SIGN UP

Should conversion to Muslim radialisation be a crime?

Avatar Image
rov1200 | 23:46 Mon 13th Dec 2010 | News
34 Answers
From experience we know this leads to hate and in some cases violent disorder against Western values. To tackle the problem at too late a stage may result in many deaths especially if they have radiacalised others. At present we only tackle the Imams for spreading their hate
.
Shouldn't the penalty at least be deportation or a prison sentence?.

Answers

1 to 20 of 34rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by rov1200. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
It should have been tackled immediately, all the mad clerics should have been rounded up and sent back to where they came from. Hysterical people really get my goat.
Identifying 'radicals' is rather tricky. You're essentially advocating a thought crime.

It's one thing for some loon on the fringes of society to spout nonsense about this, that and the other, but people shouldn't be imprisoned for their views. If that were the case, where do you draw the line? And more importantly, who decides what's 'radical'?

For example, I'm an atheist. I dislike all religions (some more fervently than others) because I believe that they all impose impossible rules and restrictions upon people and then punish them for the 'sin' of being human. I would describe myself has a realist-humanist. However, some might say that I'm a 'radical' atheist. The current Pope almost most certainly would. Radicalism is a term that means many different things to many different people and is therefore extremely subjective.

As for the deportation thing, it's difficult to deport someone who was born in the UK. Where exactly do we deport them to?

However, all that being said, I don't disagree with the sentiment of the original question. I would love to wave a magic wand and have all the violent, oppressive, hate-mongering morons disappear from this country.

But it's just not going to happen as we cannot and should not legislate for 'thought' crimes.
I agree with Birdie. We cannot and should not even try to legislate against thoughts and ideas. However, if those thoughts and ideas are purposefully broadcast in order to actively encourage acts of violence, hence putting public safety at risk, then that should be regarded as a crime, and an appropriate sentence applied. For Brits, a long term of imprisonment, and for immigrants immediate deportation for both them and their families with no right of appeal.
Unfortunately due to the strength of the human rights act, cuts in the prison system and open border policy nothing can be done.
Except perhaps ditch the Human Rights Act in favour of getting our own act together. ;o)
I think you must mean - Unfortunately due to the fact that we are not a police state imprisoning anybody who has a view we disagree with without trial - we have a human rights act
By your criteria, being either Christian and Roman Catholic in Northern Ireland should be made a crime too since there has been hate and violent disorder there for many years.
-- answer removed --
Ah yes Jake, the Human Rights Act - a wonderful thing that gives our enemies every consideration, and yet fails to protect the human right to life for the innocent victims of their actions. Something to be applauded indeed!
As much as I'd like to lock these nutters up, I have to say I'm forced to agree with Birdie, this would become a "thought crime". I mean we all have what may be termed extremist views, religious or otherwise and that is a right of the individual. I mean I often consider that death would be a suitable punishment for quite a lot of irritating day to day annoyances, usually involving the supermarket!
-- answer removed --
The guy who is alleged to have set the bomb off in Sweden has a picture of Tower Bridge up in flames (I assume after it had been bombed).

If this is not a incitement to violence then nothing is.

Of course if we could wind the clock back and change the awful decision to allow so many muslims in this country we may not be in such a mess.

So sad what is happening to this country.
Agree with koode and VHG, but if I say it I am classed a racist.

I think a very large proportion of the country believe the same but are frightened to speak out.
There are already laws against inciment to violence like there are many laws for many things.

We dont need the Noo labour approach of even more laws just use the ones we have. Minus of course Mrs Blairs pension plan aka the HRA.

As a country our Government listens to the noisy liberal minority. That is the problem. The silent majority are ignored. And that includes Muslims who despise radicalism as much as anyone else.
I can vividly remember internment in NI and it's not the way to go under any circumstances, you cannot in a civilised world police people's rights to free thought or you become what you are trying to avoid.
-- answer removed --
Free thought yes, but once that turns to action the line is crossed. This is no different to thinking you want to kill someone(we all must have done that at sometime ! ) and then actually carrying it out or inciting someone else to do it.

So yes you can have the thoughts but any action which crosses into action that breaks the law - prosecute.

Probal is we spent so long being slandered by Noo labour as racists or whatever that people feel oppressed by the State that just panderes to the hand wringing liberal minority.
well the law already exists in that situation ymb- my understanding of the question, and correct me if I am wrong, is that we should make a crime of the actual process of having radical thought because radical aciton is already covered by many aspects of law.
Question Author
Melannie Philips got it right but no-one would listen to her views.

http://www.dailymail....slamic-terrorism.html

Now its probably too late!
Question Author
Many of the posts above say the problem cannot be tackled because you are entering the world of 'thought crime' and in this country a person is innocent until proven guilty.

That is why control orders were brought in to monitor terror suspects who had not yet committed a crime but were thought likely to commit one. The woolly liberals were totally against control orders as were some members of other parties.

Now the coalition are in power they are negotiating with MI5 to restore these valuable weapons against terrorists. It shows defence of the realm is more important than individual liberty.

1 to 20 of 34rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Should conversion to Muslim radialisation be a crime?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.