tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post944311767313597991..comments2024-03-27T06:56:10.255+00:00Comments on Broad Oak Magazine: My Long Walk To FreedomUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger28125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-44954276377037454322014-04-18T08:46:24.740+01:002014-04-18T08:46:24.740+01:00Re 10 (Cestui Qui Vie Act 1666), see this from Yah...Re 10 (Cestui Qui Vie Act 1666), see this from Yahoo! Answers:<br /><br />Jimmy answered 12 months ago<br /><br /> When this Act was enacted in 1666 a large number of land owners took advantage of Britain's growing overseas land holdings to establish new estates in the the new lands. At the same time many men joined the British merchant fleet to which increased massively to address the new trade routes that were being established. Both these events meant that men were often away for many years and their homes and families were impacted by their departure. The Act was created to allow the families and tenants to seek through the courts a way to remove the barriers that prevented both those who rented land/homes and those who needs to be able to control land/housing from doing so. <br /><br />The Act allows for an individual to seek a judicial ruling that if there was no evidence that an individual was alive and that they had been missing for seven years, then they were deemed to be dead. This freed up land and money that would otherwise have been locked awaiting the return of the owner. <br /><br />The law also provided for the situation of a person deemed dead returning to Britain and how they could recover lost profits. <br /><br />Your are correct to an extent that maritime law has a very strong influence on British law, however this influence is primarily in the commercial law area and not the general law. <br /><br />We are not treated as property and the reason people are registered is simply to create a record of birth that allows the state to identify individuals and to monitor population growth, etc. A register is nothing more than a set of records. <br /><br />If we were really "property" then there would be a document that set out who owned you (such as the documents retained by slave owners). The state does not create such documents. So yes you are taking your ideas too far. <br /><br />https://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20130430073232AAEOenkSackersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17284329249862764601noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-32415364286215163732013-09-26T21:16:36.566+01:002013-09-26T21:16:36.566+01:00My blood (my noble and honourable forefathers) wer...My blood (my noble and honourable forefathers) were there when john was forced on pain of death to sign<br />this document (mc 1215), this document kept us together as one,it didnt matter whether you were a baldrick or a baron,every englishmans home was his LAWFUL CASTLE.<br />Even kings couldnt enter your home without permission,evrybody knew this inc his own footmen.Now<br />every mans home is his LEGAL PRISON.Not all barons and nobles were greedy selfish inbreds. Usurping assholes are a billion a penny, honourable people are rarer,and that meant something back then,thats why the PEOPLE gave consent for the barons and such to run the show, not blind faith,but through a proven track record of loyalty to the british people...<br />When monarchys changed you see, the laws were changed to suit the fuckwit on the throne, which usually started skirmishes and mini wars and general chaos, wereas the nobles would have to make sure the "law" was being obeyed, whether they thought the law was insane or not they had to enforce it,(on payne of death) just like today when a policeman kidnaps you and holds you to ransom on behalf of a fuckwit on the throne... I could elaborate all day<br />as my family have a track record going back to the 8th century, and along the way have gathered rare knowledge which will emancipate the british from eternal debt slavery to goatrapers.<br /><br />p.s. The smoking ban is actually part of the codex alimentarious project of removing from society anything which stimulates the brain...or anything beneficial to the mind,body and soul.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15065549200465085437noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-29617870896344281302013-09-12T18:11:17.703+01:002013-09-12T18:11:17.703+01:00Good old Captain, great words. I haven't been ...Good old Captain, great words. I haven't been in a pub for years, it's supposed to be a public house, not a government experiment with the landlord as unpaid policeman watching as trade dwindles. As for "prove I owe you money" it works with credit cards too. A line of electronic credit is what they give you. Clickety click, here's some zeroes, now pay back cash.<br />-richardAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-56703010117310567232013-09-12T16:20:47.115+01:002013-09-12T16:20:47.115+01:00And just to add some weight to Harby's stateme...And just to add some weight to Harby's statement that 'passive smoking does not kill anyone" you all might want to ask Mr Google to find McTear v ITL.<br /><br />The anti-smoking taliban brought all of their big guns to court and, well, I won't spoil the surprise.<br /><br />Read the judges summation.<br /><br />It cheers me up no end, it does.<br /><br />I found it for you:<br /><br />http://www.scotcourts.gov.uk/opinions/2005CSOH69.html#conclusionsandresult<br /><br />Read 'Result' 9.5 right at the bottom.<br /><br />CR.Captain Rantyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07839241144954596066noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-82386071160576575362013-09-12T16:14:08.578+01:002013-09-12T16:14:08.578+01:00Anon 10:29,
As Harby said earlier, it was a game-...Anon 10:29,<br /><br />As Harby said earlier, it was a game-changer.<br /><br />It proved beyond doubt, to me, that the great British public will endure any law from poor governments.<br /><br />The science behind the law does not stack up.<br /><br />Effectively, we did nothing while they legislated against a smell.<br /><br />If that's the case, I have a couple of dozen odours I want to see legislated against....<br /><br />CR.Captain Rantyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07839241144954596066noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-66727069328702140282013-09-12T16:00:37.928+01:002013-09-12T16:00:37.928+01:00....
It is not up to any state to impose its rule.......<br /><br />It is not up to any state to impose its rules upon a people. It's the people who should impose rules upon themselves. If they break them, then they will end up in conflict with those who don't. The most natural way of life was tribal society. It was the most democratic society ever created, where if people in the village had an umbrage, then they'd all sit around a fire and discuss what the outcome should be, instead of leaving it in the hands of a third party (politicians), who are nothing but bought and paid for shills of the bankers/Israel (Rothschild) and corporations.<br /><br />The problem lies therein of people who want to be nannied by others, who want to be willing slaves and thus want to be controlled and abused. These are the biggest problem we face with society because they're cowards and don't want to take self responsibility, the type of hypocrites who would eat steak but never kill and gut a cow. It is these people who feed the beast (system) as well as staff and protect it, even though it abuses them on a regular basis.<br /><br />I look forward to the day when bankers, politicians, aristocracy along with their police servants are hanging from trees and lampposts up and down the country. An end to the system that has murdered billions in its existence and created untold suffering for even more.<br /><br />Would I go around killing, raping and eating people? Of course I wouldn't but if someone was going to kill me or my family, I'd have no choice to. I simply don't allow myself to be conditioned by a system that says the police are there to sort your problems out when they most certainly don't nor ever will.<br /><br />Anarchy is a very misunderstood concept. It's just a pity people weren't more aware to what anarchy is really all about. It terrifies the aristocracy, the bankers, the politicians, the councillors and all other members of bureaucracy for it takes away their control, their security and leaves them in a big wide ocean along with all the rest of the fish. They fear this because they no longer have the power to abuse and are, worse still to them, the most likely people who would suffer from the abuse they've been meeting out to the people for thousands of years. So they have to continue promoting the lie that anarchy is chaos and without order one cannot have a society. It is of course nothing but bollocks, but it keeps them where they always want to be - pushing the buttons, turning the knobs and keeping people down, abused and ignorant to the freedoms and liberties they all have as natural human beings.<br /><br />regards<br /><br />HarbingerAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-2927600197282582272013-09-12T16:00:05.142+01:002013-09-12T16:00:05.142+01:00Nick,
"...but you're an 'anarchist&#...Nick,<br /><br /><i>"...but you're an 'anarchist' ? An-archy ... no rules ? like Anon@01.00 says, that's a bit fishy ..."</i><br /><br />The next logical progression for a libertarian is becoming an anarchist. I started off quite liberal conservative when I was in my teens, then I became quite liberal, living in London, but years there opened my eyes to much and I moved into nationalism, then libertarian nationalism, then finally into anarcho nationalism. In a nutshell, I'm one who believes first and foremost in the rights of the indigenous peoples to exist and not have their lands colonised and cultures destroyed.<br /><br />Anarchy comes from the Greek <i>anarchia</i>. The prime definition of it is 'without rulers'. When you start there as a solid foundation then you can't go wrong.<br />I suggest you read some Tolstoy, Bakunin and Kropotkin if you want to find out about Anarchy instead of reading the msm. They churn out post holocaust, apocalyptic futures, where people murder, rape and eat one another and blame it all on anarchy. I wonder why they do, don't you? Well, they want to terrify people into realising that there's an alternative to rule by government and so do what they msm does best and promote lie upon lie via their mass indoctrination and propaganda machine.<br /><br />My anarchy would be a simple one: no bankers, no aristocracy, no politicians, no police and no armed forces. This done, society would be a far better place to live in. And as the good cap'n correctly states - <br /><br /><i>"I firmly believe it is right for people to carry concealed weapons but I would make training mandatory. Crime would plummet overnight. The saying "An armed society is a polite society" is absolutely true."</i><br /><br />No truer words are spoken. Of course, you'll come up against a brick wall when you speak to the liberal luvvies, who still don't realise that guns don't kill people. People kill people. Too many times I've had the argument that if people want to kill they will, armed with a gun or not, they'll find some other object with which to end someone's life.<br /><br />So, it's really about self responsibility. Arming oneself, claiming some land to build a house, raise your family, livestock and crops and get on with life. But you see, many people don't want to go back to the natural way of life because they've become addicted on all the technological gadgetry that our 'masters' give us, in order to keep us under their control. Take a child's playstation away and it's WW3 for example!<br /><br />(cont)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-2151866846472424462013-09-12T11:10:01.263+01:002013-09-12T11:10:01.263+01:00Nick,
Shades of grey?
