Introduction War on terror has become the most recent United States mantra as funds and focus on defense are the campaigns of its current administration. Consequently, in the United Kingdom, in June 2008, the House of Commons in Westminster voted in favour of allowing the detention of terrorism suspects for 42 days without charge, an extension to the already existing 28 days that police may hold suspects. This paper will try to establish the reasons for such a decision by a democratic government as well as its effects on citizens of the United Kingdom. In a specific manner, this paper will:  1. Explain a situation characterised by emotional public and political response;  2. Conduct a thorough analysis of the situation in order to determine its direct and indirect causes;  3. Explain both present and future effects;  4. Present your own ideas for dealing with the situation. Thesis Statement: Safety and home security is a shared responsibility between the government and its public, so that detention should not be practised at random but with discrimination. Discussion Terrorism has caused much trouble, as may be recalled with the London train bombings in July 2005, as well as the United States September 11, 2001 experience. Many lives have been sacrificed and compromised with these seemingly senseless acts of terror, of which both ends are losers as the terrorists were identified as mainly suicide bombers. This, along with imminent other threats, prompted the current United Kingdom administration to take up measures to curb terrorism threats. However, according to shadow home secretary David Davis, the proposed extension of the maximum time police can hold terror suspects to 42 days, “…has no authority, it has no legitimacy, and it will be thrown out” (quoted, BBC, par 3). In June 2008, the House of Commons in Westminster voted in favour of allowing the detention of terrorism suspects for 42 days without charge, but this was met with uproar by those who opposed the proposal and had been subjected to contention prior to its discussion in the House of Lords. The reason for Prime Minister Brown Gordon’s proposal for extending detention days of terrorist suspects remains a concern for home security as well as maximise government efforts to safeguard its citizens. Labour representative John McDonnell said: “Any attempt to present this as some sort of victory for the government will ring absolutely hollow. There will be widespread consternation among our supporters in the country seeing a Labour government prepared to use every tactic available in its determination to crush essential civil liberties, which have been won by the labour movement over generations” (quoted, BBC, par 7). While the short view provides security for most citizens, it is not for those who may be randomly picked by police or armed officers who in most probability will remain “suspects”. To become a suspect in itself and be detained for hours is already quite unlawful as there is a need to prove beyond reasonable doubt that a suspect is a criminal prior to detention. The proposal for a 42-day pre-charge detention for terrorism suspects has been criticised by the human rights committ