An Unfair Cop....

From The BBC News

Terror Law Review ‘By Christmas’

Home Secretary John Reid says he will finish his review of anti-terrorism measures before Christmas.

In an interview with the BBC, he said it may mean new laws - giving security services the "tools they need to counter terrorism".

He did not confirm whether they would include plans to increase the maximum time for which suspects can be detained without charge.

Tony Blair earlier said he still backed an increase from 28 days to 90 days.

Am I being dim here? I still can't see the reason security services want this extension. Are they really saying that they can be convinced enough that someone is involved in terrorism to arrest them, but that it could really take them up to three months to find enough evidence to convince the members of a jury of the same thing?

I'm generally pretty 'pro' the idea of giving the police a fair crack at doing their job. Whilst they may be a bit of a pain in the backside, if you're the sort of person who's lifestyle doesn't fit in with the way the lawmakers see things, (and I'm talking about disagreeing on issues like drug use, personal choices, nannying laws, not basic common sense social conventions like locking up murderers and rapists etc), but they do have a job to do.
Yes, some of them might even be a little over-zealous, but even people who regularly break a few laws in their lives soon get on the phone to the cops if their car gets nicked or their mum gets mugged. There are a few things in this country you can be arrested for, that I personally think are hugely invasive, but that doesn't mean I'd want to see a world without the boys in blue generally.

But are the police really so bad at collecting evidence, or so cuckolded by the Crown Prosecution Service, or just so much better than a jury at knowing what's good for us... that they need to have the legal right to effectively imprison someone for three months without trial?