The MK I human eyeball can...Nick,<br /><br />Shades of grey?<br /><br />The MK I human eyeball can distinguish over 500 shades of grey.<br /><br />It is a very great pity that most of us are not looking.<br /><br />The creation of legislation-especially since we joined the EU-is an out of control monster. There is a cost attached to every single one of these 'laws' and I find that just as disturbing as the proliferation.<br /><br />Anarchy: One definition of anarchy is 'Rules but no rulers'.<br /><br />I like that idea. I like it a lot.<br /><br />CR.Captain Rantyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07839241144954596066noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-6856963074695958182013-09-12T11:04:05.539+01:002013-09-12T11:04:05.539+01:00Captain R @ 19:43 - it's all trade-offs and sh...Captain R @ 19:43 - it's all trade-offs and shades of grey in the world of practical decisions<br /><br />and we are <i>ad idem</i> on crazy legislation; if you check my blog you will find a a strong & consistent theme (my pet topic being crazy energy /CO2 emissions legislation) <br /><br />Harbinger - aren't we supposed to go a couple more rounds before Godwin's Law kicks in ?<br /><br />its straightforward to debate this with libertarians because they put a principle on the table: "<i>do what you like unless it harms someone else</i>". That's a ball we can all kick around to good effect in this context<br /><br />but you're an '<i>anarchist</i>' ? An-archy ... no rules ? like Anon@01.00 says, that's a bit fishy ...Nick Drewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13670594203660051701noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-17245638180388137942013-09-12T10:29:16.201+01:002013-09-12T10:29:16.201+01:00@ Ranty
It's hard to argue with your figures ...@ Ranty<br /><br />It's hard to argue with your figures for pub closures, not that I wish to argue. Maybe there is more to it than I thought. I've been to a few pubs since 2007 and stood at or outside the door for a smoke. Not ideal I know, but it didn't personally bother me too much. More of a mild annoyance than a defnite reason not to go out. Maybe other people take it more seriously.<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-54194159796355340712013-09-12T09:39:33.037+01:002013-09-12T09:39:33.037+01:00@Anonymous (1:00)
I can never understand why anon...@Anonymous (1:00)<br /><br />I can never understand why anonymous posters can't even sign off with a name out of courtesy to the blogger?<br /><br /><i>"Courtesy people say, you mean the same courtesy you showed Nick?"</i><br /><br />Well, people like Nick, like I said need a jolt to be awoken into reality, instead of accepting the façade they call society.<br /><br /><i>"However the refutation of Nick's post by Harbinger was rude and aggressive. Anarchist? One has to be suspicious."</i><br /><br />A refutation is a refutation and the only rudeness and aggressiveness was my labelling him as a moron, to which, he has proven in his reply to the article.<br /><br />Freedom of speech is freedom of speech and I'll use every means I possibly can, however rude or aggressive one may see it as in order to try and make people see the error of their ways. I am known by many for not just scraping the nerve in discussion, but severing it completely. I take no prisoners and when people need to be chiselled down to size I'll gladly do so. <br /><br />My 'aggressive' refutation (calling him a moron) was so because he is living in cuckoo cloud land with his opinions. As the cap'n has statistically demonstrated above, the smoking ban has resulted in the closure of many pubs up and down the country. I will also certainly add that price hikes and alcohol limit must take part of the blame but when the cap'n states that within the first six months of the ban, over eight times the number of pubs closed compared to the previous year then it proves overwhelmingly the damage it did to the catering industry.<br /><br />And finally, I come from a publican family. I grew up in the trade. I've worked as barstaff, management and door security in pubs from the age of seventeen up to thirty five and know the pub game like the back of my hand. I also know that smokers keep pubs alive by buying more beer, as the cap'n also stated.<br /><br />My attack on Nick for his views are perfectly within my right as a human being to do. He represents the oppressive minority who has taken control of the majority which is having a disastrous effect upon society. <br />It was I also who made the comment about car fumes. To further add to that comment, scientists have proven that cancers are the result of city living and I can really only see that considering cities are jam packed full of traffic, whose fumes linger, trapped between buildings, then this is the main reason why.