Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 84499	2007-11-08 04:54:00	Anti Terror?	Sweep (90)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
609357	2007-11-09 09:27:00	Did anyone hear anything about someone blowing things up / suicide bombers etc? NO . terrorism isn't just blowing things up; it is the act of trying to cause political change through violence/physical actions . and funnily enough, if they succeed in causing that change they are considered revolutionaries:thumbs: anyway, the whole point of the anti terror laws are to prevent terrorist attacks . obviously the police thought they had something, or they would have avoided this whole mess . but of course we can't hear their side till this goes to court, and in the meantime the media is running riot with all sorts of made up facts and false accusations . either way, maori seperatists/activists had illegally obtained illegal weapons, so while the very idea of them actually commiting any terrorism may seem ridiculous, one must ask why they had these weapons in the first place? gun enthusiasts perhaps? serious rabbit problems? extreme possum control? wake up people, the police just may have well saved a life, and the families of those arrested are playing the race card to try to get out of it . if they were white, asian or arabic i bet the response would have been very different .	motorbyclist (188)
609358	2007-11-09 09:30:00	and before anyone starts up about the police not having any solid evidence, would they really go ahead on a PR disaster campaign without a good reason? this is just like opposition to tasers: they're safer than bullets, so why the hell not? unless you intend on threatening an officer and/or resisting arrest why should you even care? it's not like they're publicy available (they are in the states though, with a 30 second shock - versus the police 4 second shock)	motorbyclist (188)
609359	2007-11-11 11:20:00	NZ is fortunate, they have a very loyal, capable and honest Police Force. They have been known to make odd mistakes, but they can be relied to apply the law without fear or favour. Prevention of terrorism is preferable to investigating a civil atrocity after the event, and to achieve effective prevention, certain civil liberties that we have taken for granted may have to be set aside in the interest of the common good. Many of the highly vocal civil liberterians would be amongst the first to complain if there was a successful terrorist attack with wide spread casualties. Unfortunately a safe secure society can be incompatible with a completely free unrestricted society, but most given the choice will opt for safety and security.	KenESmith (6287)
609360	2007-11-11 11:34:00	well said	motorbyclist (188)
609361	2007-11-11 17:37:00	to achieve effective prevention, certain civil liberties that we have taken for granted may have to be set aside in the interest of the common good. There is some merit to that argument - however, the most important question when setting civil liberties aside is who is empowered with the discretion to be able to do this. If Police are to be empowered to ignore civil liberties in the interests of civil safety then society (who are the people actually giving them this power) need to know what safeguards, checks and balances exist within the legal structure to prevent a misuse of these powers - or to address the aftermath of a misuse. Unfortunately a safe secure society can be incompatible with a completely free unrestricted society, but most given the choice will opt for safety and security. It is a divergent problem. The solution cannot be found in one extreme or the other - but in a balance of tensions. In this case the tensions are between absolute safety and absolute lawlessness. The answer lies somewhere in the middle. Our civil liberties took centuries to win. To dissolve our access to these freedoms in a few short years as a response to international violence seems shortsighted at best - and utterly foolish at worst.	Deane F (8204)
609362	2007-11-12 04:53:00	We're raising a nation of fearful drones, incapable of thinking for themselves, unable to judge risk.	zqwerty (97)
609363	2007-11-12 04:59:00	We're raising a nation of fearful drones, incapable of thinking for themselves, unable to judge risk. yeah, over at kiwibiker there's a similar fear; that jackets/pants/gloves will be mandatory along with helmets. all these laws for things we should have a choice about, and many of them don't consider the real-life application (not that i don't try to wear all the gear all the time,) bring back natural selection!	motorbyclist (188)
609364	2007-11-12 05:07:00	"Those who would sacrifice essential liberties for a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin	zqwerty (97)
609365	2007-11-12 07:57:00	Laws are set to protect the masses but the laws are applied to individuals, who will have their liberties impinged upon when the law is applied. I see the conflict between protecting the rights of the masses versus protecting the rights of the individual. I vote for the masses and despite the worst efforts of Shipton, Schollum and Co the Police generally do a good job. Insofar as those who were arrested and released - this doesn't mean they are innocent. Wait for the facts to emerge. The Police may have their reasons for not releasing all of the evidence but from what I've heard we should be worried about some of these individuals and their intentions - this isn't about a few hunting weapons.	andrew93 (249)
609366	2007-11-12 09:15:00	Laws are set to protect the masses but the laws are applied to individuals, who will have their liberties impinged upon when the law is applied. I see the conflict between protecting the rights of the masses versus protecting the rights of the individual. I vote for the masses and despite the worst efforts of Shipton, Schollum and Co the Police generally do a good job. Insofar as those who were arrested and released - this doesn't mean they are innocent. Wait for the facts to emerge. The Police may have their reasons for not releasing all of the evidence but from what I've heard we should be worried about some of these individuals and their intentions - this isn't about a few hunting weapons. police can't release details or the case will be thrown out for some legal reason. have to wait for the trial which could be ages away so it's up to the media to make whatever mockery of it they so wish:yuck:	motorbyclist (188)
1 2 3 4