Would you allow someone to be imprisoned for 42 days to suit this government?

the secret services don't want it, the police either, but the gov wants to abuse our liberties under the pretext of 'security'. What can we do?

No. 42 days is far too long. A similar extention was defeated under Tony Blair, and I dont get why Brown has decided to press for this. Firstly it was defeated last time because people dont want it. Secondly he is not in a position to be making such contraversial changes given the rebelion in the party, his low opinion ratings etc. He is just feeding into the oppositions hands. Thirdly 24 days is enough to build any kind of a case. 42 days without trial is a dance over the fundamental freedom from imprisionment without trial laid out in the Magna Carta in 1215. I appreciate that plots etc are somewhat more complicated with networks of blah blah but surely the evidence can be sifted through within 24 days. Any longer may just lead to a lax approach to evidence gatehring. For example At university if you give students extra time on their deadline, generally the work will not be to a better standard than without the extention, because people jsut think 'yea we've got another week or so to do it'. So leave it at the 24 days to minimise the unnecessary length of detention and encourage the police to build their case efficiently

I really don't understand why Brown is prepared to put his premiership and government on the line over this.

As has become clear there seems to be little demand for it from the security services themselves, just the government.

Lord Carlisle stated on a tv interview that it is over a year since someone was held under the law as it currently stands for more than 14 days, never mind 28. So why the big deal about increasing it to 42 when the current limit is not being found repeatedly lacking?

I do however have no regard for protecting the interests of terrorists and believe that unless you are very actively engaged in terrorist activities or plots you are never going to be detained for anything like 28 or 42 days under the terrorism act. in which case you would have it coming to you.

No as this is against our own liberty. Innocent until proven guilty but that sadly no longer is the case. Terrorists have not made the world a more dangerous place but the likes of USA and UK with their aggressive foreign policy have made the world a more dangerous place.

Stay out of trouble. E.g. don't plot mass extermination of UK citizens. Don't buy lots of hydrogen peroxide even if is "to make a point." Don't discuss mass extermination of UK citizens with anyone by email, telephone or in person. Stay away from chippy religious zealots bent on the destruction of Western civilisation.

According to the Dail papers, the police do want this 42 days wothout charge. You must realise this 42 days only applies to Terrorist suspects and not the general public. I would myself, vote for 90 days for these suspects if I thought it would save lives.

yes, think about it. If the police know that the guy's a terrorist but don't have any proof yet, they should have more time otherwise this terrorist might just walk out the station and bomb something the next day.

I feel legislation of this sort is needed!Sometimes!The complexity of invetigations such as obtaining evidence from overseas and trawling through computer evidence can take a lot of time!

I am all for it - I really don't understand why it is being debated at all.

Need more information to comment. Imprisoned for 42 days WHY?

You could move to Canada.

Yes, I would allow it.

what are you worrying about unless you plan on being one of them they are likely to imprison!