The topic here is how they made running public forums a crime.

After making secure communications a crime.

And you think a state like that cares about the formalities? lol..

They just doing what every other monarchy and dictatorship has done in a desperate bid to hold onto power while the state collapses due to inept leadership.

> The topic here is how they made running public forums a crime.

You brought up warrants, they counterpointed the warrants.

> And you think a state like that cares about the formalities? lol..

The warrant is a formality, isn't it? I'm pretty sure you're arguing against your own point now.

I find it terrifying that you consider this to be legitimate grounds for a search, and a reasonable procedure for obtaining permission to do so. They should get in line and get permission from proper legal authorities, like all other law enforcement.

While I hate how the UK is becoming even more of a police state, that law (or that part of a law) is the least worthy of criticism. It simply codifies one instance of reasonable grounds for a search, so that it does not have to be decided on a case-by-case basis by a judge. I.e. a judge is asked to decide if something is justified grounds for a search - now the law says "this narrow case is justified grounds, you don't have to ask a judge".

Or in other words, the proper legal authorities are parliament and the law itself. Sometimes the law needs interpreting and judgment calls, which where warrants come in. This law removes the need for interpretation in one narrow and clearly defined case. If before judges were expected to issue warrants on the kind of evidence that this law requires, then now codifying that expectation and removing what has now become nothing but a bureaucratic delay doesn't reduce liberty.

Are you familiar with the current powers of entry in E&W per s17 & s18 Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984?