http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oPotA5jqqQU
The Conservative/Liberal government have recently acted to amend s44 of the Terrorism Act, which gave the police the power to stop and search without having any reasonable suspicion (see http://www.bjp-online.com/british-journal-of-photography/news/1721519/section-44-dead-home-office ). Do you think police need these powers, or has the fear of terrorism handed too much power to the police?
16 comments:
I think that the police have got too much power as they violate basic human rights by stopping and searching without reasonable suspicion.
On the other hand, if the public were to have too much power, then terrorism rates could rise significantly, therefore harming everyone.
it isnt fair that they have these powers. just because they are police doesnt mean they are above abusing these rights and taking advantage of them. ultimatley, by enforcing this power the rights of the individual being take away and handed right to the plice.
the police are obviously paranoid about terrorism acts but then again its wrong to single certain nationalities or races for this.
Although these searches may be a slight violation of human rights, they effectivley make us alot safer. It makes it alot harder for potential terrorists to map out a target. However certain incidents regarding the use of the act, such as mentioned in the video show that at times the police misuse the act. I believe that tighter restrictions should be in place with more severe punishments for officers who flout the rules.
i think that the police have too many powers as they can stop and search people with only the smallest of suspicions and therefore innocent people are getting searched for no reason.
I think the police need to have power over people to keep terrorism as low as possible, but they are violating peoles basic rights by just searching people because of there race.
In my opinion both sides of the argument can be appropriatley argued with valid reasons and evidence as support. In terms of the police power situation you could argue that this is a complete violation of basic human rights by stopping and searchign without reasonable suspicion which showed when that man was running for the train but was stopped because they believed he was a terrorist(sorry dont know his name brazilian he was i think). On the other hand if the people are given too much power there is always the threat of an attack which will result in the police coming underfire as well as the government coming under fire which the country could do without at the moment
i think that section 44 is a bit too much, a nice idea stopping terrorists like that but in use it will just get abused.
Its a very fine line between giving police too much power and not enough.
i think that these powers are a bit too much as they can be easily be abused legally.
There is a very thin line between giving police yoo much power and not enough and it must be carefully monitered.
i think that these powers are a bit too much as they can be easily be abused legally.
There is a very thin line between giving police yoo much power and not enough and it must be carefully monitered.
I think that section 44 makes the public safe, and allows for the police to protect a lot of people.
I think that it also puts a lot of terroists off however it gets in the way of basic human rights and damages tourism.
If the public had too much power then the terroism would arise significantly and things would therefore get out of hand and that's why the police should take more power so these numbers cannot rise significantly.
And this would harm the public in many different ways.
Thanks for sharing this link, but unfortunately it seems to be offline... Does anybody have a mirror or another source? Please reply to my post if you do!
I would appreciate if a staff member here at humslearninghub.blogspot.com could post it.
Thanks,
Peter
I think that the Terrorism Act 2000 gives the police too much powers to stop and search. I think tourists and photographers being searched in public is a violation of their basic human rights. However terrorism has also scared authorities and they are going to any extents to prevent the risk of another terrorist act such as 9/11 and 07/07
I am an open minded individual and believe an effective balance has to be struck between police powers and civil libeties. Naturally, this is a contentious issue with most people likely to maintain their own opinions regarding the extent of police powers that enables them to safeguard the public, against their own freedoms and basic human rights not being infringed upon.
In my opinion, the problem - if any - does not lie with the powers as such, but the individual excersising those powers out in public at their own discretion.
I think that the police have too many powers. They violate our civil liberties. I think that Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 gives the police too many powers as it allows them to ask the perosn being searched to remove headgear, even if this is worn for religious reasons. Also many innocent people such as tourists, photographers and students have been stopped and searched under the Terrorism Act. However the police are under alot of pressure to prevent any future terrorist acts and this may be why they stop and search lots of people.
I think police have too much power over stop and search as they stop and search to many people without having any reasonable suspicion. The police take it too far because the searches haven't led to an arrest to do with terrorism.
I think that s 44 of Terrosism Act 2000 gives police too much power and they don't even think about what they're doing. They just stop and search everyone with cameras. Onj the other hand, if they wouldn't have that power Terorism could spread. I think that s 43 of Terrorism Act 2000 is reasonable.
I think the police have every right to use this power, especially in current circumstances becasue they are under pressure to prevent terrorism however I also think that they should only use the power when they have reasonable suspicions and not just becasue they feel like it. At the end of the day, they're protecting us, the public, so if they need to stop and search us, then we should oblige.
Post a Comment