Will David Cameron’s New Laws Shape Up Against Terrorist Threat?

In the G20 Australian Summit, British Prime Minister David Cameron revealed the UK’s seizing of passports for potential outgoing ISIS fighters and its blocking of fighters coming home from the frontlines. Will it be effective? Let’s see.

The UK Government’s strategy is to dry up the resources of IS, namely people. Individuals, especially youngsters within the age group of 18-21, are attracted to the ideals of ISIS. Hundreds of individuals in Europe and the United States have travelled to Syria and Iraq to fight with their brethren. According to the UK, they provide the biggest population of terrorist migrants.

The new powers will expand passport seizure laws from the Home Secretary to Policemen stationed in airports. Anyone suspected of participating in any acts of terror could be held down for 30 days until their names are cleared. 

Meanwhile, the UK will not be welcoming British Jihadists home. They will be allowed home, but only if they comply with strict measures of living inside the United Kingdom.

Will it shape up? I believe it would have effects. With plenty of inspections happening in airports, most youngsters will be discouraged to go. Veteran fighters could sneak their way from the airport, but they may be barred from their return.

Regardless whether it’s a prideful fight for terrorists, they won’t be going home unless they are treated like criminals in their home state. But for the laws, I believe they could achieve their goals effectively. 

Source

The Possibility of Abusing the Anti-Bullying Law

Almost every western country and some Asian countries are adapting anti-bullying laws to better protect young people from people who take advantage of their position and attributes. While this is a great victory for all those who fell victim to bullying from education to employment, there is a great chance this could be abused.

In countries where compensation culture is quite a big part of everyday life, employees who were shut out by their employers could file for damages based on bullying. This can create problems for employers who rate and lay off their employees performance-wise. Employees could claim for damages against their employer, or possibly retain their work.

This could create an unfair advantage this time to superiors. Although legal challenges are available against those who claim damages, it can become a very costly issue for the company.

It is important that the use of such laws as loopholes and personal rights be monitored carefully. The definition and exclusions of the law must be well defined. In this way, nobody, especially those who have actually done wrong and were given rightful reprimand, could be properly given justice.

The provision of an anti-bullying law is a country still has its benefits outweigh the cons it could possibly have, such as this one.

UK Social Media Defamation: What You Could Do

The Internet gave way for people to interact with each other quickly and effectively through social media and electronic messaging. However, this also gave way for many people to post offensive and obscene methods of expressing themselves through messages, pranks and deliberate meanness. Here are a few ways you could defend yourself against social media defamation in the United Kingdom.

1.     Defamation Bill 2013

On April 23, 2013, the UK Lords passed a defamation bill that would stop cases against journalists, academics or individuals who live outside the cases to reduce the amount of libel in the United Kingdom. The law makes filing for libel in social media a bit more difficult because you will need to prove the social effects of the defamation before the law can take action.

2.     Copy Important Documents

Conversations, mocking social media profiles, wall posts, tweets, blogs and virtually anything that shows defamation against you or any party, organization or other business must be documented and saved. Copying important documents like these online on soft copies serve as evidence in your future defamation case against the defamer.

3.     Leeway

In the Internet, defamation is different from cyberbullying. If a threat was issued against a person, they could just have the individual surveyed by authorities in case they prove true to their promise. Cyberbullying is intently defaming a person. Defamation, in itself, is a negative branding of a person, company or organization. There is leeway given to defamation than cyberbullying.

UK Fraud Laws: What Protection Do You Have?

In every country, people will try countless methods to earn more from a buyer by selling them a fraud or involving them in a scam. Every country deems fraud punishable by law. In the United Kingdom, the Fraud Act of 2006 protects consumers from fraud, fraud by false representation, fraud by failing to disclose information, fraud by superposition and more.

Most UK fraud and scams come from the Internet, through telemarketing or text marketing, and through actual fraud of certain criminals. Sometimes, these scams come from an anonymous call or text that is unsolicited. Often, these scams will tell you that you have money waiting in your bank account and a fee is needed to deposit the amount into your bank account.

Fraud by false representation tackles the area of buying designer products that turn out to be imitations with sub-par quality of materials used. Fake items, such as bags and clothing, are common targets. With digital media, pirated movies, DVDs and CDs are punishable by law for selling or even ownership.

If you’re a victim of fraud, the UK government has the Action Fraud hotline for its citizens who fell victim to Internet crime frauds and scams. Action Fraud’s suspects are not limited to individuals to large corporations and organized crime. Again, all fraud suspects are subject to punishment by the Fraud Act of 2006, which is commonly five to seven years imprisonment.

Imagining A World Without Rules or Legal System

My name is Jeremy Williams and I like discussing topics about the law of countries, states or cities. However, I don’t wish to discuss them in the full technical veracity associated with laws. For my first post, I want to share to you readers about an idea of a world without rules or legal systems. Will it do humanity good, or will it do the world worse? Here are my two cents.

Different people in the past have always said that for the world to remain civilized, rules need to be in place. Rules make a person more civilized, more mature and responsible, and this is what sets them apart from barbarians. Indeed, this is true, with rules, the world had probably become a great place with proper respect for inventions, creativity, religion, cultures and others.

However, rules have also made a man more cunning and unreadable than he ought to be. Rules made transparency impossible; while barbarians were honest with their intentions, civilized men appearing to be good may actually be evil. Rules could be used as a tool for manipulation or to push up a person’s personal interests. Most of the time, those who make these rules are the ones who only benefit from them.

A world without rules will not also be a beneficial world. Without the legal system, no justice could be served. Voices cannot be heard. While oppressors are obvious in their appearance, there is no way for a governing body to control them and their dispute. Without proper control, there is chaos and this is where the law protects the ordinary citizen.

It is therefore important that we find the balance in transparency and the protection of citizens and individuals from those who manipulate the law. Advocacy, and the awareness of knowing the rights of citizens and individuals can make a civilized world truly civilized and free of any manipulations.