> >
> I'm English.
>
> I'd say the current government is too likely to give itself
> excessive powers, but that Gillmor is overstating the case.
>
> --
> Robert
>
I have a question for you. Personally, I think that a constitution with a
bill of rights, such as the US has, is an advantage in preserving liberty.
IIRC, if the House of Commons wants to pass a bill outlawing speech against
the government, it only has the risk of losing the next election and some
possible foot dragging by the House of Lords standing in its way. In the
US, it would take a 2/3rds vote by the House and Senate and ratification by
75% of the state legislatures. An example of this is the fact that, even
though the majority of Americans think burning the flag as part of a
political protest should be outlawed, it is still protected free speech.
I've read articles written by British citizens that suggests that tradition
provides as much of a guarantee in GB as the Constitution does in the US.
I'm curious to see what your viewpoint is.
BTW, I'm not trying to start a "US is better than UK" debate here. This is
one particular bit of law where I like the setup in the US better. To show
at least some balance in my view, I'd like to point out that I think that
the significantly lower cost of the British system is an advantage for that
system. IMHO, the US has far too many lawyers per capita and spends far too
much money on fighting in the courts.
Dan M.
