Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Home Secretary Theresa May wants Human Rights Act axed
BBC News ^ | 10/02/2011 | BBC News

Posted on 10/02/2011 3:25:08 AM PDT by EnglishCon

The home secretary has called for the Human Rights Act to be scrapped, less than a fortnight after Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg said it was "here to stay".

The act enshrines the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law.

But Theresa May told the Sunday Telegraph she "personally" would like to see it go because of the problems it caused for the Home Office.

.....

Prime Minister David Cameron said he agreed with Mrs May that the act should be scrapped and replaced with a British Bill of Rights.

(Excerpt) Read more at bbc.co.uk ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: billofrights; humanrights; uk
This is a huge change for the UK, and possibly a move towards a more constitutionally based government. Bear in mind that our constitution is unwritten - just precedent from the last thousand years or so.
1 posted on 10/02/2011 3:25:14 AM PDT by EnglishCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: EnglishCon

English Bill of Rights???

Might start out with a 2nd Amendment so your poor citizens (oops, subjects, blokes, whatever...) can defend hearth and home from criminal miscreatants.

You might also put in the preamble, Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit if good dental care.

heehaw


2 posted on 10/02/2011 3:42:14 AM PDT by wetgundog (" Extremism in the Defense of Liberty is no Vice")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EnglishCon

English Bill of Rights???

Might start out with a 2nd Amendment so your poor citizens (oops, subjects, blokes, whatever...) can defend hearth and home from criminal miscreatants.

You might also put in the preamble, Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of good dental care.

heehaw


3 posted on 10/02/2011 3:42:37 AM PDT by wetgundog (" Extremism in the Defense of Liberty is no Vice")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wetgundog

:P

You forget, you got the life and liberty bit from us. The good dental care - well, that’ll take some serious time.

What everyone forgets is, up until Hungerford and Dunblaine, we had the right to own arms. Actually, we still do, just incredibly heavily licensed and regulated. Those I would like to see reduced - not swept away, we are a different country with different problems, and one size does not fit all - but made more reasonable.
I hunt, both rifle and crossbow. Own my own .303 Enfield, which lives in the gun club most of the time and I am not allowed to have it or ammo for it at home at all. My crossbow, sure, that hangs by the door, despite it being just as deadly and a heck of a lot quieter.

It is a strange system.


4 posted on 10/02/2011 4:03:29 AM PDT by EnglishCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: EnglishCon

WOW.
England lost the American Revolution
The One Euro Revolution
And is in the process of losing the Muslim Take Over Revolution.


5 posted on 10/02/2011 4:40:35 AM PDT by SECURE AMERICA (Where can I sign up for the New American Revolution and the Crusades 2012?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wetgundog

England and Scotland had Bill of Rights 100 years before you.

What do you think yours is based on?.


6 posted on 10/02/2011 4:55:03 AM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman; wetgundog

The American Bill of Rights is based on what they didn’t have in England.


7 posted on 10/02/2011 4:58:47 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: EnglishCon

MY Enfield lives in MY safe.
Alongside its brother, and German cousins.
Feed, too.


8 posted on 10/02/2011 5:20:05 AM PDT by Flintlock (Photo ID for all voters--let our dead rest in peace.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

The American Bill of Rights is based on what they DID have in England but didn’t have in the colonies.

Remember Jefferson’s words; “We might have been a great and free people together...”


9 posted on 10/02/2011 5:57:46 AM PDT by Mitch86
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: EnglishCon

“...up until Hungerford and Dunblaine, we had the right to own arms.”

I have to disagree with your statement. If your government took away your right to bear arms it wasn’t a right to begin with, only permission from the government.


10 posted on 10/02/2011 6:03:08 AM PDT by ops33 (Senior Master Sergeant, USAF (Retired))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: EnglishCon

This sounds like a great development across the pond for our conservative British friends. We see so much misery happening in England and I’ve lost track of what’s going on with all of their politics, being that we’ve got plenty of miserable politics that we’re experiencing. I had kind of lost hope for Europe. It seems that the true British may be getting back into the game. I hope they can turn it around...cheers to our British FRiends...


11 posted on 10/02/2011 6:12:48 AM PDT by Caipirabob ( Communists... Socialists... Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Caipirabob

The English Bill of Rights (1688) guaranteed the right of the citizens to bear arms (in order to protect themselves against the standing army of the king).

