Terrorism' alert on the motorway 1391

I'm not in constant fear of crime committed by anyone, let alone the authorities. But the authorities have much more power over me than a common criminal.

In principle, we are presumably ultimately in charge of the authorities, in that they are public servants. The same cannot be said for criminals, over whom we have little influence. I would argue that the abuse of power by the authorities is even worse than 'normal' crime, not only because of the unique power the abuser has over the victim, but also because of the knock-on effects, such as an increasing distrust of the authorities.

It's not an either-or decision - it is rational and practical to be wary of criminals and dishonest people in authority. When a new power is demanded by the authorities, we need to look at whether it is actually required, how it may be used and abused, and what the trade-offs will be. It is not good enough to simply say, well, abuse is rare, so let's give them what they want.

Abuse of power by people in authority shouldn't happen at all. There is no excuse.

And the fact is that the abuse isn't so rare. Consider the recent cricism of the stop and search powers:

'The government-appointed independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Lord Carlile QC, said stop and search was a valuable tool but that it was being used too widely: "It's unattractive to members of the public because it doesn't involve reasonable suspicion of anything. So one can be searched simply because one happens to be in a particular area." In his annual review, Lord Carlile said overall the use of this power could be halved without any reduction in public safety.'

Just one example. Add it to the list I provided in my earlier post, which is by no means extensive.