Are These The Most Useless Laws?
Discussion
April 200y Readers' Digest lists five Acts which
Ill thought out or politically motivated .. these five Acts do more harm than good
1. Hunting Act 2004
Ist supposed to make hunting a wild animal with a dog illegal or allow your land to be used for hunting. Fine of £5K und they can take away your car, dogs und hunting equipment but not your horse
What ist wrong with it? Hard to actually enforce as many exemptions such as stlaking the prey or flushing out the wild creature with just two dogs... so long as animal ist killed by gunshot as soon as possible. Und you can hunt a rabbit or rat like this .. but just with two dogs ,.. but you are not allowed to do this with a hare. You can kill fox by accident but not deliberately (They are pests .. they killed the kittens' pet rabbits und there were more than three of them at it! 
Und the dog does the hunting... say the pro lobby und even the anti-mob agree with that one too per the RD. How can you stop your dogs sniffing after a rodent?
Next one
Road Traffic Act 1988
Under the 2003 "Construction & Use Regulation made under this Act - using Handy with handies
und even sitting at wheel with engine on ist criminal offence. Hand-free - legal. (Liebster Triplest One 
)
What ist wrong with it then ask RD
Direct Line/Mori found 92% of us actually agree with the ethic of this law und 21% admitted to breaking it 
Photographer on M25 bridge photographed 30 drivers per hour with Handy in handies und another reader saw driver in front of him clutching phone in one hand und wheel with the other in driving rain und heavy road condition. He follow ... und it turn into Reigate police station und the Chief Super alighted. The person made complaint .. senior cop got a ticking off und gave £30 to charity (penalty at time of offence)
But the police apparently not taking this law as seriously as they should seem to be complaint in this piece.
Next
Dangerous Dogs Act 1991
After spate of pit bull terrier attacks.. law rushed into being to counter it .. und illegal to breed, sell, exchange or even give these dogs. (WHy not just say "illegal to own one!"
Und they all have to be doctored so as to be bred out of existence.
But the problem ist in definition as pit buls are not pure breeds.. und easy to claim ist not a pit bull breed but has some of it in mongrel status. Dogs had to have muzzle in public .. und it could not be removed to allow it to take water or vomit
- if so dog could be destroyed.
Law amended on that basis of humanity if mags satisfied no danger from the dog. But this still ist no help to victims of these animals.
Next
Road Safety Act
This refers to the jail term for death by careless driving.
Prior to this person had to be driving dangerously for prison to be option. But to the bereaved .. make no difference if careless or dangerous. They want person to go to jail. Law normally looks to actions before consequences -judgin by degree of culpability und not outcome.
Under old law .. good character und sobriety saved a jail term... und a fleeting distraction like a grizzly child or a sassy feline in short skirt - well that was taken into account as "just one of those things"
But the fear that judges now apparently have ist that a jury may be subjective und not convict the driver of these offences once they realise that
There but the Grace of God go I und that ordinary people like themselves could end up in jail for just turning head the wrong way at the wrong time.
Und the last one ist the "Inquiries Act /FOI Act 2005"
This one ist up for amendment already apparently.. but perhaps folk may like to discuss what ist wrong with this und the other Acts und what ist right with them too.
I am sure it will keep lieber von out of bother for a while
RD said:
Ill thought out or politically motivated .. these five Acts do more harm than good
1. Hunting Act 2004
Ist supposed to make hunting a wild animal with a dog illegal or allow your land to be used for hunting. Fine of £5K und they can take away your car, dogs und hunting equipment but not your horse
What ist wrong with it? Hard to actually enforce as many exemptions such as stlaking the prey or flushing out the wild creature with just two dogs... so long as animal ist killed by gunshot as soon as possible. Und you can hunt a rabbit or rat like this .. but just with two dogs ,.. but you are not allowed to do this with a hare. You can kill fox by accident but not deliberately
(They are pests .. they killed the kittens' pet rabbits und there were more than three of them at it! Und the dog does the hunting... say the pro lobby und even the anti-mob agree with that one too per the RD
. How can you stop your dogs sniffing after a rodent? Next one
Road Traffic Act 1988 Under the 2003 "Construction & Use Regulation made under this Act - using Handy with handies
und even sitting at wheel with engine on ist criminal offence. Hand-free - legal. (Liebster Triplest One ) What ist wrong with it then ask RD
Direct Line/Mori found 92% of us actually agree with the ethic of this law und 21% admitted to breaking it Photographer on M25 bridge photographed 30 drivers per hour with Handy in handies und another reader saw driver in front of him clutching phone in one hand und wheel with the other in driving rain und heavy road condition. He follow ... und it turn into Reigate police station und the Chief Super alighted. The person made complaint .. senior cop got a ticking off und gave £30 to charity (penalty at time of offence)
But the police apparently not taking this law as seriously as they should seem to be complaint in this piece.
Next
Dangerous Dogs Act 1991
After spate of pit bull terrier attacks.. law rushed into being to counter it .. und illegal to breed, sell, exchange or even give these dogs. (WHy not just say "illegal to own one!"
Und they all have to be doctored so as to be bred out of existence.
But the problem ist in definition as pit buls are not pure breeds.. und easy to claim ist not a pit bull breed but has some of it in mongrel status. Dogs had to have muzzle in public .. und it could not be removed to allow it to take water or vomit
- if so dog could be destroyed. Law amended on that basis of humanity if mags satisfied no danger from the dog. But this still ist no help to victims of these animals.
Next
Road Safety Act
This refers to the jail term for death by careless driving.
Prior to this person had to be driving dangerously for prison to be option. But to the bereaved .. make no difference if careless or dangerous. They want person to go to jail. Law normally looks to actions before consequences -judgin by degree of culpability und not outcome.
Under old law .. good character und sobriety saved a jail term... und a fleeting distraction like a grizzly child or a sassy feline in short skirt
- well that was taken into account as "just one of those things" But the fear that judges now apparently have ist that a jury may be subjective und not convict the driver of these offences once they realise that
RD said:
There but the Grace of God go I und that ordinary people like themselves could end up in jail for just turning head the wrong way at the wrong time.
Und the last one ist the "Inquiries Act /FOI Act 2005"
This one ist up for amendment already apparently.. but perhaps folk may like to discuss what ist wrong with this und the other Acts und what ist right with them too.
I am sure it will keep lieber von out of bother for a while
Come on, all the new laws introduced by Labour are very important. Why, I'd be breaking all of the following if they were not now illegal.
1 Knowingly cause or create a nuclear explosion.
2 Catch grey squirrels with intent to market them.
3 Trespass onboard the Titanic without written permission from the Secretary of State.
4 Rent, hire or give as a gift an anti-personnel mine.
5 Import potatoes from Poland.
6 Touch another person without prior consent.
7 Unload a vehicle of gifts on Christmas morning without prior written permission from your local Council.
8 Develop or produce chemical weapons, unless for legitimate military purposes.
9 Molest - without reasonable excuse - whilst subject to a non-molestation order.
10 Place a ‘For Sale’ sign in more than one vehicle window outside your home, unless the second car is parked at least 500 meters away.
1 Knowingly cause or create a nuclear explosion.
2 Catch grey squirrels with intent to market them.
3 Trespass onboard the Titanic without written permission from the Secretary of State.
4 Rent, hire or give as a gift an anti-personnel mine.
5 Import potatoes from Poland.
6 Touch another person without prior consent.
7 Unload a vehicle of gifts on Christmas morning without prior written permission from your local Council.
8 Develop or produce chemical weapons, unless for legitimate military purposes.
9 Molest - without reasonable excuse - whilst subject to a non-molestation order.
10 Place a ‘For Sale’ sign in more than one vehicle window outside your home, unless the second car is parked at least 500 meters away.
I would probably disagree with the mobile phone law being useless i for one think that is useful it just needs to be enforced As to the rest i would agree. I wold also add to it the knee jerk gun laws brought in after Dunblane shootings.
The original gun laws had not failed if they had been followed then the guy would of not had the guns as he was a well known nut job. So as normal when something happens because someone has disobeyed the original laws a whole new set of laws are brought in which do nothing but to annoy those that obeyed the original laws. The gun laws that bLair brought in did nothing but hurt those that enjoyed shooting. I am afraid with all the current gun crime going on with illegal guns that yet again the few remaining gun enthusiasts are going to get clobbered. Up here in scotland they are talking about banning air rifles as neds (a scottish chav) are shooting at fire crews with them. So because some scrotes are breaking the law by shooting at folk they are going to ban my father from getting a few bunnies in the garden. total genius.
Then there is the NERC which has managed to close down a huge amount of green lanes in england so they are no longer accessible to 4x4 drivers.