<br /><br />Many arguments I've had with drivers who welcome the ban and who don't smoke. They do not see the hypocrisy in their argument. The only thing they do is laugh when I say that they should put a pipe back into their car, to stop their exhaust polluting the atmosphere. They say it would kill them if they were to do so, not realising that they are effectively killing pedestrians by not doing so. They have no argument regarding this matter. <br /><br />Lastly, passive cigarette smoke HAS NEVER been proven to cause cancer yet is continually linked to it. The green agenda, liberal luvvies make sure the msm parrots this continuously and yet ironically, we never see any objection to them wanting to go abroad to Islamic lands and bomb the bejesus out of all those 'towel heads'.<br /><br />The smoking ban was a massive attack on the liberty of human beings in the UK. And yet people like Nick fail to see this. All he was concerned about was his cronic asthma, no doubt, never doing any research into how and/or where he actually got it from. If it were the case that people got asthma through passive smoke, then we'd all have it. However we don't, which disproves that theory. My guess is asthma comes straight from the pollutants in the air caused by carbon monoxide and other deadly chemicals in the air as a result of manufacturing smoke and aircraft spraying of barium and aluminium. <br /><br />regards<br /><br />HarbingerAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-2982506966863382662013-09-12T08:40:56.120+01:002013-09-12T08:40:56.120+01:00Anon 01:00,
I have no doubt that there is more at...Anon 01:00,<br /><br />I have no doubt that there is more at play than just the smoking ban. To assume otherwise would be naive.<br /><br />Supporters of the ban regularly state that it was the global recession that killed most off.<br /><br />Not quite true.<br /><br />In 2005 102 pubs closed.<br /><br />In 2006 205 closed.<br /><br />In 2007, in the first six months of the ban, 1,682 closed.<br /><br />The numbers crept up steadily from 2 closures per week in 2005 to 49 per week in 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010.<br /><br />Close to 800,000 jobs have been lost from pubs directly, and those that support pubs indirectly.<br /><br />You say that a pint costs 3.50 which is about right. This was always going to happen when an industry stood idly by and allowed the govt to ban around 70% of their customers. Fewer customers always means that the price of the product will rise in an attempt to make up the shortfall. Whilst smokers make up 21% of the population, in pubs & clubs the demographic changed dramatically to around 76% of people smoking in pubs & clubs. Most, as you can see, were/are "social smokers".<br /><br />Studies carried out reveal that smokers spent longer in pubs, spent more, and tipped better than non-smokers.<br /><br />We were the hospitality industries best customers and they threw us out on the street. No surprise that the pub losses are so huge. Take a look at Pubco shares before and after the ban. They lost billions.<br /><br />There is a pub not 300 yards from my front door. I moved to this village 3 years ago and I have not been inside it once. I will not use pubs in this country. One of the reasons I love going to Africa is being able to smoke in a pub or bar. There is no hand-waving, no indignation, and curiously, no odour. Those 'third world nations' have discovered a technology that defeats tobacco smoke: they call this witchcraft "Air conditioning".<br /><br /><br /><br />CR.Captain Rantyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07839241144954596066noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-19781688907263145542013-09-12T08:25:35.138+01:002013-09-12T08:25:35.138+01:00Mark,
I have paid taxes all my life. I continue t...Mark,<br /><br />I have paid taxes all my life. I continue to pay taxes (PAYE) so for the time being, I will use the services if I need them.<br /><br />If I could stop paying all taxes-which is almost impossible as almost everything is taxed-I would keep more of my own hard earned money which would enable me to pay for an ambulance, fire engine or a police visit. I have needed none of those for a very, very long time.<br /><br />Defence? The Bill of Rights allows me to arm myself. The wording is careful, it says we are permitted to carry weapons "...as allowed by law". So they disarmed us over the decades because of lunatics in Hungerford (no more rifles) and Dunblane (no more pistols).<br /><br />I am ex-military and I am familiar with, and trained to use, a whole host of small arms. I firmly believe it is right for people to carry concealed weapons but I would make training mandatory. Crime would plummet overnight. The saying "An armed society is a polite society" is absolutely true.<br /><br />CR.Captain Rantyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07839241144954596066noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-8028086608104803082013-09-12T06:25:44.585+01:002013-09-12T06:25:44.585+01:00"two pints an hour or twenty going through ha..."two pints an hour or twenty going through half a keg?":<br /><br />The old landlord of the Little Lark in Studley had a notice on the wall saying, "Please drink harder and faster. Thank you."<br /><br />Don't know if that'd be allowed these days.Sackersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17284329249862764601noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-88888800030473290692013-09-12T01:00:16.787+01:002013-09-12T01:00:16.787+01:00I would say the demise of pubs is down to economic...I would say the demise of pubs is down to economic factors, as is the demise of eveything else, including the High Street in general (though internet sales have loomed large here as well).<br /><br />At three and a half quid a pint (or more, rarely less) it's a price too far for many people. And how much are womens' drinks now? Strewth. This is where the supermarket deals come into their own too.<br /><br />What about home entertainment these days, all this mega-technology? One doesn't have to go out these days for excitement - it's all there on the desk top. I get the feeling that a lot of political bloggers don't go out that much, going by the amount of material they produce daily, but I do suspect they enjoy a drink at home whilst doing so. Good on them, but they aren't in the pub and that isn't anything to do with smoking.<br /><br />The smoking ban has been a straw on the camel's back, but really that's all it's been. <br /><br />That's what I think anyway. I might be wrong.<br /><br />Otherwise I agree emphatically with the comments on the smoking ban.<br /><br />To the asthmatic then surely the comment about vehicle exhaust fumes is valid. Living in the rural coutryside must be better for that condition than a busy city. Tobacco smoke would be incidental in the country, unless one was in a locked and sealed room with a smoker. I can accept that crowded, smoky pubs wouldn't be ideal. That's unfortunate, but doesn't warrant a change in the law for everyone.<br /><br />However the refutation of Nick's post by Harbinger was rude and aggressive. Anarchist? One has to be suspicious.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-65744161596627372922013-09-11T23:38:06.653+01:002013-09-11T23:38:06.653+01:00Sackerson,
With all due respect, it's the lib...Sackerson,<br /><br />With all due respect, it's the libertarians like the cap'n who are speaking out against the drastic future hell we all face that could see people, like Nick, being arrested in public for farting, to be assaulted, beaten and locked in a cell until his loved ones handed over enough cash to the coppers to release him.<br /><br />I'm sorry Nick is an asthmatic, but why should say, one man, with breathing difficulties have the right to stop far more people having a fag down the local? In the past they'd have told dogooders like he to kindly piss off, go home and make his own brew. Moreso, because of the smoking ban many publicans have seen sales plummet and have had to close shop.<br /><br />Let me see.... if you were a publican, would you rather have Nick, the asthmatic in your pub or twenty locals who no longer come because of the ban? Would you rather have Nick buying two pints an hour or twenty going through half a keg?<br /><br />It's pretty much a no contest isn't it? <br /><br />I'm known for not mincing my words and for people like Nick they need a good boot up the backside to bring them into reality.<br />The smoking ban was the litmus test on the public's acceptance of state enforced bureaucracy upon their lives. And they passed with flying colours. In this one show of state victory they re-insted soviet communism in the west. And it's only going to get worse, thanks to people like Nick.<br />regards<br />HarbingerAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-31548936036659411632013-09-11T21:48:13.728+01:002013-09-11T21:48:13.728+01:00Harbinger: it's perfectly Ok to differ here, b...Harbinger: it's perfectly Ok to differ here, but it's a question of style - they say the mark of a gentleman is that he removes his hat before beating his wife. Let's air our differences with lethal courtesy.Sackersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17284329249862764601noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-46655416854250596082013-09-11T20:31:49.495+01:002013-09-11T20:31:49.495+01:00Nick Drew,
So then, you don't think the vast ...Nick Drew,<br /><br />So then, you don't think the vast amounts of carbon monoxide being pumped into the air daily from car exhausts aren't giving you problems then?<br /><br />I'm with the cap'n on this. The smoking ban was a trial run to see how obedient the populous were and they showed it. Showed how weak they were.<br /><br />Look back in history. The pub was a meeting place for people, to go and talk, socialise, gamble, fight, smoke and drink. And because you have a 'condition' you think it's ok to ban possibly the majority's right who drink in that pub to smoke, because you're not happy about it? <br /><br />The best thing would have been for cities to have created a cafe, a pub and a restaurant for all those non smokers to go and postulate in and allow all other establishments to remain doing what they'd been doing for hundreds of years before you came along.<br /><br />It's nothing but downright selfishness of politically correct morons like you who ruin life for many because it doesn't fit into your way of things.<br /><br />The word fascist does spring to mind quite frankly reading your post. And worse still, I bet you drive as well which would make you somewhat of a hypocrite, or if you don't, at least use public transport which does, not forgetting buying goods, that result in the pollution of the atmosphere (and land) with deadly chemicals.<br /><br />How many chronic asthmatics in the UK are there compared to smokers Nick? You epitomise the Marxist realist who believes that the minority should rule over the majority.<br /><br />I don't smoke but I vehemently defend the right for people to do so, whenever and wherever they are. No one has the right to tell them they can't. Then again I am an anarchist which pretty much labels me as one who believes 100% in liberty and freedoms, unlike people like you.<br /><br />HarbingerAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-78829672737880442322013-09-11T20:20:10.146+01:002013-09-11T20:20:10.146+01:00How about the passport?How about the passport?Mark In Mayennehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14987723233401368368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-2930147262684492042013-09-11T20:13:03.075+01:002013-09-11T20:13:03.075+01:00CR, I think many pubs were done in by supermarket ...CR, I think many pubs were done in by supermarket booze, desubsidised public transport, the destruction of blue-collar employment and police keen to make their quota by following your car.Sackersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17284329249862764601noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-33257625624824624652013-09-11T19:52:08.433+01:002013-09-11T19:52:08.433+01:00Presumably if you have distanced yourself from Mrs...Presumably if you have distanced yourself from Mrs W and her agents, you have no call on her services for your defence?<br /><br />What rights do you therefore have to defend your life and property? Are they any different from those "enjoyed" by the rest of us?Mark In Mayennehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14987723233401368368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-22193084674182175122013-09-11T19:43:09.105+01:002013-09-11T19:43:09.105+01:00Nick,
I hear you.
But, it doesn't matter. (B...Nick,<br /><br />I hear you.<br /><br />But, it doesn't matter. (Bear with me now).<br /><br />The point of me mentioning the smoking ban was to highlight bad law. Yes, I know you got what you wanted/needed, but it was the way it was done that was jaw-dropping.<br /><br />The junk science, the ridiculous comments by the Health Committee, the haste with which is was enacted, all made for a bad law put together by biased fools.<br /><br />And, if you look back from that day to this, the floodgates opened for all sorts of insanity which just 'had to enshrined in law'.<br /><br />In 1265 those men embarking on a new way of governing our nation must have been beside themselves. They had power, given by the people and blessed by the monarch and despite that, it took them TWO YEARS to produce their first piece of legislation.<br /><br />Do you know how many bits of legislation were vomited out in 2012? 4,195.<br /><br />Four thousand one hundred and ninety five.<br /><br />How many of those (a mix of primary and secondary legislation) got the scrutiny they deserved? Serious question.<br /><br />Parliament sits for less than 180 days a year. My calculator says that they enacted 23.3 bits of legislation per day during 2012.<br /><br />Now, do you imagine that all 650 MPs read every single word?<br /><br />How many other bad laws are we enduring, or are about to endure?<br /><br />CR.Captain Rantyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07839241144954596066noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-48125374864365989352013-09-11T19:31:54.349+01:002013-09-11T19:31:54.349+01:00FascinatingFascinatingMark In Mayennehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14987723233401368368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-83114996607113723142013-09-11T19:31:26.008+01:002013-09-11T19:31:26.008+01:00Ah. That explains it then.
CR.Ah. That explains it then.<br /><br />CR.Captain Rantyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07839241144954596066noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5524682876220396502.post-57400301757066986722013-09-11T19:29:15.580+01:002013-09-11T19:29:15.580+01:00York? Vikings - who were Celts by extraction.York? Vikings - who were Celts by extraction.Sackersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17284329249862764601noreply@blogger.com