Metrication, the EU and treason

Jack Lewis, of the anti-rule-by-EU "We Want Our Country Back" group, argues that the UK's switch to metric measurements was unconstitutional and therefore another example of sedition by British politicians. He also argues that the Imperial system has certain technical advantages over decimal measures:

The enforced, as opposed to voluntary acceptance of the metrification of Britain by the EEC (EU) was an illegal and treasonable act committed by the Government. This was because allowing a foreign power to interfere in our affairs was contrary to English Common Law. The British people were never consulted on this issue. Surveys repeatedly showed that 90% of British people refused to adopt the metric system. 

Metrification, in itself, had already been allowed by an Act passed in 1897. This gave the people the choice of using it. However the British people chose not to accept it and continued with the Imperial System until the advent of the EEC. The law, as it has stood since 1897 allows the free use of either of the Imperial or Metric systems. The Government’s inspired mantra, “The UK took the decision to adopt the metric system in 1965” is a deliberate lie and is known as the “Myth of 1965”. 

The Imperial Weights and Measures System was a world leading system and even the ‘mile’ was used to name the nautical system for measuring distance at sea, hence ‘nautical mile’. The Imperial system units for measuring length could easily be divided by two. The 12 inch (in) ‘Foot’ could be sub-divided easily into 1/2 = 6ins, 1/4 = 3ins, 1/8 = 1 ½ ins all of which were convenient sub-units. When the inch is divided progressively by 2 into smaller divisions the sub-units become known as nominal units 1/2, 1/4, 1/8, 1/16, 1/32 and 1/64. These sub-divisions commonly appear on virtually all rules especially engineer’s rules. The reason why dividing by 2 is so useful is when measuring something, in many cases, the midpoint is often required e.g. determining the radius of a circle from measuring its diameter or centralising something. It also meant that a draughtsman could draw to 1/2 or 1/4 or even 1/8 scale using an ordinary 12 inch rule although special scale rules are made for convenience. However this kind of scale drawing is not possible using an ordinary metric rule. Only special scale rules make it possible. For more accurate measuring in the Imperial System these nominal sizes are converted to decimals. Engineering apprentices soon learned these conversions without having to refer to charts. Misplaced decimal points are a frequent curse that could have dangerous and disastrous consequences. The metric system is not as user–friendly as the Imperial System.

 

Teaching children the Imperial System of Weights and Measures had a bonus in that it taught them how to mentally calculate using different numerical bases, e.g. when adding columns of money in the old ‘£, s d’ system. Children soon learnt that two halfpennies made a penny, 12 pennies made a shilling and 20 shillings made a £. The divisibility of the old shilling and pound were an advantage when people were paid in pence per day - only the high inflation of the 20th century has rendered this fairly irrelevant. It was even more interesting using Imperial Weights! 16 ounces (oz) make a pound (lb), 14lbs made a stone (st), 2 st (28lb) made a quarter (qtr), 4 qtrs (112lbs) made a hundredweight (cwt) and 20cwt (2240lbs) made a ton (t). Similarly this applied to the 2 pints (pts) = 1 quart (qrt), 4 qrts = 1 gallon (gal). Primary children brought up using the Imperial System could probably out-calculate any modern-day child or student. There were no electronic calculators in those days and calculations had to be done mentally or on paper!

The Imperial System has been used successfully for centuries – if something is not broken then there’s no need to fix it!  By comparison, the metric system is workable only in multiples of 10. Prior to electronic calculators, it would have been very difficult to do metric calculations. Dividing a metre by anything other than 2 (50cm) and 4 (25cm) created decimal points. The Imperial System can be used without the need for a calculator.

The established non-use of the Metric System in the UK (legalised in 1897) remained until we were illegally taken into the EEC when metrication was imposed on the people by the Government. However the EU have since back-tracked and said that we could still use the Imperial System. Unfortunately Public Authorities still retain the power to prosecute anyone using the Imperial System e.g. selling bananas by the lb and not by the kilo. This is a paradox that must be dealt with as Public Authorities are not a power unto themselves or above the law.

ADDENDUM (6 October 2013):

Jack's fellow campaigner "Rex" comments:

If I could add one other thing that I meant to mention earlier, you’ll know that except for Russia (odd one out), it is the world wide convention to use imperial measurements in all air and sea matters. Except for in Russia, distances are universally given in nautical miles, yards, feet or inches and depths in feet, yards or fathoms. Weights are given in pounds (for example, aviation fuel content or aircraft weight) or tons and quantities are in gallons though perhaps generally, US gallons are used. Here, the difference between English and US gallons is slight so using “gallons” in speech conveys a generally understood universal volume.

Just as an aside, another thing that has occurred to me is the insidious manner in which we are coerced to use metric units. People use millimetres unthinkingly because the subtle presentation on measuring tapes and rulers is so often the first side to be read. The metric compulsion then continues as these “fine” graduations are incompatible with imperial units thus obliging all-metric measurement. While society strives for accuracy, only the millimetre is offered for use; we are not permitted the more comprehensive range of imperial fine graduation. Many people still do not realise that metrication insidiously brings not just outlawing of our traditional measures, but criminalisation, imprisonment and a denial of our right to use parts of our own language.

All original material is copyright of its author. Fair use permitted. Contact via comment. Unless indicated otherwise, all internet links accessed at time of writing. Nothing here should be taken as personal advice, financial or otherwise. No liability is accepted for third-party content, whether incorporated in or linked to this blog; or for unintentional error and inaccuracy. The blog author may have, or intend to change, a personal position in any stock or other kind of investment mentioned.