From: nick royall, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
One thing that IG's list of laws omits is that:
Prior to 1930 it was NOT an offence to abuse onself by taking drugs
therfore there were no illegal drug dealers shooting each other over their
patch.
Prior to 1953 the law abiding could carry virtually any item for any reason
including self-defence wheras criminals couldnt. Now the law abiding are
penalised and criminal acts punished diminished
Prior to 1970 it was still illegal to drive a car whilst pissed, it was just
harder for the police to randomly stop people. Now Essex police CC boast
about how many people have their rights infringed every christmas in the
knowledge that it serves no purpose.
Prior to 1920 it was legal (and is still compusory if called upon)to help
the police by loaning them your rifle to contain anarchists and murderers
holed up in Sydney St, nowadays if you carry a mobile phone some heavily
armed protector of the citizenry will nigh on kill you because it might be a
gun (or chair leg or toilet handle or balloon etc) yet 6 guns can be
recovered from a birthday party in Camberwell with the co-operation of those
there. Just think what the unco-operative were carrying.
Prior to 1958 you could be slung in the chokey for not marrying the girl
after having a bit of leg-over and there was no social security payment to
be recovered.
At some point society must decide whether it wants to carry on down the road
it has been following or wants people to be responsible for their own
behaviour. There will always be those who will never fit in with what the
others think is reasonable but there is a big difference between an
expectation and compusion to conform.
The police could spend all their time and resources chasing after drug
offenders and it will never make a dent in the problem because it is a self
abuse (like drinking, smoking, eating bacon sandwiches etc) and there is no
will for it to stop, just laws. These laws have been rendered hollow by the
actuality.
In short many of these laws mentioned do not deal with the problem, they
merely create new problems to be addressed. The Saxons had no time for
complex legalese, their laws of tort meant that if you were wronged then you
could seek redress, whether monetary or otherwise. The complex laws were
introduced by the Normans who needed to apply a legitimacy to their conquest
and land partition in such a way that favoured their own nouveau riche by
effectively using the laws as a barrier between themselves. and those they
now lorded it over. it was politics then and little has changed, even the
language is the same.
Nick
Why me?
Cybershooters website: http://www.cybershooters.org
List admin: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
___________________________________________________________
T O P I C A http://www.topica.com/t/17
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics
