Printable View
If you had the power what law would you like changed, added or removed?
Anything from nonsensical health and safety and ancient bylaws to more current legislation on things like hate crime etc.
Drug laws.
Tax laws.
What constitutes self defence.
Local laws (like marrying your cousin/sheep etc in Wales and the Westcountry)
International laws on immigration, human rights etc.
Child arrangement order. (Court order to see your kids)
The ONLY court order in the UK that tens if not hundreds of thousands of parents regularly break and the courts do nothing.
90% of the time its a "Mum" using the child as a weapon.
I call it Child Abuse.
Annual car MOT’s should be abolished
Tax online companies like Amazon which are killing off the high street
Close all tax loop holes for big business
Famous stars who do not pay tax like Lewis Hamilton cannot hold up a British flag, ever.
Footballers diving should be imprisoned.
Hot women to wear transparent clothes.
I would abolish hate speech and hate crime laws.
I would legalize all drugs and have them controlled thereby reducing cost and increasing safety.
I would have stricter immigration controls.
I would move back the welfare state to 1950's standards.
I would have free University education for all students providing they go to a library and study there for a minimum of 20 hours a week on top of seminars and lectures.
The War on Drugs has never worked . It was introduced in 1971 when there were less than 40 registered heroin users in the UK and has wasted Billions. It creates a huge waste of money and does not protect those it is supposed to. If you are over 18 you can grow, smoke, inject or ingest what you like.
The right to vote should not be abused just because you have a British Passport. If you do not pay tax and contribute in other ways to Britain and live abroad your vote should not be automatic until you are back living here. Working outside the UK for short periods or being in the forces etc is a bit different. Complicated but Tax exiles dictating policy is not good.
That's pretty much how it works after a set number of years anyway, Beanz.
I would also ban people who have lived on benefits for more than a year a vote too.
They contribute little too.
The monarchy also needs to go and proportional representation is just common sense.
I was being too extreme. I would just cut the benefits after 6 months like they do here. They can still vote.
I would privatise the monarchy. If they really do make more more money than they take they can go it alone.
I don’t like how when we lie to the government it is a crime but it is acceptable for them to lie, mislead us everyday. Either let us both lie or make us both tell the truth
All man made laws, all we need is the golden rule.
But surely that is a man made rule? That only works if the person using it is reasonable. Amend it with 'providing you do no harm' and it makes more sense. Yes of course learning to treat others with respect is good but not all people and certainly not all peoples ideas are worthy of equal respect. Judeo/Christian law in the west had the golden rule as an underpinning principle but has often twisted it to inflict the opposite result. Things like 'I don't drink so nobody should drink' and 'I don't believe black people are deserving of equal respect and so neither should others' are distortions of the golden rule, that were once enshrined in law.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha
Do to others, what you would want done to you. Conversely, don't do to others, what you wouldn't want done to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanzBut surely that is a man made rule? That only works if the person using it is reasonable. Amend it with 'providing you do no harm' and it makes more sense. Yes of course learning to treat others with respect is good but not all people and certainly not all peoples ideas are worthy of equal respect. Judeo/Christian law in the west had the golden rule as an underpinning principle but has often twisted it to inflict the opposite result. Things like 'I don't drink so nobody should drink' and 'I don't believe black people are deserving of equal respect and so neither should others' are distortions of the golden rule, that were once enshrined in law.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha
It's never right to initiate unjust force or violence, threats or coercion on people who haven't harmed or threatened to harm another person.
All laws are nothing more than the opinions of politicians, backed by the threat of force. So when people tell us that we must obey the law, what they are really saying, is that we must submit to the opinions of politicians or face the possibility of being punished.
I believe that no one has a higher claim over your life and property than you. I believe that you should be safe in your person, house, papers and effects. And I believe that no one has any right to initiate any sort of unjust force or violence on you, if your not harming another person, or damaging or stealing their property. It's pretty simple.
The difference between someone guided by principle and someone driven by bias:
A person who is guided by principle will stand up to his allies and side with his “opponents” If truth and morality dictates it.
A person who is driven by bias will go to war against reality in order to defend the identity of the herd.
Everyone should be free from oppression and the ruler-ship of anyone, who would try to harm you or your family or take your stuff.
Nah, a little war is a good experience. Makes you see what people are like in the most absolute desperate situations. Changes your views on things forever. Gives one true appreciation for peace. Unfortunately, most countries that live in peace have fought for it from time to time. I don’t make the rules, it’s just our history. I’m not advocating or suggesting war I just think if it does come up you should jump in check it out, it’s interestingQuote:
Originally Posted by AlphaDo to others, what you would want done to you. Conversely, don't do to others, what you wouldn't want done to you.Quote:
Originally Posted by BeanzBut surely that is a man made rule? That only works if the person using it is reasonable. Amend it with 'providing you do no harm' and it makes more sense. Yes of course learning to treat others with respect is good but not all people and certainly not all peoples ideas are worthy of equal respect. Judeo/Christian law in the west had the golden rule as an underpinning principle but has often twisted it to inflict the opposite result. Things like 'I don't drink so nobody should drink' and 'I don't believe black people are deserving of equal respect and so neither should others' are distortions of the golden rule, that were once enshrined in law.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha
It's never right to initiate unjust force or violence, threats or coercion on people who haven't harmed or threatened to harm another person.
All laws are nothing more than the opinions of politicians, backed by the threat of force. So when people tell us that we must obey the law, what they are really saying, is that we must submit to the opinions of politicians or face the possibility of being punished.
I believe that no one has a higher claim over your life and property than you. I believe that you should be safe in your person, house, papers and effects. And I believe that no one has any right to initiate any sort of unjust force or violence on you, if your not harming another person, or damaging or stealing their property. It's pretty simple.
The difference between someone guided by principle and someone driven by bias:
A person who is guided by principle will stand up to his allies and side with his “opponents” If truth and morality dictates it.
A person who is driven by bias will go to war against reality in order to defend the identity of the herd.
Everyone should be free from oppression and the ruler-ship of anyone, who would try to harm you or your family or take your stuff.