| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... 09:29 - May 25 with 3764 views | ThatMuhrenCross |
That was the number published this week, and Abedi was among them.
My question, therefore, is this...
Why are these people on our streets and roaming freely among our communities?
If there's enough of a suspicion, lock them away. For me, conspiracy to commit a terrorist act, association with terrorist organisations and incitement of terrorism should all carry long custodial sentences. It shouldn't get to the stage where they're making bombs or carrying out atrocities. It shouldn't get that far.
I get that some will slip through the net, and it's impossible to know every single potential terrorist, but if they're known to the authorities, and there is suspicion around them, get them off our streets. |  |
| |  |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 09:33 - May 25 with 2739 views | unbelievablue |
Put simply, the law does not allow for detention on pure suspicion.
Additionally, the authorities do not always act immediately because it is not always in their best interests to do so. Further surveillance and understanding could, for example, lead to the unravelling of an entire network. |  |
| |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 09:40 - May 25 with 2724 views | Guthrum |
But what if they haven't done anything illegal?
For conspiracy, you have to prove they actually conspired. Likewise with incitement. And association stops short of membership.
Merely expressing support for a highly radical position (say the desire for the establishment of a salafist caliphate in the middle East) might get you classed as an extremist, with sympathies for the aims of Islamic State. But that's having a political opinion (file under freedom of speech) not necessarily advocating terrorism. |  |
| |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 09:43 - May 25 with 2710 views | Swansea_Blue |
It shouldn't get to that stage, agreed. Legislation has changed substantially in recent years to give more powers to the courts,and I suspect we'll have more changes again after this.
As things stand though, suspicion isn't enough to lock them away. And we don't have the room either even if we could. |  |
| |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 09:45 - May 25 with 2705 views | unbelievablue |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 09:40 - May 25 by Guthrum |
But what if they haven't done anything illegal?
For conspiracy, you have to prove they actually conspired. Likewise with incitement. And association stops short of membership.
Merely expressing support for a highly radical position (say the desire for the establishment of a salafist caliphate in the middle East) might get you classed as an extremist, with sympathies for the aims of Islamic State. But that's having a political opinion (file under freedom of speech) not necessarily advocating terrorism. |
Had this exact discussion in the flat last night.
Those who have travelled to Syria to join/fight with IS, and then return to the UK. Have they broken UK law in any way? | |
| |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 09:46 - May 25 with 2697 views | homer_123 |
Really, really?
I despair..... |  |
| |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 09:50 - May 25 with 2676 views | bluelagos |
You are suggesting we lock people up because we have a suspicion? Seriously?
Suspicion rightly means the police/spooks monitor for evidence and if that is strong enough, they will then arrest, charge etc.
What I think is a valid question is whether the police / intelligence services need considerable additional resources. 3000 suspects would each need 30 highly skilled staff monitoring them 24/7, which would cost say 90k staff at £50k.
£4.5 Bn is affordable, but you have to recruit and train these guys....
No easy answers |  |
| |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 09:52 - May 25 with 2665 views | Guthrum |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 09:45 - May 25 by unbelievablue |
Had this exact discussion in the flat last night.
Those who have travelled to Syria to join/fight with IS, and then return to the UK. Have they broken UK law in any way? |
If they've actually fought with IS, then yes.
If they've just gone because they wanted to live in an islamic caliphate and not taken any direct part in violent action, then quite possibly not.
The difficulty is making the distinction - because the former are quite likely to claim they fall into the second group. | |
| |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 09:53 - May 25 with 2660 views | homer_123 |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 09:50 - May 25 by bluelagos |
You are suggesting we lock people up because we have a suspicion? Seriously?
Suspicion rightly means the police/spooks monitor for evidence and if that is strong enough, they will then arrest, charge etc.
What I think is a valid question is whether the police / intelligence services need considerable additional resources. 3000 suspects would each need 30 highly skilled staff monitoring them 24/7, which would cost say 90k staff at £50k.
£4.5 Bn is affordable, but you have to recruit and train these guys....
No easy answers |
The question is what would the cost be to start to deal with the root cause of a disenfranchised young male population, at least within the UK, so that they are significantly less likely to be radicalised.
I'm sure as hell that it's both cheaper and safer in the long run to deal with that than up police presence? | |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 09:53 - May 25 with 2656 views | unbelievablue |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 09:52 - May 25 by Guthrum |
If they've actually fought with IS, then yes.
If they've just gone because they wanted to live in an islamic caliphate and not taken any direct part in violent action, then quite possibly not.