The original gun laws had not failed if they had been followed then the guy would of not had the guns as he was a well known nut job. So as normal when something happens because someone has disobeyed the original laws a whole new set of laws are brought in which do nothing but to annoy those that obeyed the original laws. The gun laws that bLair brought in did nothing but hurt those that enjoyed shooting. I am afraid with all the current gun crime going on with illegal guns that yet again the few remaining gun enthusiasts are going to get clobbered. Up here in scotland they are talking about banning air rifles as neds (a scottish chav) are shooting at fire crews with them. So because some scrotes are breaking the law by shooting at folk they are going to ban my father from getting a few bunnies in the garden. total genius.
Then there is the NERC which has managed to close down a huge amount of green lanes in england so they are no longer accessible to 4x4 drivers.
thinfourth said:
I would probably disagree with the mobile phone law being useless i for one think that is useful it just needs to be enforced As to the rest i would agree. I wold also add to it the knee jerk gun laws brought in after Dunblane shootings.
The original gun laws had not failed if they had been followed then the guy would of not had the guns as he was a well known nut job. So as normal when something happens because someone has disobeyed the original laws a whole new set of laws are brought in which do nothing but to annoy those that obeyed the original laws. The gun laws that bLair brought in did nothing but hurt those that enjoyed shooting. I am afraid with all the current gun crime going on with illegal guns that yet again the few remaining gun enthusiasts are going to get clobbered. Up here in scotland they are talking about banning air rifles as neds (a scottish chav) are shooting at fire crews with them. So because some scrotes are breaking the law by shooting at folk they are going to ban my father from getting a few bunnies in the garden. total genius.
Then there is the NERC which has managed to close down a huge amount of green lanes in england so they are no longer accessible to 4x4 drivers.
The original gun laws had not failed if they had been followed then the guy would of not had the guns as he was a well known nut job. So as normal when something happens because someone has disobeyed the original laws a whole new set of laws are brought in which do nothing but to annoy those that obeyed the original laws. The gun laws that bLair brought in did nothing but hurt those that enjoyed shooting. I am afraid with all the current gun crime going on with illegal guns that yet again the few remaining gun enthusiasts are going to get clobbered. Up here in scotland they are talking about banning air rifles as neds (a scottish chav) are shooting at fire crews with them. So because some scrotes are breaking the law by shooting at folk they are going to ban my father from getting a few bunnies in the garden. total genius.
Then there is the NERC which has managed to close down a huge amount of green lanes in england so they are no longer accessible to 4x4 drivers.
Well, the surest thing to make something instantly 'cult' and 'popular' is to ban it. The current gun crime sweeping the nation all started with Blair and Co. making guns so desirable in the first place. If people can't have guns, some will want them even more. Simple human nature. Who knows how many tragic deaths the anti-gun campaigners have been indirectly responsible for.
thinfourth said:
I wold also add to it the knee jerk gun laws brought in after Dunblane shootings.
Yeah was it Prince Charles that got a load of flack afterwards by asking something to the effect of would they ban cricket bats if someone was beaten to death by one. A bit insensitive perhaps but nonetheless true.
Many laws in this country appear to do nothing more than penalise the generally good population while the lack of decent policing allows those who flaunt laws to keep on getting away with it.
cpn jack spanner said:
4 Rent, hire or give as a gift an anti-personnel mine.
How do you rent or hire a mine??
a) " Excuse me, I'd like to rent an anti personnel mine"
b) " Certainly sir, how long do you intend to rent it for"
a) " Well until someone steps on it "
b) " Very good sir, here are the rates, don't forget that if the unit is damaged in any way, you will be liable for the cost of replacement, unless you take take out the accidental damage insurance"
a) " Yes, I'll take out the damage insurance, please"
cpn jack spanner said:
4 Rent, hire or give as a gift an anti-personnel mine.
More accurately, it's to buy, hire, borrow or accept as a gift - Landmines Act 1998 S2(6)(a) referring to S2(1)(c), referring to S1(4) - Streaky PS - can I borrow your AP mine for a mo'? Oops! Do you have another I could borrow? - S
streaky said:
cpn jack spanner said:
4 Rent, hire or give as a gift an anti-personnel mine.
More accurately, it's to buy, hire, borrow or accept as a gift - Landmines Act 1998 S2(6)(a) referring to S2(1)(c), referring to S1(4) - Streaky PS - can I borrow your AP mine for a mo'? Oops! Do you have another I could borrow? - S
Or 'I saw this AP mine and thought of You'
' Really, you shouldn't have'
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff