Is it time for the United Kingdom to re-write the Bill of Rights Act?

2012-03-15 03:45:12

#1

artofsurvival: Idiot!; +33|6571|the Great British Queendom :)

Good day all,
Thought I'd ask on here whether you think that the UK should create a new "Bill of Rights Act"? At the moment it is an outdated act that governs what human rights people have within the UK. As it only applies to the UK you would think that we (The people, politicians, soverienty) have the say on what goes into the bill, which we do? Well its actually Europe (Strasburg) that has the be all and end all. Recently in the UK the goverment wanted to ban prisoners from having the right to vote. This was overturned in the European Court as a breach of human rights.
Watch this and it will all become clearer I hope:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0 … one_Wrong/

Enjoy

2012-03-15 05:03:23

#2

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5573|London, England

Not like governments pay attention to the restrictions already on the books. Add more, that'll show em you REALLY mean business

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-03-15 05:57:25

#3

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5800

Jay's right. I called the President a fascist at a rally on campus the other day. Later that night the Secret Service broke down my door, beat up my father, raped my mother, and dragged me off to a reeducation camp. They then stationed troops in my home, searched through my stuff, and forced me to confess to treason.

2012-03-15 05:58:43

#4

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5800

Seriously though, you are dense if you think the government just trounces on us and violates our civil rights at will.

2012-03-15 06:01:34

#5

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5573|London, England

Macbeth wrote:
Seriously though, you are dense if you think the government just trounces on us and violates our civil rights at will.

just like anyone that criticizes TARP is a moron? You've got a real hardon for our government. Is Nancy Pelosi your prof?

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-03-15 06:22:55

#6

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5800

Yes, anyone that disagrees with TARP is a dipshit. But no, I don't have a hard on for government. I just think a lot of this antigovernment rah rah is stupid.

2012-03-15 06:26:07

#7

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6931

Macbeth wrote:
Yes, anyone that disagrees with TARP is a dipshit. But no, I don't have a hard on for government. I just think a lot of this antigovernment rah rah is stupid.

So all these economists are morans right?

good to know theres a philosphy major to lead use the way.

https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png

2012-03-15 06:28:51

#8

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5573|London, England

Cybargs wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
Yes, anyone that disagrees with TARP is a dipshit. But no, I don't have a hard on for government. I just think a lot of this antigovernment rah rah is stupid.
So all these economists are morans right?

good to know theres a philosphy major to lead use the way.

I think he just wants the machinery of government to keep expanding because he thinks he's got a shot at wielding that power one day.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-03-15 06:39:58

#9

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6931

Jay wrote:
Cybargs wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
Yes, anyone that disagrees with TARP is a dipshit. But no, I don't have a hard on for government. I just think a lot of this antigovernment rah rah is stupid.
So all these economists are morans right?

good to know theres a philosphy major to lead use the way.
I think he just wants the machinery of government to keep expanding because he thinks he's got a shot at wielding that power one day.

well thank god he wont since hes a fucking nut case who wants to torture cats.

2012-03-15 06:45:44

#10

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5800

Cybargs wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
Yes, anyone that disagrees with TARP is a dipshit. But no, I don't have a hard on for government. I just think a lot of this antigovernment rah rah is stupid.
So all these economists are morans right?

good to know theres a philosphy major to lead use the way.

The vast overwhelming majority of economist agree the crisis would have been worse. Only fringe economist, and ones with political agendas criticized it.

Whatever background noise.

2012-03-15 06:49:27

#11

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6931

Macbeth wrote:
Cybargs wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
Yes, anyone that disagrees with TARP is a dipshit. But no, I don't have a hard on for government. I just think a lot of this antigovernment rah rah is stupid.
So all these economists are morans right?

good to know theres a philosphy major to lead use the way.
The vast overwhelming majority of economist agree the crisis would have been worse. Only fringe economist, and ones with political agendas criticized it.

Whatever background noise.

Lol majority of economists? You mean the ones praising the success of austerity measures and keeping a balanced budget instead of spending more? Keynesian economics is dead, it seems like its only the American government want to hold onto it. A government is more effective at cutting taxes than spending more money if it wants to influence the economy.

I think we should start hiring philosophers to run the economy instead of economists now!

2012-03-15 06:55:37

#12

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5800

Cybargs wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
Cybargs wrote:

So all these economists are morans right?

good to know theres a philosphy major to lead use the way.
The vast overwhelming majority of economist agree the crisis would have been worse. Only fringe economist, and ones with political agendas criticized it.

Whatever background noise.
Lol majority of economists? You mean the ones praising the success of austerity measures and keeping a balanced budget instead of spending more? Keynesian economics is dead, it seems like its only the American government want to hold onto it. A government is more effective at cutting taxes than spending more money if it wants to influence the economy.

I think we should start hiring philosophers to run the economy instead of economists now!

There's a difference between austerity measures and TARP. If you don't recognize that I can't help you.

But we could quote hypothetical economist all day. Can you form an argument against TARP in your own words?

2012-03-15 06:56:24

#13

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5800

Just a few sentences. No quotes or articles. In your own words. Why was TARP bad?

2012-03-15 07:02:02

#14

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5573|London, England

Cybargs wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
Cybargs wrote:

So all these economists are morans right?

good to know theres a philosphy major to lead use the way.
The vast overwhelming majority of economist agree the crisis would have been worse. Only fringe economist, and ones with political agendas criticized it.

Whatever background noise.
Lol majority of economists? You mean the ones praising the success of austerity measures and keeping a balanced budget instead of spending more? Keynesian economics is dead, it seems like its only the American government want to hold onto it. A government is more effective at cutting taxes than spending more money if it wants to influence the economy.

