Its been oft discussed and ends up derailing threads so here you go

ugly

LE
Moderator
#1
#3
The basic problem with the Bill of Rights is that it is simply an Act of Parliament (it's not part of the Constitution as in the case of the USA) and so it is easily and simply overturned by other Acts carried by a simple majority in Parliament.
I disagree. There's cases which say the BoR cannot be repealed either implied or otherwise. It's part of our codified or unwritten constitution and holds special status.

The point I'm making refers to: English Bill of Rights 1689
By causing several good subjects being Protestants to be disarmed at the same time when papists were both armed and employed contrary to law;
That the subjects which are Protestants may have arms for their defence suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law
- which brings me onto why the Firearms Act 1968 (still the primary piece of legislation) states:

Legislation.gov.uk
27 Special provisions about firearm certificates..

(1)A firearm certificate shall be granted where the chief officer of police is satisfied
28Special provisions about shot gun certificates..

(1)Subject to subsection (1A) below, a shot gun certificate shall be granted or, as the case may be, renewed by the chief officer of police if he is satisfied
- and has been since 1920: Firearms Act 1920
2)A firearm certificate shall be granted by the chief officer of police of the district in which the applicant for the certificate resides, if he is satisfied
- which brings in the bit about 'as allowed by law' from the BoR. They can ban certain firearms but they can't stop people having firearms per se.

As an aside, I dislike the BoR on a number of levels as it talks about people being free yet 'we' still had slavery.
 
#4
Their was a bit on Radio4 about shakespears time where daggers and rapiers were openly carried and the resulting mayhem.
( niether were poncy weapons big pigsticking stabby things)
Rapiers were heavy you could stab or slash with them.
Access to weapons legally does not make for paradise.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
#5
We arent necessarily talking about open and free access but restoration of rights if we knew what they were and hadnt been taken away by Parliament!
 
#6
The basic problem with the Bill of Rights is that it is simply an Act of Parliament (it's not part of the Constitution as in the case of the USA) and so it is easily and simply overturned by other Acts carried by a simple majority in Parliament.
Being part of the constitution hasn't made any difference in the USA, they have the patriot act which makes a mockery of the 4th amendment, and can now detain US citizens with a trial, on mere suspicion, indefinatley. The whole basis of the Anglo-Saxon model of personal liberty is based on habeous corpus and this is now effectively gone. Osama must be very pleased with his work and having a jolly time with "old nick". If the yanks could disarm their citizens they would, but they can't without a civil war and this will define the high tide mark of the elite's power.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top