The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Australian Anti-Terrorism Laws infringe civil liberties?

Australian Anti-Terrorism Laws infringe civil liberties?

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
I am doing a research about the above topic and I was wondering about the opinions of people regarding this matter.

The Australian Anti Terror Laws have been reinforced since the 9/11 attacks and London bombings to prevent similar cases from happening here. But since there is no Bill of Rights, there is no way of telling if the laws are appropriate or not.

Are some of these laws, such as the control orders and the sedition laws too 'harsh' and do they infringe on the basic human rights of the people?

Any feedback will be much appreciated.
Posted by EstherL2, Monday, 18 June 2007 6:24:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
YES but is it worse than death by a terrorist act?
Posted by Belly, Tuesday, 19 June 2007 5:38:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think we need to realise that the rights that these laws apparently infringe are highly compromised anyway.

Sedition laws impinge on the fundamental right of freedom of speech, which is held up as a pillar of democracy. But this apparent right is very highly reduced for many of us, and probably always has been. Hence the overwhelming use of pseudonyms on this forum.

I would dearly love to be able to express my views under my own name. But I simply canít as government employee. The same issue exists in private enterprise.

I donít have a problem with control orders or sedition laws. Much better we have this added level of restriction on our civil liberties than suffer a terrorist attack. Or putting it another way: much better a very small portion of the populace suffer some further restrictions to their civil liberties, even if some of those people are found to have nothing to do with terrorism.

This sort of stuff presents a terribly difficult balancing act, in fact an impossible one. I reckon many of the same people who are up in arms about these laws now, would be up in arms about the lack of government action against terrorism if they were affected by a terrorist act.
Posted by Ludwig, Tuesday, 19 June 2007 6:56:09 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
sedition laws can not exist in a democracy, a society ruled by the people- which oz is not. the purpose of sedition law is not to protect people, but to protect government. governments fear and hate free speech, for they know how corrupt and incompetent they are.

the australian people cheerfully accept thousands of casualties every year so they may drive vastly overpowered vehicles in a manner that exhilarates the driver. but they are unwilling to accept the possibility of attack? they are in more danger from lightning strike.

of course, terrorists might strike oz even in the face of sedition laws- suicide bombers are serious people. sedition law doesn't stop them, it only stops us from discussing in public why we are hated.

if you accept sedition laws, you are 'collared', a slave to 'government approved' information.
Posted by DEMOS, Tuesday, 19 June 2007 9:12:18 AM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well Demos, if it is so bad here, why are you still here ?
Could it possibly be that this country is significantly better than
wherever else you might otherwise go ?

I thought sedition was an offence of making statements and acting in
support of the enemy. So it depends on whether there is an enemy.
It also depends on whether there is a war I guess.

There is less freedom of speach now for white Australian males as there
are subjects that are illegal for us to make statements about as we
might wish.

I cannot even say to you "Go back to where you come from" without
raising the PC police's attention.
Posted by Bazz, Tuesday, 19 June 2007 10:13:20 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
We are living in a big, open island nation that is vulnerable by its very isolation.
I personally agee with anti terror measures because what we give up in liberties we have enjoyed in the past, surely we make up for in safety. Is there some sort of Orwellian theme happening here?
We cannot let 9/11 happen again.
Posted by Goddess, Tuesday, 19 June 2007 12:08:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy