It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


New Law States Anyone Can Be Arrested For Communicating With Criminals

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 03:25 PM
This is it people...

A new law for the Australian citizens of New South Wales which allows for anybody to be arrested just for talking to past convicted criminals. It doesn't matter if you have nothing to do with any can be completely innocent yet you will still get arrested, simply for talking to a criminal. Worse yet, said 'offender' can be charged, trialled and convicted to a maximum of 3 years jail term for communicating with a criminal.

Personally, i find this absurd, as it allows for an abuse of powers, and it has been slightly confirmed that it would be too!

It was reintroduced in April, explicitly to target bikie and organised crime gangs following a series of shootings in Sydney this year.


Despite criticism from the state's two main legal bodies, senior detectives have said the new powers will now be used to target other individuals, including repeat offenders.

This opens the way to slam anyone...for communicating with the lowest of criminals.

Under the NSW Crimes Act, police can charge people for communicating with two or more convicted criminals, whether in person or by phone, email or via Facebook. Police do not have to prove this communication was related to a criminal act to make an arrest.

Indeed, someone has already been convicted under this law:

Inverell man Charlie Foster, 21, who was born with an intellectual disability and cannot read or write, was sentenced to between nine and 12 months' jail a fortnight ago for a series of shopping trips and walks with three friends who have prior convictions.

"The legislation... highlights the concerns of the community in relation to the problems, not just involving individuals of bikie organisations, but of individuals that have a criminal propensity," Mr Holmes said.

Sources: 1226416141636

posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 03:30 PM
Yeah, just let the criminals speak to only other criminals...see what happens. I could see this law applying to law makers though. Don't let them speak to eachother, just their constituants and the world is golden.

posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 03:36 PM
This is the most insane law I have ever heard of..

With laws like this being passed, I am surprised we haven't heard of citizens killing these politicians with pitchforks and whatever blunt weapon they can grab hold of..

If it happens in the USA there is going to be a lot of dead lawmakers and politicians..

posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 03:37 PM
At first glance this looks insane and the specific case there looks like it needs tossed but what is the context here? I understand the violent biker gangs that started here have branched out world wide. The 1% clubs. Is that who the article is talking about this law having been directed against?

The law is patently ridiculous and just kinda erases freedom wholesale to solve a criminal problem by all indications, I'm just trying to understand context which originally made this seem like a good idea to pass to someone?

posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 03:41 PM
So who is going to arrest the politicians?

posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 03:50 PM
"Inverell man Charlie Foster, 21, who was born with an intellectual disability and cannot read or write, was sentenced to between nine and 12 months' jail a fortnight ago for a series of shopping trips and walks with three friends who have prior convictions."

That was most disturbing to read. I understand how lawmakers wanting to target organised crime would use 'broad' legal terms to allow flexibility for prosecution, however that test case is a terrible example of abuse of power. A shame on the nation's judicial system clearly lacking in checks and balances to enforce this draconian method.

posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 04:08 PM
What if you dont know they are criminals???

What if the OP is a criminal? does that mean those of us who have replied can be arrested?

Am I unserstanding this correctly?

posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 04:08 PM
If I was living in Australia I'd be screwed. This seems rather archaic and tyrannical. I thought Australian laws tended to be rather lax and fair? This may be a misconception of mine I'm not too sure.

posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 04:10 PM
Foster had been convicted....and one of the men he was with on this recent arrest, is the man he had been caught with in the past.

Foster and his friends - Mr Hayes, Damien Case and Eli Morris - have had several run-ins with the law since their early teens and have all served time for violent offences. The consorting charges have seen Foster imprisoned for a second time.

I'm not saying this law is right or just IMO, but I do think it's aimed at keeping people already convicted from joining up with cronies who also have criminal history. Not just the general public. I understand the sentiment, it's just a shame they make a law that can step on everyone if it wants too. The mystery here is why only Foster was arrested under this guise. They all had history.
edit on 15-7-2012 by PutAQuarterIn because: add thought

posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 05:16 PM
What if they are family ? I honestly think a part of human society are going insane. Partly due to Paranoia. Those at the top are most surely afraid of something.

posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 06:07 PM
Don't talk in prison or you will never be let out!

posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 06:28 PM
This is the most insane law ever, it really is stupid, however perhaps we could turn this to our advantage, all we need to do is get the bikers to go and have a chat with all the banksters, all the politicians, all the corporate executives and viola all the arseholes locked up

All joking aside I really cant believe this passed, I mean what happens to a shopkeeper who serves them in a shop? What happens to a wife who speaks to ex convict husband or his kids? I mean Australia> I couldn't even imagine this law being past in some draconian 3rd world hell let alone Australia. The world really is going mad

posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 06:41 PM
Why do people think they are free in Australia? They are subjects of the queen. They have no real rights. No one in the UK or whatever it is called does. They have to do what the government says.

posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 06:48 PM
Was this written by children, or the mentally and criminally insane? It was clear done by people living in a vacuum.

The will the government officially drop the sham that is rehabilitation? If one goes to prison and does their time, they are still excommunicated, so there is no need to rehabilitate as they cannot get a job, see their family, apply for a place to live as all of those things mean communicating. There must be more to this "law" as that fact alone makes this impossible.

What is so incredibly funny is the country was built on a foundation created by criminals, which, if the law were in effect in that hideous time, would make the founding impossible.

posted on Jul, 15 2012 @ 06:58 PM
I've read a lot on here about Australia passing insane laws recently and although I don't live there, I wonder why these laws are being passed, who exactly is passing them, and why the citizens of Australia are letting this happen. I am also concerned because if Australia is passing these laws, it might not be long before America is passing the same insane laws.

And THIS IS AN INSANE LAW. It means anyone who has EVER been convicted of a felony is off limits from any type of communication from an non-felon FOREVER. So how does a convicted felon get a job, order food from a restaurant, go to church? The implications are infinite if TPTB wish. So if a cop has it in for you and knows you visit an ex-felon, he can arrest you. And there is no time limit. Are ex-felons supposed to live in solitary confinement forever? Because that is what this law implys. Who passed this? Talk about a country that needs a revolt and some politicians who need to be removed.

edit on 15-7-2012 by Gridrebel because: (no reason given)

posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 05:52 AM
reply to post by PrinceDreamer

I was thinking along the same line but you forgot one. Does this mean the convicted can not have or hold a job? No income breeds crime. If they cant talk to the general public or even their boss where does that leave them as well as their burden on society?
edit on 16-7-2012 by Agarta because: Spelling

posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 06:26 AM
get ready for the next
all ex criminals will be required to wear a black arm band, to helplawfull citizens identify and avoid them

posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 06:31 AM
Next we'll be arrested for being white on a tuesday while standing at the bus stop.

Good stuff these laws, it means that only little kids will be free to roam the street.

posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 07:17 AM

Originally posted by TechUnique
If I was living in Australia I'd be screwed. This seems rather archaic and tyrannical. I thought Australian laws tended to be rather lax and fair? This may be a misconception of mine I'm not too sure.

It's my understanding that they used to be that way. It appears that they started rocketed towards being a nanny state around 15 years ago or so.

The laws they are passing today are so bizarre, I'd swear they could only became "law" in the US. Crap like "Complain about carbon taxes for rising prices and you'll face massive, ruinous fines":

posted on Jul, 16 2012 @ 07:26 AM
Gonna need a few hundred more jails.

And don't forget to jail the judge who passes sentence, he'll be breaking the same law he is sentencing on.

new topics

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in