QUOTE (neil @ Dec 19 2009, 07:19 PM)

Warthog,
Which measures are actually affecting our civil rights? sorry I dont want to do this post to death, but perhaps I am missing something here.
I expect you're referring to my views on these laws in my first post on the subject...
Well, lengthy detention without charge for a start. Yes, it is only supposed to be related to terror suspects, but who checks the validity and plausibility of the suspicions used to approve such an arrest? Would these always be completely ethical judgements if that adjective can ever be applied? After all the first to be imprisoned under the ATCSA 2001 were then deemed to be illegally imprisoned by the House of Lords, no less. Didn't stop them staying in the clink for a few months longer without even a trial...
10 years ago, these measures would have had the voting public up in arms...
Thing is, it
is quite hard to put your finger on which of one's personal rights are being infringed at that moment, because it predominantly affects "someone" else, but at the risk of sounding cliche, it's the thin edge of the wedge, IMHO. You ask some young muslim (looking) lad who gets stopped and searched or quizzed umpteen times and you may find he feels its more intrusive.
Then you have the government that used these measures (or rather the reduced limiting legislation) to tap phones of other officials in Whitehall IIRR!!
Measures are proposed, and although a little harsh in our eyes, we acquiese because we have terror attacks of one kind or another fed to us through the media every single day, so we don't kick up a fuss. A few years later we are so used to it, we forget our initial reticence. Then new measures are brought in, duly "justified" in one way or another, and the process repeats itself.
Then, if you have the presence of mind, you think back 15 years the way we might now and see how much things have changed and think to yourself "WTF?!? How did get like this without me noticing?!?"
The UK was under far greater threat of terrorism in the 70s and 80s IMO, but the government then did not resort to these measures, so why now?
Naturally, you need not agree with my views but I really think this is a slippery slope and it is not the general public that will feel what ever benefits may exist... now and certainly in the future.