[pbhjpbhj]

Come, come.

The reason you make it illegal is that then you can, with Rule of Law, take action against it.

You're (extremely naively) correct in saying making Terrorism (and associated activities) illegal is likely to have little direct effect, but if it isn't illegal then authorities subservient to the Rule of Law are impotent to act against it.

Assuming your comment is not that naive, what's the purpose of the comment? Unless you're advocating return to feudalism I can't see anything positive in your thinking here.

What am I missing?

[fredley]

I'm certainly not advocating against the rule of law, rather that we already have plenty of counter-terrorism laws, the sum total of which doesn't seem to stopped terrorist attacks from happening. I believe that in order to reduce the threat of terrorism in the UK, what we need is not more laws against it, but spend that time and energy tackling the root causes of radicalisation - poverty, mental health issues, education, wartime atrocities committed overseas, and other factors. Preventing people from becoming radicalised is safer and much more cost-effective than trying to find and track people who already are. Both approaches are necessary, but all the rhetoric is focussed on the latter, the former being not such a vote winner as a 'tough on crime/terror' stance.

[pbhjpbhj]

Aye, but you specifically said "making the things they do illegal" with the implication being that such actions are entirely unnecessary. My point is they are necessary in a society that cares about the rule of law.

You're right to contend that simply adding more laws doesn't help further in general. But that's a considerable climbdown from the position implicit in your post upthread.

[abandonliberty]

You can try taking a broader stance and consider the criminalization of related things that otherwise innocent people would still want to use. E.g. encryption.

The jaded tone is likely due to laws being created for the 'drug war' and 'terrorism' quickly impacting ordinary citizens, while having relatively little effect on the groups they were purportedly created for.