Informed_Debate's profile . Informed_Debate group posts
 |
| xAdamx |
on Tue 8 Nov 11, 10:07 PM to the Informed_Debate group.
It's my opinion that the UK has got to be the most legislated group of countries and yep a principality in Europe..can't say for sure because I'm semiliterate, though I do know you should never build a semi on a water plane.
I googled the disorderly house act 1751..1751 ffs does it still exsist in law? for instance if l were given the keys to city of London apparently under the law I would be allowed to drive a herd of elephants over London bridge.
How many other little gems like this exsist ?..
| 9 Nov 11, 4:36 AM Empress_Martine UK(HA), 2 yrs £       |
Quite a few of these little gems of old laws still hang around.But they are slowly being repealed. For example, up to recently it was illegal to burn or make tallow on the thames at 3am in the morning!That crazy law has now bit the dust. http://empressm7.uboot.com/ http://www.socialkink.com/empressmartine Vampire, pro/lifestyle ts dom/switch.Ageplay mummy/aunty/AB,medical play,domestic,energy, outdoor specialist."Who you calling"@?!;:$£<Σ#"!" "Did you just call me a "@€$££!?"! | |||
| 9 Nov 11, 7:21 AM shit_sub UK(W), 5 yrs |
there are, according to the "centre for policy studies" think tank, two hundred and sixty six ways in which the state can legally force its way into your home. two hundred and sixty six ways in which they are quite entitled to push past your front door and shoulder their way into your living room. including a "writ of assistance", which is basically permission for a customs officer to burgle you, the legal validity of which was one of the reasons the americans fought and won their war of independence. as of 2004/5 it was still in use in this country and nobody was recording how often. as for the charmingly quaint rather than the vaguely sinister i have heard that hackney cabs are required to carry food for the horses and i think i also heard gentlemen are allowed to piss on the back wheel of their vehicle. dunno how true those are though.
Edited 9 Nov 11, 7:25 AM by shit_sub | |||
| 9 Nov 11, 8:19 AM Muzzlehatch UK(TN), 7 yrs |
About time someone mentioned shooting a Welshman with a bow and arrow after mindight in Chester.
Don't try it. Like a lot of these archaic laws, they are superseded by modern statute. In the above case you would be charged with murder, or attempted murder if you were a poor shot. Owner of The Croppery Dungeon and Breakfast. Organises The St Leonards munch. | |||
| 9 Nov 11, 10:12 AM Attitude_Adjuster UK(N), 6 yrs |
Many of them were never true in the first place (like the OP's sheep example, and the shooting a Welshman after midnight law too).
And all men kill the thing they love, By all let this be heard, Some do it with a bitter look, Some with a flattering word, The coward does it with a kiss, The brave man with a sword! | |||
| 9 Nov 11, 10:15 AM Attitude_Adjuster UK(N), 6 yrs |
Most of the good reasons that people say america wanted independence are bunk!
And all men kill the thing they love, By all let this be heard, Some do it with a bitter look, Some with a flattering word, The coward does it with a kiss, The brave man with a sword! | |||
| 9 Nov 11, 10:35 AM AshUK UK(EN), 7 yrs £ |
I've often wondered how feasible it would be to junk all our outdated laws and statutes etc and replace with a modern constitution and legal framework. The idea appeals to me massively ( not just because of what I am starting to suspect might be my slight OCD tendencies ) but also because it would do away with fat overpaid lawyers arguing the toss between the 1875 verdict of Massingberd vs Massingberd and the 1921 law of anomolies etc etc. I suspect it would be something of a massive ( and costly ) undertaking - but surely not impossible ? After all, other countries have done it. It would also have the advantage of making us look like a modern, forward-thinking nation, rather than a dusty old anachronism.
" Pow ! Right in the kisser ! " | |||
| 9 Nov 11, 11:29 AM shit_sub UK(W), 5 yrs |
I'm sure that's true Put another (better) way then: writs of assistance, and their manifest unfairness, were the subject of a number of controversial legal disputes in the revolutionary period. in particular, paxton's case, which john adams (one of the key founding fathers and the second president of the united states) described as "the spark in which originated the American revolution". they were prohibited by the Virginia declaration of rights, and subsequently the fourth amendment to the bill of rights. (Thank you wiki!) Edited 9 Nov 11, 6:07 PM by shit_sub | |||
| 9 Nov 11, 11:33 AM Doghouse_Reilly UK(MK), 6 yrs |
True enough. The discussion for Americans over the issue of independence went something like this: Britain: We're going to outlaw slavery. America: They're going to take our slaves? Fuck that. FREEDOM! Britain: You suck. The object of persecution is persecution. The object of torture is torture. The object of power is power. | |||
| 9 Nov 11, 12:39 PM Empress_Martine UK(HA), 2 yrs £ |
There is a committee of senior solicitors who meet on a regular basis,in private and look through old or out of date laws. They then make a ruling to suggest that this law or that law is repealed.If their ruling is taken up then the law in question will be repealed. At the moment the bulk of laws being repealed are mainly from over a hundred and fifty to two hundred years ago. I only found out about the committee because of a radio four programme. http://empressm7.uboot.com/ http://www.socialkink.com/empressmartine Vampire, pro/lifestyle ts dom/switch.Ageplay mummy/aunty/AB,medical play,domestic,energy, outdoor specialist."Who you calling"@?!;:$£<Σ#"!" "Did you just call me a "@€$££!?"! | |||
| 9 Nov 11, 1:02 PM xAdamx UK(SE), 9 yrs |
No facts to offer...but wasn't the war of indepenence caused by the scots in particular the glaswegians tobacco plantation owners in America..something along the lines of wanting more and more higher revenue..and not just a tax issue..prepared to be disagreed with and ejumacated..
Yours is not to reason why, yours is but to do or cry. |
