Another Law Too Far!!!!

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by uncle_vanya, Feb 5, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Thus, from the 16th of February 2009, it becomes a criminal offence [Counter-Terrorism Act 2008 amends the Terrorism Act 2000 regarding offences relating to information about members of armed forces, a member of the intelligence services, or a police officer.] liable for up to 10 years' imprisonment and/or a fine to photograph for example Police in a public place, or even brick walls.

    This law, the 'Terrorism Act 2009' has been used to stop legal protest in the UK. Protestors have often been charged with 'Stalking'!!! So no more writing porkies about Jimmy Bond of MI5.

    With all the rest of this garbage, how long before ALL protests of any sort, even the WRVS protesting about 'Restrictions on Jam and Cake Making', could be construed as 'Terrorism'. These laws are so vague in their wording that any 'interprestation' could be construed on on them. How many more 'Anti Terrorism' Bills, or amendments to current ones will Pa McBean Broone and Pals try and force through Parly-ment?

    They might even make it a criminal offence to write 'Scurilous and Insulting Things' about our wonderful Government on Internet Forums. So that means most of us on ARRSE are doomned to languish with ASBOS in the Neues Lieb-bore Gulags of 'Korrect Thunking'..... Allegedly.

    How many more 'Laws' will Dear Lieder Pa Broone, our equally dotty Home Secretary, Missy Jacqui and our Nick-nack Numpty Justice Secretary 'Strawman Jack' pass before they are winkled out of orrifice for good....

    Ooops!! :oops: 8)

    Old Eric Honniker, the old leader of the old East Germany, if he was still alive, would be having spins of delight if he was living in Broone's version of Fantasy Island.... the UK Plc under Neues Liebore.... :) :?
     
  2. Command_doh

    Command_doh LE Book Reviewer

    Don't see the problem. Shall we all go on strike like France though? Just for the sake of it?

    Like anyone has a hope in hell of changing the way the world is going vis a vis prevention of/dealing with the aftermath of terrorism.

    Its all part of the 'V for Vendetta plan', where we live in a Chinese 'democracy' and have no freedoms. Better no freedoms than being exploded into millions of little bits, or having a Pastaran supplied nuclear suitcase go off in my face.
     
  3. I saw on the news that the people in Iceland are trying to get rid of politicos and govern the country by an iternet forum, as they no longer trust them. this sounds like a realy good idea, get rid of all the pigs in the trough and have true democracy by the people for the people and not by a corrupt bunch of wonkers as we have now
     
  4. Even if you reduce immigration; they are already in country and multiplying for generations.

    It's an invasion.

    IG
     
  5. Hmm, while it is touching to see new converts to the cause of liberty and "yooman rights", what the new section 58A of the Terrorism Act 2000 actually says is that it is an offence to obtain or publish - about an individual who is or has been a member of Her Majesty’s forces, a member of any of the intelligence services, or a constable - information which is of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism.

    It is a defence for a person charged with an offence under this section to prove that they had a reasonable excuse for their action.

    The recent legislation also provides for more severe penalties for service offences where there is an aggravating terrorism element.
     
  6. So they've made a new Strict Liability offence then? Surely they should have to prove you intend to use it for terrorist purposes rather than you to prove you don't. Innocent until proven guilty and all that .....

    Edited to say that I may have lost my temper slightly and not made a lot of sense... Not a strict liability offence, because you can defend yourself, but still a bit much imho.
     
  7. I think this is a bit of a Daily Wail story.

    This is, for those old enough to have sat through NIEP lectures, the old 'information of use to terrorists' for a new generation.

    Onus of proof being on the possessor of the soldiers VRM, or the picture of the guardroom or whatever doesn't make it a strict liability offence.

    Given that most people have more to do with their lives than photograph plod or barracks this is unlikely to hinder most of the populace... :pc: