 |
|  |
 |
|
OneFootInTheGrave
|
 |
Kuzelj
Nov 2000 time: 05:20
|
|
It is not a fundamentally wrong idea, and if you see something being wrongly done, that is fine, but still good check should be kept in place so that you dont have some rough justice appearing out there.
Coupling that with the rights of surveillance of whomever you want, and searches without people knowing that they have been searched.
I mean endless doors to abuse appear in the middle level of those who keep us "secure".
At high levels there cannot be real accountablilty anyhow (only if they step on their colleagues feet). But this opens doors to some middle level guys to stir up fuss where there is none for utterly wrong reasons like wrong political bias (leftists and such), racial reasons - arabs and muslims in general I can bet will be more affected by those measures than others, or maybe even personal reasons, etc.
Accountability is the main factor in this whole thing, but with large numbers of people involved this can hardly be as well controlled as it should. Well I wouldn't expect USA to be secetrly leaned towards encouraging such action, but there will be plenty of opportunity to lesser folks to try and "educate" someone they think is a threat.
See no evil/ hear no evil is no good, but how effective and efficient in finding terrorists this such huge surveillance operation with God knows whom in the 1 million chosen ones will be is anyones guess. The potential for causing more harm than good to normal citizens and for wasting existing intelligence agency staff time and resources is immense. Not to mention a potential for another McCarthyist era.
Did you have such free espionage laws against the citizens in the 50's?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Lefty Scaevola
|
 |
San Antonio TX USA
Oct 2000 time: 23:20
|
|
Increased survelliance by law enforcement and informers is not a problem for me, being one of the few real live got nothing to hide persons (I am even scrupulously honest with taxes). But if they leak any info to spammers or marketers, I will be infuriated. In my current situation, increased police survelance has only a plus side in the way of increased security, from all sorts of crime, not just terrorism. Yhe more eyeblass in my neighborhood, the less burglars, robbers, rapists, vandals, etc. I do not care at all that they make note about how grungy i dress at home, or how I scratch whatever itches or that I say, in sweet voice, terrible curses to my wife GD dog or somtimes laugh out loud at my children's social problems or see my necking with my wife in the back yard or see any of my many non-conformist habits. I am better than any of them anyway . For all you guilty scum who are trying to hide you misdeeds, MUA HA HA! suffer!
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Q Cubed
|
 |
t3h y3ll0w p3ril
Apr 1999 time: 23:20
|
|
i dunno, this just reminds me a bit of whitehouse.org's patriot registration form...
if this is serious, i really don't know how such a thing could work; i'm setting aside considerations of civil liberSAFETY FOR ALL CITIZENS IS A PARAMOUNT CONCERN OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION. NATURALLY, SOME COMPROMISES MUST BE MADE, BUT THAT IS IN THE TRADITION OF AMERICA. NO PATRIOT WOULD QUESTION THAT IN TIMES OF GREAT PERIL, CITIZENS MUST DO WHAT IS GOOD AND RIGHT FOR THE COUNTRY.ties...
4% of americans means tens of millions of reports filed, which then have to be duplicated in triplicate, xeroxed, faxed, digitized, classified and censored, etc., etc., etc... who's going to do all that ? and if the program is successful, increasing the number of people involved?
where's all the paper going to go? yucca mounDO NOT QUESTION THE WISDOM OF THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE. TIPS IS TO ENSURE THE SAFETY AND FREEDOM FOR ALL RIGHT THINKING AMERICAN CITIZENStain?
i dunno, to me it just seems like another crackpot idea from the bush adminiPRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH IS THE BEST WARTIME LEADER AMERICA HAS EVER HAD. HE STANDS FOR MORALITY, RIGHT-THINKING, STRENGTH, AND GOOD LEADERSHIP. DO NOT QUESTION HIS AUTHORITY.stration.
ah, well. comes with living in times like "dangerous" these, mm? we wouldn't want those mean old nasty terrorists to win now, would we? maybe soon i'll get one of them patriot identification tatoos that whitehouse.org says is going to mandatory soon...
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jon Miller
|
|
I will spy on Milla's house and other choice houses
JonMiller
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jon Miller
|
|
yes
there are always those who approve of wat he is doing, but think someone else would do better
besides the party line voters
Jon Miller
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Sprayber

|
 |
Dixie
Oct 2000 time: 23:20
|
|
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2...6802691135.html
quote:
By Gabrielle Costa
July 17 2002
Police are to be given increased powers to search people for weapons and those who refuse face fines of up to $3000 under new laws detailed by Premier Steve Bracks yesterday.
The planned legislative changes have been attacked by legal bodies, with Liberty Victoria and the Law Institute questioning whether they would give police excessive search powers and prompt some officers to conduct racially based searches.
Under the proposed legislation, to be introduced in parliament in the spring session, officers who have a "reasonable suspicion" that a person is carrying a weapon, including knives, machetes, crossbows and swords, may conduct a search.
The courts interpret "reasonable suspicion" - the principle applied in drug searches - to be a fair view formed by a person acting without prejudice or passion, and taking into account all circumstances.
At the moment, the tougher legal test of "reasonable belief" applies for weapons searches, where the belief must be formed on the basis of all the circumstances.
Mr Bracks said the changes, which with Liberal support appear set to pass parliament before the end of the year, would improve community safety.
"It means police can do the very job they're required to do and make the streets safer with knives . . . taken off people," he said.
Mr Bracks acknowledged that police could not force a person to submit to a search, but said the $3000 penalty would deter refusals. He said other options were available to police in those cases, such as restraining a person if a situation became threatening.
Law Institute president David Faram said tougher search powers were unlikely to reduce the number of people carrying weapons in public.
With a lesser test, he said, police could decide to conduct searches based on "stereotypical groupings, whether it is the Asian community or any other ethnic community in our society".
He called for more extensive public debate on the issue and for stricter legal definitions of the types of searches and instances where they were legally permissible.
Liberty Victoria vice-president Greg Connellan called for tighter legal definitions and raised the prospect of Asian people being targeted because of preconceptions about Asian youths carrying weapons.
Mr Connellan also said the government should tackle the sale of weapons, which he said were readily available in Melbourne.
The proposed legislation has the strong backing of senior police, the Police Association and the State Opposition.
Chief Commissioner Christine Nixon said the additional search powers, together with 420 new metal detectors to be distributed to police stations, would help make Victoria's streets safer.
Ms Nixon and Police Association secretary Paul Mullett said the changes would win community support.
Opposition police spokesman Kim Wells said the Liberals supported the changes in principle and would consider the legislation in parliament.
|
Those damned facists Aussies. 
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20. Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|