The difficulty is making the distinction - because the former are quite likely to claim they fall into the second group. |
What is the law which they have broken if they've fought with them? | |
| |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 09:54 - May 25 with 2653 views | homer_123 |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 09:52 - May 25 by Guthrum |
If they've actually fought with IS, then yes.
If they've just gone because they wanted to live in an islamic caliphate and not taken any direct part in violent action, then quite possibly not.
The difficulty is making the distinction - because the former are quite likely to claim they fall into the second group. |
quite likely - wasn't needed there.... | |
| |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 09:55 - May 25 with 2652 views | JimmyJazz |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 09:43 - May 25 by Swansea_Blue |
It shouldn't get to that stage, agreed. Legislation has changed substantially in recent years to give more powers to the courts,and I suspect we'll have more changes again after this.
As things stand though, suspicion isn't enough to lock them away. And we don't have the room either even if we could. |
That's the 'island' comes in to play? Put all these people together on an island where they will breed even further resentment against the 'motherland' and trade ideas on how to gain revenge |  |
| |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 10:07 - May 25 with 2626 views | Guthrum |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 09:53 - May 25 by unbelievablue |
What is the law which they have broken if they've fought with them? |
Having been an active member of a terrorist group (encouragement, preparation, training all fall under the 2006 Act). Membership of a proscribed group. | |
| |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 10:08 - May 25 with 2615 views | unbelievablue |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 10:07 - May 25 by Guthrum |
Having been an active member of a terrorist group (encouragement, preparation, training all fall under the 2006 Act). Membership of a proscribed group. |
Cheers. | |
| |
| on 10:11 - May 25 with 2614 views | _ |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 09:50 - May 25 by bluelagos |
You are suggesting we lock people up because we have a suspicion? Seriously?
Suspicion rightly means the police/spooks monitor for evidence and if that is strong enough, they will then arrest, charge etc.
What I think is a valid question is whether the police / intelligence services need considerable additional resources. 3000 suspects would each need 30 highly skilled staff monitoring them 24/7, which would cost say 90k staff at £50k.
£4.5 Bn is affordable, but you have to recruit and train these guys....
No easy answers |
|  | | |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 10:12 - May 25 with 2609 views | rickw |
Of the 3000 under suspicion probably 2990 are not extremists nor will ever be - unless we lock them up, then maybe they'll start to hate!! |  |
| |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 10:36 - May 25 with 2581 views | Guthrum |
It is possible to have pretty effective security services without turning them into the Stasi or setting up concentration camps. They don't mange too badly as they currently are, nothing we can do will make them infallible.
Among the aspects of society we're trying to defend are reasonableness and the rule of law. | |
| |
| on 10:37 - May 25 with 2575 views | _ |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 10:36 - May 25 by Guthrum |
It is possible to have pretty effective security services without turning them into the Stasi or setting up concentration camps. They don't mange too badly as they currently are, nothing we can do will make them infallible.
Among the aspects of society we're trying to defend are reasonableness and the rule of law. |
| | | |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 10:38 - May 25 with 2570 views | J2BLUE |
How many would we arrest before the rest of them realised their time was probably almost up and it was now or never to carry out an attack?
We'd suddenly have loads of low tech attackers on the rampage. |  |
| |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 10:42 - May 25 with 2562 views | Guthrum |
Lawyers, judges and oversight committees, in the main.
I'm more concerned about the politicians, who have a long track record of wanting to be seen as "tough", or of manipulating intelligence assessments to suit their own agendas and are the ones making the actual policy decisions. | |
| |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 11:34 - May 25 with 2506 views | PrideOfTheEast |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 09:33 - May 25 by unbelievablue |
Put simply, the law does not allow for detention on pure suspicion.
Additionally, the authorities do not always act immediately because it is not always in their best interests to do so. Further surveillance and understanding could, for example, lead to the unravelling of an entire network. |
The law does allow for arrest on suspicion of though doesn't it. Whether you charge on the back of that or not is a very different question but the answer cannot be to wait to uncover a network unless literally every move of these people is being constantly watched (which is next to impossible when many networks will be international etc).
It's fairly obvious that the law hasn't adapted sufficiently to address the issue. Something has to change to address those already radicalised. Something else has to be done (it might be different) to address those at risk of being radicalised. The latter is clearly the most difficult to address. | | | |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 11:36 - May 25 with 2496 views | unbelievablue |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 11:34 - May 25 by PrideOfTheEast |
The law does allow for arrest on suspicion of though doesn't it. Whether you charge on the back of that or not is a very different question but the answer cannot be to wait to uncover a network unless literally every move of these people is being constantly watched (which is next to impossible when many networks will be international etc).