The 13 colonies copied that and most added it to their colonial laws immediately.


12 posted on 10/02/2011 6:24:47 AM PDT by CondorFlight (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman

What does it matter when you had it if you no longer have it in an operative form?


13 posted on 10/02/2011 6:37:22 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Mitch86

It was based on lessons learned, good and bad. England certainly did not have all of the rights enumerated in the BoR, Constitution, or concepts in the DOI.


14 posted on 10/02/2011 6:50:03 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman
Yeah, but we still have ours.

Cheers!

15 posted on 10/02/2011 6:58:18 AM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: EnglishCon

I would like to thank the UK for setting the fine
example that our dear leader Obama likes to point to while
he is in the process of making a total jackass out of
himself. I think that they should not change a thing so
that the rest of the world will have something to point
to as an example of what not to do.


16 posted on 10/02/2011 7:13:24 AM PDT by Slambat (The right to keep and bear arms. Anything one man can carry, drive or pull.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EnglishCon
...we are a different country with different problems, and one size does not fit all...

The operative concept is human beings, not countries. And in the case of human beings and self-defense rights, one size does indeed fit all.

17 posted on 10/02/2011 7:33:10 AM PDT by Talisker (History will show the Illuminati won the ultimate Darwin Award.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman

“England and Scotland had Bill of Rights 100 years before you.”
And you lost it.

“What do you think yours is based on?.”
Common sense.

England and Scotland bow to royalty.
Americans do not.
England and Scotland have rights granted by Queens and
sometimes a King.
Americas rights are granted by god.
The problem we have is our own version of Bonnie Prince Charlie is sitting in the white-house pointing at western
Europe as a fine example.


18 posted on 10/02/2011 7:35:59 AM PDT by Slambat (The right to keep and bear arms. Anything one man can carry, drive or pull.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998
What does it matter when you had it if you no longer have it in an operative form?

Encumbered or not, the right remains. All the more reason to strip it of the infringements.

Even a ban by fiat of an unalienable right does not take the right away, it just makes the practice thereof more difficult.

19 posted on 10/02/2011 6:02:17 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

In the UK the rights do not remain. They disappeared long ago.


20 posted on 10/02/2011 6:14:35 PM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

Look up ‘unalienable’. Rights given by God remain, despite the oppressions of man. Do you have a right to defend yourself, regardless of the means employed? Does that right go away if someone says you can’t? No. The right remains, despite encumbrances, just as murder is still wrong whether the state legalizes it or not.


21 posted on 10/02/2011 6:44:05 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Slambat
... Bonnie Prince Charlie ...

Say What? I think you owe all Scotland an apology.

That latter day Lennin in the White Hut wouldn't be fit to lick the sheep sh*t off Bonnie Prince Charlie's boot soles.

22 posted on 10/02/2011 6:49:48 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

I have rights. People in the UK really don’t. Yes, my rights come from God. The UK has no more faith in God than it does a belief in rights.


23 posted on 10/02/2011 7:26:44 PM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998
Faith in God is an individual thing, last I checked. So is the decision to submit to the state that which you rightfully posess. Every day, there are people who do what they have a right to do, and some suffer the animus of the local authorities for it, but that does not change whether they have their rights, only that the state is acting outside any proper authority it has in infringing on those rights.

Freedom is not a piece of paper, it is a state of mind.

24 posted on 10/02/2011 7:33:31 PM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

The rights of UK citizens are no longer operative according to the UK state and culture.


25 posted on 10/02/2011 7:45:52 PM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

“Scotland an apology”
A certain scene of a duel in the movie
“Highlander” comes to mind here.
I liked ol Oli Cromwell. He was probably the best thing to
happen to the English monarchy. Oh wait.


26 posted on 10/02/2011 9:48:16 PM PDT by Slambat (The right to keep and bear arms. Anything one man can carry, drive or pull.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

Thank god Charlie was defeated in 1746.

I am proud that both sides of my family fought AGAINST him.


27 posted on 10/03/2011 3:45:31 AM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Slambat

1—We havent lost it.
2—As is ours. Scotland esp was famous for its common sense philosophers like Hume or Frances Hutcheson.
3—We dont bow to royalty, since 1642 the monarch is a figurehead with no actual real power.


