To think Teresa may is right about new terrorism laws

[LovelyBath77]

Something needs to change. I think the safety of people needs to be a priority.

Depends what she's planning really need more meat on the bones

New laws at times of stress and panic tend to be:

Ill thought out
Draconian
Not actually effective
Make the problem worse.

Is this the suggestion of putting people already prepared to die for their cause in prison for longer?!
Yeah that's a top suggestion

Maybe she could stop selling arms to the Saudis for them to sell to ISIS - that might be a start.

Theresa May is using these attacks to take away your human rights. Theresa May has been selling arms to Saudi Arabia who fund Isis. Theresa May has seriously reduced the number of police on our streets. I could go on. Please tell me exactly what you think she's doing right?

No, I think it's a knee jerk response. Yes, safety should be a priority - so fund and staff the police and the security services properly.

nope. UABU

Introducing new legislation is way cheaper and more headline-grabby than providing proper funding for the effective implementation of existing and perfectly adequate legislation

She's trying to fix a broken leg with a smiley plaster.

She's had 7 years to do something

I think freedom of people should be the priority or we are doing the terrorists job for them.

Someone at work announces that something needs to be done about an issue. The issues has been there, and been a problem for years. This person has been in charge of the department that deals with this issue for many years.

The questions that spring to mind are-
Why haven't you already done something?
and
Why would I now be trusting you to come up with solutions?

[Keir] Starmer, a former director of public prosecutions who oversaw dozens of terror cases, said ... he had never found human rights law a barrier to successful prosecutions of terrorists or those preparing acts of terrorism. “I know because I did it for five years,” he said. “We did not run into the Human Rights Act as a problem preventing successful prosecutions. We put a lot of people away for a very long time.”
www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/07/keir-starmer-uk-human-rights-law-does-not-prevent-capture-of-terrorists

Righto, what particular, specific item is it you agree with or currently disagree with?
Why did she just hatch these plans recently? I can't for the life of me imagine why she didn't suggest this to the then Conservatives' Home Secretary... oh wait!
Obviously, a lengthy prison sentence under the current state of our prisons wouldn't also pose a fertile breeding ground for further terror-recruitment.

TM and her puppet-masters, such as the owners of the Sun, Mail, Star, Express, Times, Telegraph, would like nothing better than a return to the servile 19th Century when the lower orders (including women) knew their place and had little or no rights as such, just so long as they worked themselves to an early death and the menfolk lined up in some foreign field to shoot the darkies so the elite could steel their land and natural resources.

That's it lengthy prison sentences for someone willing to die is no deterrent. In fact I'd imagine they love their role as chief recruiter once inside.

*New laws at times of stress and panic tend to be:

Ill thought out
Draconian
Not actually effective
Make the problem worse.*

This. It's been a while since alevels law but I seem to recall the classic example of this is the dangerous dogs act which was rushed through parliament after a spate of dog attacks.

Legislation should not come about as part of a knee jerk reaction.
I agree the discussion needs to be had but in a methodical and thought out way.

In particular, I mean the area where she says people are at risk of doing an attack, or influencing others. I think, people can be sectioned for being at risk of putting their own life at risk, so there should also be something where if people are going to put others lives at risks, are deluded and a terrorist threat, they should also be in a place where they are not putting others at risk. I also think they need to crack down on the internet and places like FB having groups promoting and celebrating ISIS and terrorism.

The existing powers would be fine if the police had the resources they needed.

Don't need new knee jerk laws, need more resources.

Oops cross post alltouch

Um, she's definitely old enough to remember the Troubles. Although lots of English people have this weird thing where they focus entirely on IRA bombs on the British mainland, which is... interesting So maybe it's that she's thus just not thinking about the fact we've already had that relatively recent clusterfuck of draconian oppression that somehow managed to be incredibly counterproductive (in that it really riled people up, not least because it stirred sectarian tensions well beyond membership of or liking for any terror organisation) & pretty useless at actually stopping anything (iirc). So yes. It would be really great if we could, you know, NOT go for a repeat of that.

Of course it's important things are examined. But a kneejerk reaction is unlikely to actually be helpful.

Oh & y/y to PPs points re need for adequate resources for police to enforce current laws.

I thought she was nicking the Labour policy of Control Orders, but finding a way to make them legal. That's not knee jerk - it's something that people from both main parties have been banging on about for some time.

No. it's a smokescreen designed to appeal to the low intelligence & racist sun reader type of which unfortunately there are many and she knows it (see their front page about 'jihadi jezza' as proof that is who they try and appeal to)