So why are the police using them then? If they are able to ignore burglaries, threats to life and limb why can't they simply not pull someone up on stop and search unless they see wires hanging or something.
This does not make sense. We don't want these laws but we have used them 21 thousand times. Pull the other one.
Wat, hope you don't mind - posted this on the Guardian site. All comment is against Blair
I recently went on Colombia a country with security problems but getting a lot safer. There they have loads of random security checks and a lot of people's lives have been saved.
Perhaps the reason why there have been no convictions for terrorist offences despite 21,577 stop-and-searches is because, in the name of political correctness, the majority of stops have been carried out on middle aged blokes with grey hair and specs, not on people who look like potential Islamic terrorists...
Above mentioned lady, Shamless Akrobati (Director of Liberty, a human rights organisation), never fights a cause outside Britain - or the West. She knows, fighting the horrible human right abuses in Somalia, Sudan, Algeria ... you name it, is very DANGEROUS and DOESN'T PAY well.
She then better fight the Gov... The worst thing that can happen to her is to be elected ambassador to XYZstan, world bank, EIBRD, UN or some other place well paid by tax money. I bet we see her there in 5 years time.
Commenting by HaloScan
