Adhering to the countrys laws

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by YouAreHavingALaugh, Mar 11, 2009.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Why is it that in all other countries the laws of that country are adhered to but in our green and not so pleasant land we change our laws to fit in with anyone who complains.

    This extract is incredible, and where was Cherie and Tony bliar when she wanted them

    Being kicked out of the country for this, in our country you can murder some one and still not be deported because of HR.
  2. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    Aah, from The Sun - the newspaper [sic] that changes it's opinion and political allegiance whenever it feels like it... :evil:

    Anyway, comparing the UK legal system to the one used in the UAE is not entirely fair; they are based on and governed by completely different religious and penal codes.
  3. SPB, as always a good reply.

    I agree the Sun, changes with the wind.

    However, it is the point that you make, we cannot compare the two different penal codes or laws.

    My point is:

    If we choose to live in the UAE, we adhere to their laws

    In the UK, we change our laws to assist those who do not agree with them when they live here. Sharia law!

    Who is the soft option
  4. I think the main point though is that if you go to the UAE, it is very unlikely that you will want to become a permanent resident, if you did and had the right to vote then you may well wish to suggest changes in the law that may make your life easier.

    Or are you suggesting that a British citizens rtight to campaign for political change in the UK is determined by his/her ethnicity.
  5. When in Rome.....THINK first, and keep your drawers up
  6. sgtpepperband

    sgtpepperband War Hero Moderator Book Reviewer

    The sheer volume of legislative law is becoming a headache, but I think most people are frustrated by the erratic application of the law by the courts, rather than the number of laws. Most people are oblivious to many strands of legislation (other than crime, employment, etc.) and sensationalist stories in the media do not exactly help the perception that the UK is a lawless place.

    From my own experience, cases are lost due to poor interpretation of the facts of the case by the Defence or Prosecution and, in the majority, judges do the best they can do with the evidence presented to them. But I for one would hate to see a return to barbaric medieval punishments awarded by courts, with limbs being removed and serious breaches of human rights. :oops:

    But to paraphrase Bob Dylan, the best way to live outside the law is to be honest... :thumright:
  7. In my experience - having spent quite a lot of time in the UAE, they are exceptionally tolerant of expatriates and many times the media just grab hold of a story for the sheer sake of causing mischief and being sensationalist.

    I wouldn't mind betting there is a WHOLE lot more to this story than the few bits the Sun decided to latch onto. Adultery due to having TEA might be something you could expect in Saudi Arabia but certainly not in Dubai - there is a lot more to it.
  8. Unfortunately this mob keep changing the law to have a data base whether you're innocent or not .... a la Tacky Jacqui.

  9. It all depends on where the tea was situated in relation to the male visitor and her mouth. :biggrin:
  10. I tend to take the Sun, as with the Daily Wail, with a pinch of salt. Sensationalist headlines make for good profits, and stirring up trouble, little else.
  11. I only read the Scum for Dear Deidre.. makes me feel superior :D
  12. I tend to take them both - from the recycling bin for the new puppy to do his business on. So far he has refused to use either :lol:
  13. I only read the sun for that bird in the cartoon strip whos always got her tits out bobbing around

    George and lynne is it not?
  14. Alright, getting back to the original thought, I think there is a valid point here.

    Why does the Her Majasties Government decide to change laws to the benefit of the minority? Ofcourse we don't want to discriminate against any Britons, but surely that is exactly the point, it seems that a lot of the PC stuff that has been introduced recently discriminates against the established nationals and for the "recently joined" nationals.
  15. I don't want discrimination against anybody.

    I don't think that whether you're a recently assimilated Briton or a so-called established national has anything to do with it - if you can't live with our laws, you have every right to leave - but it's hard to reconcile some of the posts we've seen on RR lately with the kind of freedom-loving, tolerant society that I want Britain to remain.
  16. Come TD

    Surely mate you are missing the point totally. it should not be up to "recently arrived" nationals to try and make Briton more like where they came from, if they liked that place so much why did they choose to move? When a rule is made that discriminates in favour of a group doesn't that by definition become a bad law?

    In the UK currently there are many cases, not just the ones the current bun prints, whereby a historically British national has now lost rights or even worse where laws are Interpreted differently for "white" brits and "asian" Brits, does this not then become Discrimination? All anybody is asking for is a level palying field. I think the comments you refer to are just the start of "Normal folk" getting sick and tired of being pushed around to placate a very vocal minority.
  17. Amen. I blame Harriet Harman. Shes an idiot, and actually wanted to push through a law that made it legal for companies to employ based on gender and ethnicity, rendering White British Males undesirable. :tard:
  18. So its ok for a Peer of the Realm that was convicted and given a custodial sentence for causing a death while driving and texting on a phone is to be released as the custodial sentance might "Hinder " his work!!!Yes its our Chum Lord Ahmed again!
  19. In the last few years there have been almost 4000 new laws passed. The breaking of any one could make you a criminal, with a criminal record.
    Add that the the thousands already on the statute book and what chance do you stand.
    Hands up that person who truly knows whether even some quite reasonable actions are not now against the law.
    If we don't know that then how the hell can we expect others to.
    A once proud country (well at least that is the bar room myth) we are now among the most controlled. Plus, with more than 14,000,000 cctv cameras now the most surveyed.
    It really is a total mess.
  20. My bold above (as I got told off by someone for "amending" his quote recently!). If this is the case then the "normal" people should be careful what they wish for. I sense a danger of this country freefalling into a position where there is an automatic assumption that all non-WASP/C British citizens are automatically from some indefinite "somewhere" (to where they are constantly implored to go back), where hard working and contributing immigrants, refugees, asylum seekers and illegals are lumped together into an analogous mass of “scrounging foreigners†(in the thread on the protests at the Anglian parade there is a debate about the guy that works at Luton aiport yet one poster wades in with "scrounging benefits that allow him to potest") and where all Asian protests are “Islamic fundamentalist†(whether legal, legitimate, distasteful or downright disrespectful). I fail to understand how in the same sentence someone can say that “they have the right to do X but how dare they do X as they haven’t earned the right?†Over on Arrse there is a thread in which posters are actually advocating the use of torture, in one on this site someone suggests that unconvicted terrorists “disappearâ€. Surely freedom from torture, oppression and state sanctioned murder are 3 of the freedoms fought for by British service personnel in the last 100 years (including Alacrity, against a regime that routinely used them)? Also, a good point was made by someone else that some of the less than serious but actually quite close to the knuckle posts could be picked up and used as “a servicemen said...†type quotes. a bit of a disjointed ramble but had respond, perhaps I'll contemplate and amend later.

    To the original subject; I agree absolutely that the law should be equally applicable to all sections of the community, as it was in the subject of the original post, ie in Sharia law women are not equal to men in terms of evidence, inheritance, etc and she appears to have put herself into a position that is unacceptable in a Muslim/mixed marriage. A harsh price to pay and a very emotional clip.


Share This Page