Quote from: botany on September 21, 2014, 01:14:07 PM

Quote from: leannemckim46 on September 21, 2014, 03:40:19 AM

Quote from: SeaofBTC on September 21, 2014, 01:35:50 AM

Quote from: leannemckim46 on September 20, 2014, 11:32:57 PM

Quote from: SeaofBTC on September 20, 2014, 09:49:52 PM

Quote from: Leina on August 29, 2014, 10:14:35 PM

The law can only be enforced when US still have the influence and military might.

As soon as US lose that influence, no one will care what US want.

A law can only be enforced when the people chose to allow it to enforced.

Anyone can decide to not follow the law, and nothing can stop them from the choice to not follow a law.

What can be done is punishment for not following the law, after the fact. Punishment is only repercussion, and cannot stop someone from committing the crime before they do it.

That said, you can now be thrown into prison indefinitely for being a "suspected" terrorist. Still, that's really just the government breaking the law. The government, in this case, is just choosing to not be enforced by these laws.

This is not entirely accurate. What suspected terrorists are jailed for is for planning a terrorist attack on the US. It is generally something along the lines of conspiracy to commit terrorism.

I would also be surprised if many/any people would actually be opposed to this if it could be proven that people detained were people who were actually planning and hoping to carry out an act of terrorism

That is indeed the appeal to emotions card that is played. The problem is the suspected terrorist is detained on "proof" at the military/government side, but is only given a lawyer *after* the detainment on "strong suspicion," and the process of a lawyer acquisition is not quick.

There is the ideal, then there is the real. The real is people are detained first, and then given a lawyer months later, years later, or, in some cases, they just happen to die in prison.

Also, to speak to your "proof," most of the "terrorists" in, and who were in, Guantanamo Bay didn't wind up there by capture and proof from USA forces. They got there from middle eastern fighters. Why did these militant groups help us? Oh right, the massive bounties on any captured terrorists that were offered.

Human rights are quickly tossed out the window when we mix military with government. Indefinite imprisonment based on a suspicion is just plain evil. The word "Terrorism" has an incredibly wide meaning, and can apply to a very large range of acts including much of what the USA does. "Conspiracy to commit terrorism" can encompass quite a bit.

Heck, my posts here suggesting people can just simply choose to defy all laws could be construed as me conspiring with you all to be terrorists in the sense that we just don't obey any law of the USA.

Have you ever heard of habeas corpus? It is when someone that is detained petitions the court (or someone petitions the court on their behalf) to have the prisoner brought before a judge so the judge can evaluate if the prisoner is being lawfully detained. If they are not then the prisoner is let go. This process takes a very short amount of time (days at most). The supreme court has held that suspected terrorists have the right to request a writ of habeas corpus

Wasn't the Guantanamo Bay detention centre used to circumvent this?

The supreme court ruled that detainees (or someone on their behalf) can file a writ of habeas corpus if they think they are being held illegally.