28 posted on 10/03/2011 3:48:26 AM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: grey_whiskers

As do we, myth and hype aside.


29 posted on 10/03/2011 3:49:10 AM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver

Actually many of the rights you enjoy were amendments to the initial BoR.


30 posted on 10/03/2011 3:51:01 AM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

Yes, the people here really do.


31 posted on 10/03/2011 3:51:47 AM PDT by the scotsman (I)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: the scotsman

really gosh I didn’t know that, golly thanks

oh by the way the rights I “enjoy” existed before the amendments or the BoR.


32 posted on 10/03/2011 3:53:12 AM PDT by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: EnglishCon

Very little chance of Theresa getting this done though. Pity.


33 posted on 10/10/2011 4:53:48 AM PDT by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Slambat
The Bill of rights still stands. Its just been gnawed on for a lot longer by those who find it "inconvenient". Dont worry, they're working on your constitution too.

The US bill of rights was NOT based on common sense. What is common sense but what we all accept as wisdom anyway? Well it certainly was not commonly held wisdom before the bills of rights were introduced, by definition.

Don't be so naive. Americans certainly DO bow to royalty, its just a different kind these days - mostly based in the WH and Hollywood. Well, most americans do anyway. Those with more sense (as in those on these boards) dont. But youre in a minority.

Both an Englishman's and an Americans rights are granted by God. The difference is that ours are guaranteed by the crown and yours by the constitution.

34 posted on 10/10/2011 5:03:37 AM PDT by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

That sounds pretty odd. Do you think God only affords rights to Americans? I mean, if you believe your rights are “inalienable” (which I presume you do), then it follows they must be universal. God is not a racist. He’s not going to give some rights to one group of people but not to another. Evil men may subsume those rights, or seek to suppress them, and seem to have succeeded in large tracts of the world, but those rights don’t go away - unless you think that man can overturn God’s pronouncements?


35 posted on 10/10/2011 5:10:41 AM PDT by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Vanders9

You had your chance to participate a week ago. You blew it.


36 posted on 10/10/2011 5:14:14 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

Well I didnt know about it. Anyway, do these discussions decay with time?


37 posted on 10/10/2011 5:23:53 AM PDT by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Vanders9

They do decay. Hence, you’re the only one pursuing the thread.


38 posted on 10/10/2011 8:42:14 PM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Vanders9

“The difference is that ours are guaranteed by the crown and yours by the constitution. “

The constitution doesn’t grant or give or even defend our rights. They are just there, in the either, god granted.
Those rights are for all men, as inalienable. Even you have
these right as well as all men of the world.
The constitution just tells the government, not the people,
what it can and cant do. . We also have the
right to defend those rights for ourselves and others.
Example...

Iraqis will be allowed to keep sidearms at home for protection. But they will not be allowed to take those weapons outside without a special license.

http://articles.sfgate.com/2003-05-21/news/17491791_1_4000-strong-military-police-brigade-weapons-proclamation-military-type-weapons

Looks like the Iraqis have more rights than the average
Brit. We believe all men “Planet Wide” are borne with these rights.


39 posted on 10/11/2011 2:21:26 AM PDT by Slambat (The right to keep and bear arms. Anything one man can carry, drive or pull.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Slambat
If the rights are inalienable, they must be universal. As you say, you believe all men planet wide are (borne?) born with those rights. Therefore to say Iraqis have more rights than the average Brit is a contradiction. All men have the same rights, if they are god given, even if they do not believe in the god who gives them.

However, flawed men can act to limit those rights (or try to) through laws or restrictions of various kinds. Ergo, wise and good people have to act to uphold those rights.

I didnt say the constitution grants or gives those rights. I said it guaranteed them. The constitution is the mechanism put in place by your founders to ensure that those god given rights are not abused. I think we are actually saying the same thing. I think.

40 posted on 10/11/2011 3:00:44 AM PDT by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

Its ok vlad. If you find the question too difficult to answer just say so. I won’t think any less of you.


41 posted on 10/11/2011 3:02:34 AM PDT by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Vanders9

It’s not difficult. It just is no longer timely. Dead threads don’t interest me much.


42 posted on 10/11/2011 4:22:57 AM PDT by vladimir998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: vladimir998

It seems to me that threads only become dead when people stop responding to them, but OK.


43 posted on 10/11/2011 8:56:38 AM PDT by Vanders9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson