Scameron77
I reacted because I think comments of the 'huggy fluffy liberals' and 'Nazis/Fascists' variety often spoil good debates here, and are almost as bad as the 'I'd round the feckers up and shoot em' (those they dislike, or with whom they disagree) contributions by people who aren't up to sensible discussion but have a curious need to post in 'serious' threads anyway.
Your guess is right. I don't agree with your proposition.
I don't think of myself as liberal or human rights focussed - I think some of the decisions of the ECHR in the name of 'human rights' are completely absurd. However, I think it would be outrageously unfair to punish decent, law-abiding people for crimes committed by members of their family.
Nor do I think it would be a deterrent.
Fanatics/extremists who commit terrible terrorist atrocities against innocent human beings are so driven by their belief in their cause that nothing and no-one matters but the cause - even more so in the case of those who are prepared to sacrifice their own lives in the process.
Other than the obvious measures of intelligence, detection, conviction and life imprisonment (literally) of those who commit or plan terrorist atrocities, one step we might consider is pausing to ask ourselves why Britain is a terrorist target and most countries are not.
We might then restrain our Prime Minister's enthusiasm to join the American administration in meddling so much in the Middle East, interfering in other states' affairs and becoming involved in conflicts between other nations/countries except as our contribution to a UN peace-keeping force.
He'd have to find some other way of feeding his insatiable need to feel important on the world stage but I'm sure we could think of something to help him and, in time, he might come back down to earth and even find his conscience again. Others may disagree, but I think he used to have one.
FL
Last edited by Flying Lawyer; 10th Aug 2006 at 23:54.