Strangely enough, I agree, but I do not entirely understand why it is a flaw. I do not see why it should be a flaw to restrict the criminal offence of doing something recklessly—in other words, perceiving the likely consequences of an action but doing it in any event—to its effect on reasonable people. The point is that if I perceive that there may be unreasonable people out there who will receive such a statement as encouragement or inducement to such behaviour, but I go ahead and make that statement, I commit the offence under the terms of the Bill. So every single such statement will be caught, because I must be taken to understand that what I say may be so received by unreasonable people.
Terrorism Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Robert Marshall-Andrews
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 9 November 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Terrorism Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
439 c404 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-09-24 16:00:57 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272661
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272661
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272661