"Big Bill" <bill@kruse.co.uk> wrote in message 
news:rplvr2t1v3nepnsg95ggnf76jd0kmlru8s@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 15 Jan 2007 09:11:51 -0000, "Dr Zoidberg"
> <alexNOOOOOO!!!!!!!@drzoidberg.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> > Maria wrote:
> > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6261791.stm
> > > 
> > > Violent offender 'Asbos' planned
> > > 
> > > The government is planning "behaviour orders" for people considered to
> > > be at risk of committing a violent crime.
> > > 
> > 
> > "If there's evidence that you could commit a violent offence in the
> > future,
> > proper evidence of that proved in a court, then why shouldn't you be
> > restrained from committing that violent offence. "
> > 
> > Well that violent offence is already against the law. Are the sort of
> > people
> > they have in mind likely to suddenly be less violent because it's now
> > against a *different* law?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > "We are willing to do it relation to Anti-social Behaviour Orders, why not
> > in relation to other sorts of offences as well."
> > 
> > Because in the case of ASBOs they *have* already committed these types of
> > actions and are having it re-iterated that they shouldn't do so.
> > The proposed law seems to be "we think you might commit a crime"
> 
This is already the case with SOPO