In his comment here, Glynsky showed his blinders. Shall we lift them a bit?
1. What a load of bollocks couched in pomposity. How do you find them in the first place to lock them up ?
“Them” refers to terrorists. Glynsky seems to think, one can find find them, before they commit a crime. Either he believes in mind readers, or – worse – he wants to make thinking and speaking a crime.
The obsession with “preventing crime”, proven to not work by the way, just takes the eyes off the ball. Which in this case would be, to catch criminals, prosecute them, and – if found guilty – punish them. No, let’s instead chase the bogeyman and build a surveillance state. It did work so well for the communist states, didn’t it?
2. If all these Government Departments and politicians (most of whom you lambast for not understanding the internet) don”t do their (albeit sometimes misguided) best to sort some sort of safety for all are there any other takers?
Safety from what? At what price?
You English lived through hundreds of real IRA terror attacks. Did you bomb Ireland in response? No. Did you lock up all Irish? No? Was everyone Irish under surveillance? No. Why? Because that would have been unreasonable, unjustified, out of proportion, etc. Yet today, all it takes is one incident, and you, your politicians, and media go crazy. And you are willing to give up the few freedoms you have, for what can only be called the illusion of security.
By the way, France had full telecommunications data retention since 2006. That worked well.
The supposed terrorists were on various French and international spy agency watch lists. Luckily that prevented the slaughter.
But don’t let mere facts get in the way of stupidity. After we lost direction, we doubled the effort.
3. Does it not occur to you that most (including you) properly civilised/cultured people can’t even glimpse at what drives them let alone understand and react to it in a way you find acceptable.
Nobody has a problem with catching, prosecuting, judging and punishing criminals. And in that order, please. But this is not, what the hysteria around Charlie Hebdo is about.
4. Magna Carter? Isn’t that ours (and the empires)? And you keep saying we have no constitution but quote MC when it suits.
I await with interest your detailed solution/s.
Magna Carta is one, just one, milestone. And no, it is not a constitution or a substitute for one, Glynsky.
Magna Carta gave a few rights to the barons against the king. And to nobody else. Similar to how the Greek and Roman democracy was for those, who did not have to work to make a living. You had to be able to hang around the forum to participate. Slaves and working people were either by law of de facto excluded. Except for voting once in a while. Usually for the one candidate, who paid the most. No too different from today, I admit.
Anyone preferring safety over freedom, should consider moving to North Korea. I hear it has perfect safety.
PS: If you find irony or sarcasm in this post, congratulations.