something occured to me reading this.

[jumpy]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7030096.stm

It is alleged he had a copy of the "Anarchists' Cookbook", containing instructions on how to make home-made explosives.

I know this is a bit off the topic of the article, but go with me on this, taking the above statement on its own this seems to suggest you can be guilty of a crimianal act just by having a copy of something to read (albe it bad instructions).

The first charge relates to the possession of material for terrorist purposes in October last year.
The second relates to the collection or possession of information useful in the preparation of an act of terrorism.

The second is a pretty broad envelope. For example, I know where 10 downing street is, and should I produce a map of how to get there, surely with the right slant to an investigation it could be misconstrued as 'collection or posession of information useful in the preparation of terrorism'.
Simply having something doesn't require any attachement of guilt and the use of said item.
Now I'm assuming that the charges in this case are justified, however there seems to be a rather gross remit to label information and items as puissant to terrorism, should it be decided so.

What do you guys think?

[Letum]

Originally Posted by jumpy

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7030096.stm

I know this is a bit off the topic of the article, but go with me on this, taking the above statement on its own this seems to suggest you can be guilty of a crimianal act just by having a copy of something to read (albe it bad instructions).

Correct. The anti-terror laws recently imposed have made some forms of litriture illegal.
I forget the wording.

Time for a good, old book burning?

[STEED]

The anti terrorist laws allow the state to do what they see fit, the problem is, if we are attacked again you can bet more of are democracy will be lost and the ID cards will be forced on to ours over night. We live in dangerous combination of the voter dose not give a toss as long as they have there creature comforts and the powers to be are corrupt in there own way. They believe they are right and they know what is best for all of us.

[Chock]

Well, this sort of thing has been done for years, remember the ubiquitous 'found bomb-making equipment on the premises' statement you used to hear on the news after searches of properties in Northern Ireland? Well, I doubt there is a kitchen or shed in the land that doesn't have 'bomb-making equipment' in it; flour, weedkiller, a length of pipe, some nails etc, etc, all of these are bomb-making equipment if used in that way. Just recently, the guy who was found guilty of mailing letter bombs in the UK actually used the small quanties of the stuff that goes bang in party poppers as a component of his letter bombs, so by that definition, you can find bomb making equipment at a children's party if you want to call it that.

And since your computer has an internet connection, and therefore allows access to information on bomb-making if you choose to search for it, your computer qualifies too.

But if these things are found within a premises and tied up with other elements that indicate some prospective evil deed in the planning, then they must be allowed to be submitted as potential evidence. The Crown Prosecution Service has enough of a hard time putting cases together with all the loopholes and bleeding heart get out clauses they have to contend with, and fighting terrorism with one hand tied behind your back is not possible, especially when the terrorists are not limited by any such self-imposed constraints. So in the right context, yes, those things are bomb-making equipment.

Chock

[Letum]

I think the new anti-terror laws are akin to thought crime.

The logic behind them is that it allows police to charge people even before they are guilty
of attempted murder or making an explosive device.
This is helpful to the police because they don't have to sit around and watch it all happen.

This is not helpful to anyone who has such information, but is not a terrorist.
It is also not helpful to someone who the police want to arrest for no good reason. Almost
Everyone will have some "information useful in the preparation of an act of terrorism"
even if it is just a traffic report.

[STEED]

Originally Posted by Letum

I think the new anti-terror laws are akin to thought crime.

The logic behind them is that it allows police to charge people even before they are guilty
of attempted murder or making an explosive device.
This is helpful to the police because they don't have to sit around and watch it all happen.

This is not helpful to anyone who has such information, but is not a terrorist.
It is also not helpful to someone who the police want to arrest for no good reason. Almost
Everyone will have some "information useful in the preparation of an act of terrorism"
even if it is just a traffic report.

