From: "IG", [EMAIL PROTECTED]
< I don't mean any insult by mentioning the Nuremberg
trials, but it was an important historical event
in law that has evolved into various declarations
of human rights in international law that this country
has signed up to.>
Well, you are insulting and tell us what laws Nuremberg
has evolved into.
Your reference to the SS man smashing the windows of
shops belonging to Jews.......
First of all.........he was not acting under any law.
Krystallnacht was an arranged 'spontaneous' act of
vandalism and anti semitism structured and
organised by the Nazi party. That rules that argument out.
<Well, it's grown into the UN convention, there are currently
war trials going in the Hague prosecuting police officials
from Yugoslavia under similar legal provisions.>
Yes, for murder and other human rights offences that were
not commited under the banner or protection of laws passed
by a democratically elected government.
I take it that you and other contributors want to have
the various sections of the firearms act that infringe
our rights repealed?
Is it fair to assume that a burning sense of injustice
remains? (It does for
me).
If so, what is to be achieved by attacking the police so
virulently? The references to Nazi criminals remains, and
the comparison is abhorrent. There is no relationship at
all. None. Not in any way, shape or form imaginable in
the most fevered and fertile imagination can such a
comparison be justified. It is a gross insult to every
police officer in the UK to suggest that they are akin to
criminals tried at Nuremberg for offences of mass murder,
ethnic cleansing, torture and so on. I have no inclinations
to commit such acts, nor do I know of a single colleague
that does. The laws I uphold are laws passed by a
democratically elected government. I am sure that you have
some friends or relatives that voted for them. Are they
Nazis as well? I think not. If your wife voted for them
what would that make her?
There was no legal precedent at Nuremberg. ECHR has nothing
to do with it at all. For the last time, Nuremberg was a
showcase expedient whereby most of the major murderers were
'tried' and executed. Obeying the law had nothing
to do with it. The excuses were 'just obeying orders'. This
was an attempt at mitigation in order to escape the death
penalty.
If you want to regain lost rights, the only way to do it
is to use the same process that was used to remove them
The courts and the politicians. Anyone who thinks otherwise
is fooling themselves. Futile gestures like handing medals
in, doing silly things at the commonwealth games and
attacking everyone who disagrees with them are pointless and
will only weaken the case. Only well presented and structured
debate, strongly made cases and relentless pressure will win
the day. Relentless pressure does not, however, have to
translate into intemperate and hostile attacks on people
either as individuals or institutions. It is human nature
to fight back. I do not defend the stance by ACPO, the
Superintendants Association or the Police Federation (its
not a union, by the way. Police officers do not have that
particular human right, along with many others that are
conveniently ignored). I disagree with it and said so
vociferously at the time. I marched, lobbied and did the
things that everyone here did. If I was to take notice of
some of the subscribers, I wouldn't have done so as he
thinks I should not have an opinion. I think he means I
should not have one different to him.
IG
--
I think you are completely missing my point, in my
whole entire life every time the word "Nazi" crops up
people tend to get offended when in fact in this case I
am simply trying to illustrate a legal theory. I'm not
suggesting that the police in the UK are akin to the
Gestapo, what I'm trying to say is that the police bear
responsibility for their actions, not the Home Office
and not Parliament, which is what you have said is the
case. The defence of "I was just following orders" does
not wash, and the Nuremberg trials are an example of where
that defence failed. I will stay away from Nazi comparisons
in the future because people seem unable to get away
from the emotional side of it.
Unless it's a criminally negligent act, a police officer
does not commit a criminal offence if he decides he is not
going to follow orders. If you decided not to show up
to work tomorrow because you thought you would have to
arrest someone for breaking an immoral (in your opinion)
law, what offence would you commit? None whatsoever.
Yes you would face disciplinary action, but the Home Office,
Parliament etc. cannot throw you in prison for it.
Steve.
Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org
List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________________________________
T O P I C A The Email You Want. http://www.topica.com/t/16
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