I think we should start hiring philosophers to run the economy instead of economists now!

It's about power. It's always about power. American politicians think they are god and Keynesian economics gives them the illusion that they can manipulate the economy and force it to conform to the models political scientists produce. The problem with political science, and what makes it fall flat on its face, is that it deals with human beings instead of inanimate objects.

Try hosting a birthday party sometime. Invite 40 of your closest friends, and make a guarantee to the bar that 40 will show up (or you face a penalty). Odds are at least 10 will have other priorities and won't conform to your wishes. You'll end up paying the penalty. Political scientists hate freedom and free will because it fucks up their models. They can't force all their friends to show up so it makes it difficult for them to plan. It would be so much nicer if people were pieces on a chess board that could be moved around by some master will; so much more organized, efficient etc.

In the end this is why every piece of legislation written comes with penalties attached: jail time, fines, etc. They don't want people walking around in a chaotic mass doing whatever they want, they want order, because it's easier to model and plan. Nevermind that the whole exercise is futile in the first place. People are not chess pieces, they'll do whatever they want. If you try to control them, they'll find a way out of it or around it. It's human nature. You'd have more luck trying to push water uphill.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-03-15 07:07:58

#15

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5573|London, England

Macbeth wrote:
Just a few sentences. No quotes or articles. In your own words. Why was TARP bad?

Because it prevented our economy from hitting bottom. We've been staggering along for years now propping up this industry, and propping up that industry, and it's done nothing except prevent our recovery from really happening.

What was the real outcome of TARP anyway? All it did was provide funds for the banks to consolidate. Instead of 20 or so big banks we ended up with 5ish that refuse to lend any money. We used taxpayer funds to make sure a bunch of rich people and union pension funds didn't lose any more money than they had to on their bad investments. All TARP did was thwart Natural Selection.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-03-15 07:14:04

#16

Macbeth: Banned; +2,444|5800

Jay wrote:
Macbeth wrote:
Just a few sentences. No quotes or articles. In your own words. Why was TARP bad?
Because it prevented our economy from hitting bottom. We've been staggering along for years now propping up this industry, and propping up that industry, and it's done nothing except prevent our recovery from really happening.

What was the real outcome of TARP anyway? All it did was provide funds for the banks to consolidate. Instead of 20 or so big banks we ended up with 5ish that refuse to lend any money. We used taxpayer funds to make sure a bunch of rich people and union pension funds didn't lose any more money than they had to on their bad investments. All TARP did was thwart Natural Selection.

If you really think crashing the U.S. economy would be a good thing and we could rebuild from there you are either misinformed or delusional.

2012-03-15 07:15:55

#17

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5573|London, England

Economies have crashed thousands of times throughout history. Bailouts are a 20th century invention designed to cushion the blow for rich investors. They don't do anything else.

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2012-03-15 09:00:57

#18

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,053|6986|PNW

How the fuck did this turn into an American politics thread?

2012-03-15 11:52:29

#19

-Whiteroom-: Pineapplewhat; +572|6873|BC, Canada

every d&st thread does in the end UN13.

2012-03-15 13:15:19

#20

Cheeky_Ninja06: Member; +52|6947|Cambridge, England

I thought Human rights were EU not UK and thus a bill would be a waste of time because EU law overrules it.

Our human rights are stupid in the UK look at that whole pikey eviction, how many million we spent on the scum of society. Jokes.

2012-03-16 01:57:14

#21

BVC: Member; +325|6910

How is no voting for prisoners a "breach of human rights"? Fuck that. You rape a kid or murder someone or whatever and you lose your freedom - including the right to vote. Don't like it? Don't breach someone elses human rights.

2012-03-17 18:53:03

#22

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6620|North Carolina

Just get out of the EU. Until you do, your rights are ultimately in the hands of elites that don't even live in your country.

2012-03-17 19:30:11

#23

Cybargs: Moderated; +2,285|6931

Turquoise wrote:
Just get out of the EU. Until you do, your rights are ultimately in the hands of elites that don't even live in your country.

they might as well. keep the part of being in the customs union, and get out of the political union.

2012-03-18 06:37:08

#24

Cheeky_Ninja06: Member; +52|6947|Cambridge, England

I dont think we can get out of the EU theres a fair bit of pressure within the UK to do it, i.e. it would be a popular movement. However I suspect on balance we will be worse off than we are currently, hence the reluctance to do it and our current Quasi EU membership.

2012-03-21 05:20:41

#25

artofsurvival: Idiot!; +33|6571|the Great British Queendom :)

In the OP I should of stated that in order for a new Bill of Rights the UK would have to leave the European Courts etc: And to the other posts it would help us to maintian and better relantionship with the "guys across the pond" as we all know that ties between UK and USA are "Special". On those 2 statements it would be very difficult to actually do as I believe it has only be done in the UK (England) on 3 occasions: The Magna Carta, The Bill of Acts Right (1950) and The Human Rights Act (1990's, can't remeber when of the top of my head! 93 I think........) so on a timescale it's probadly not the best time to do it.
On leaving the European Union I can't see it making that much difference in the UK and actually think that it would be a good idea for mainly dim-witted views! I mean that we don't have the Euro, so we wouldn't have to adopt a new currency, the majority of law's, acts of parliment tend to be pointless and ignored as you can always go to the European Courts to get the UK's decision overturned.

Yes	16%	16% - 1
No	16%	16% - 1
Who cares!	66%	66% - 4
Total: 6

BF2S Forums Is it time for the United Kingdom to re-write the Bill of Rights Act?

Poll

Macbeth wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Jay wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Cybargs wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Jay wrote:

Macbeth wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Board footer