Good point, if we suffer a massive attack (I hope that day will never comes) the excuse will been given to the state to say good bye to democracy as we know it. They will sell it like mothers milk and the voter would gladly give the state the go ahead. There are to few in this country who can see we are walking on a tight rope every day of our life's.

[Letum]

Of course, the police don't even need to say that you have such material to imprison
you for 3 months under the terror laws.

[Kapitan_Phillips]

Should they not be cracking down on providers of that publication?

[STEED]

Originally Posted by Kapitan_Phillips

Should they not be cracking down on providers of that publication?

How?

It's like trying to enforce the mobile phone law on drivers, the amount of drivers I have seen using there phone and driving at the same time..........

[SUBMAN1]

Hmm.. I read through that book as a kid. Friends and I treated it as a joke way back when. Does that make me or them a terrorists? I mean, that book is full of stupid stuff like making a box, filling it with 3 weeks old pee, and when it is opened, the razor blades spill the pee all over the victims desk. This is how pathetic that book actually is.

I mean, the book may be plain stupid, but it does have some plus sides - It has some good chemistry expriments in it, even though they may be potentially dangerous. I was a bit of a chemistry nut as a kid, so that holds interest to me in my mind. However, for the situation of the story, just having the book means nothing.

The point I am making is, the news is so worthless to watch now days since they fabricate stories, and make accusations based on nothing in an effort to get ratings where there would otherwise be none. A perfect example is this story. They are trying to lend credability to a story where there is actually little real credability by advocating that this was in this guys possesion so it must make him a terrorists. I find this even more pathetic than the book in question! Plain bad logic. This is why I read my news now days because I can skip over the BS.

-S

[Letum]

*WARNING - Reading the following may technically be illegal in the UK*

I remember making explosives and firearms as a boy.
Hours of fun.

One "cannon" could shoot a 2'' caliber block of hardwood through a 1/2'' wood plank.

It consisted of a steel tube blocked off at one end, some plant food explosive and
wooden "bullets".

[StdDev]

Originally Posted by jumpy

Simply having something doesn't require any attachement of guilt and the use of said item.
What do you guys think?

Hmmmm... What if you just happen to have a human head in your freezer?

Seems to me that possession in the above circumstance would highly imply guilt... of something anyways.

As far as possession of literature in any form.. I would think that at best it might "enhance" opportunity.. but not be a crime in itself.
I can remember as a child reading in our Encyclopedia Britanica a very basic recipe for gun powder.. and I thought to myself..."hmmm gunna have to give that one a try"
never did though.. turns out you can buy gun powder at just about any gun shop or sporting store that sells reloading equipt.

[STEED]

Originally Posted by Letum

*WARNING - Reading the following may technically be illegal in the UK*

I remember making explosives and firearms as a boy.
Hours of fun.

One "cannon" could shoot a 2'' caliber block of hardwood through a 1/2'' wood plank.

It consisted of a steel tube blocked off at one end, some plant food explosive and
wooden "bullets".

Blast it now I have to hand myself in to the police for reading that.


November 5th coming up.
(Firework Night)

[SUBMAN1]

Originally Posted by Letum

*WARNING - Reading the following may technically be illegal in the UK*

I remember making explosives and firearms as a boy.
Hours of fun.

One "cannon" could shoot a 2'' caliber block of hardwood through a 1/2'' wood plank.

It consisted of a steel tube blocked off at one end, some plant food explosive and
wooden "bullets".

Isn't everything illegal in the UK? Anyway, I gave up on chemistry as a kid when it became difficult to find the chemicals I needed. My biggest disappointment came when I was looking for 2 specific ingredients - Glycerin and Nitric Acid. I never could figure out why it was so hard to find nitric acid!!!??? Putting the two together is supposed to have a reaction that makes a cool blue flame - fire out of simple chemicals - sound cool? I thought so. Only later do I understand the term Nitroglycerin! Duh!!! As a kid, you are so ignorant sometimes! Anyway, computers came along and stole my interest from then on.

-S