It's fairly obvious that the law hasn't adapted sufficiently to address the issue. Something has to change to address those already radicalised. Something else has to be done (it might be different) to address those at risk of being radicalised. The latter is clearly the most difficult to address. |
Poor wording choice from me then. I used 'detention' when I should have used prosecuted. Previous post said 'lock them up' which I assume meant having been prosecuted.
Edit - I am unsure that it's any easier to address the 'already radicalised' demographic because in reality how do you really know who is radicalised, or who is flirting with radicalisation? (That's put very simply but you know what I'm getting at). [Post edited 25 May 2017 11:38]
| |
| |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 11:48 - May 25 with 2457 views | blue_oyster |
You'd make a fantastic dictator. |  |
| |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 12:10 - May 25 with 2427 views | ThatMuhrenCross |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 09:40 - May 25 by Guthrum |
But what if they haven't done anything illegal?
For conspiracy, you have to prove they actually conspired. Likewise with incitement. And association stops short of membership.
Merely expressing support for a highly radical position (say the desire for the establishment of a salafist caliphate in the middle East) might get you classed as an extremist, with sympathies for the aims of Islamic State. But that's having a political opinion (file under freedom of speech) not necessarily advocating terrorism. |
The question here then, is what got them on the list in the first place. Abedi was known to have travelled to Syria, he had a history of petty crime, it's emerging that he was part of a highly radicalised family. A man like that should not be on the streets. Surely, surely there is something he can be put away for.
And by the way, merely "sympathising" should be punishable in some way. If you sympathise with the holocaust in this country, there are repercussions, and rightly so. So why can't the same be applied to ISIS?
I admit, there is not one set way to combat this, but are we cracking down on the potential perpetrators enough?
Our children's lives are at stake, we mustn't pussyfoot around. This is a serious matter and it's high time we stopped making excuses for these people. | |
| |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 12:14 - May 25 with 2415 views | unbelievablue |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 12:10 - May 25 by ThatMuhrenCross |
The question here then, is what got them on the list in the first place. Abedi was known to have travelled to Syria, he had a history of petty crime, it's emerging that he was part of a highly radicalised family. A man like that should not be on the streets. Surely, surely there is something he can be put away for.
And by the way, merely "sympathising" should be punishable in some way. If you sympathise with the holocaust in this country, there are repercussions, and rightly so. So why can't the same be applied to ISIS?
I admit, there is not one set way to combat this, but are we cracking down on the potential perpetrators enough?
Our children's lives are at stake, we mustn't pussyfoot around. This is a serious matter and it's high time we stopped making excuses for these people. |
You're effectively asking for a change in law I think, judging by your points. It's not unreasonable to want more powers in the wake of such a tragedy but it's good to think this through a great deal first.
Re: sympathising with the holocaust, I'm not sure that's correct though I will have to do a little bit of research. I believe there is an EU wide law introduced, parts of which the UK blocked.
Edit - your last point is unfair. No-one is making excuses for terrorists. [Post edited 25 May 2017 12:15]
| |
| |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 14:03 - May 25 with 2356 views | Guthrum |
| 3,000 suspected extremists known to the authorities in the UK... on 12:10 - May 25 by ThatMuhrenCross |
The question here then, is what got them on the list in the first place. Abedi was known to have travelled to Syria, he had a history of petty crime, it's emerging that he was part of a highly radicalised family. A man like that should not be on the streets. Surely, surely there is something he can be put away for.
And by the way, merely "sympathising" should be punishable in some way. If you sympathise with the holocaust in this country, there are repercussions, and rightly so. So why can't the same be applied to ISIS?
I admit, there is not one set way to combat this, but are we cracking down on the potential perpetrators enough?
Our children's lives are at stake, we mustn't pussyfoot around. This is a serious matter and it's high time we stopped making excuses for these people. |
Merely having an opinion is not - and should not be - a crime. After all, who knows someone's innermost thoughts? And there is a big difference between thinking something and acting upon it.
You can't start imprisoning swathes of the population merely because you think their "type" might be the kind to do something. Do you lock up every angry muslim youth who may have ever been to his ancestral country?
No, there was nothing for which he could be arrested, let alone charged, without evidence beyond which we currently know. I'm sure if the authorities had known he was plotting, there would have been raids and arrests - as has happened before. | |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
