Results 151 to 165 of 190
Thread: Presumption Of Innocence
-
1st August 2007, 03:32 PM #151
The Magna Carta established the rights of englishmen and by extension all dominions, including Australia and USA.
But it did not establish legal rights for foreigners.
So should we have laws for Australians and another code entirely for foreigners, especially those who intend harm or mischief/
-
1st August 2007, 03:51 PM #152
-
1st August 2007, 04:00 PM #153
-
1st August 2007, 04:03 PM #154"We must never become callous. When we experience the conflicts ever more deeply we are living in truth. The quiet conscience is an invention of the devil." - Albert Schweizer
My blog. http://theupanddownblog.blogspot.com
-
1st August 2007, 04:09 PM #155
Yeah, but they all looked foreign and that's the main thing!
Chasers did a loverly thing on photographing "secure" sites. Dressed as an American tourist they were all but welcomed in for a meal, in an outfit so overtly Moslem it was funny, complete with obviously fake beard, they weren't allowed within cooee of anywhere carrying a camera.
It's easy to spot a terrorist!!
P
-
1st August 2007, 04:21 PM #156Deceased
- Join Date
- Jun 2003
- Location
- ...
- Posts
- 1,460
Irrevelent to the issue at hand.
As to the tax take according to my doctor the cost to the community for smoking related illnesses is about 10 times more than the tax take on tobacco. The reason it is not banned is that prohibition doesn't work.
BTW he also refuses to bulk bill anyone who smokes. He reckons that if they can afford to pay for smoking they should also be able to pay for their health care.
Peter.
-
1st August 2007, 04:54 PM #157zelk
- Join Date
- May 2006
- Location
- sydney
- Posts
- 0
-
1st August 2007, 04:58 PM #158
Hi Peter,
Relevant in that the response is not proportional to the threat. If terrorism is a societal cost (which it must be) then the reponse should be proportional to the cost. Same as smoking etc. Im trying to highlight the blatant hypocrisy in the situation which is why the presumption of innocence is so readily discarded so that the "L's" can court our vote.
We know prohibition doesnt work but it still appears to be a large proportion of our pollies activities. Prohibition on terrorism doesnt work either,
Sebastiaan"We must never become callous. When we experience the conflicts ever more deeply we are living in truth. The quiet conscience is an invention of the devil." - Albert Schweizer
My blog. http://theupanddownblog.blogspot.com
-
1st August 2007, 05:45 PM #159Deceased
- Join Date
- Jun 2003
- Location
- ...
- Posts
- 1,460
Fair enough Sebastiaan.
But society considers some crimes and threats to its wellbeing greater than others. Hence those crimes and threats are treated different from others.
For instance, if you have an accident and stop and render assistance the punishment is minimal but make it a hit and run and the book is rightly thrown at you.
If you defraud a company with clever and creative accounting you are treated much more leniently than if you go and rob a bank.
Similarly with terrorrism. The laws, by its very nature, need to be more restrictive to fight that crime against our society. Sometimes we get it wrong but hopefully most of the time we get it right.
However there may be a need for appointing a permanent royal commissioner to review and oversee the fight against terrorrism with regular reports direct to parliament.
Peter.
-
1st August 2007, 05:51 PM #160
-
1st August 2007, 06:59 PM #161
-
1st August 2007, 07:26 PM #162
Makes it harder for the busy bodies
Mick
avantguardian
-
1st August 2007, 08:54 PM #163
-
1st August 2007, 09:08 PM #164I may not have gone where I intended to go, but I think I have ended up where I needed to be.
My Other Toys
-
6th August 2007, 09:46 AM #165
Similar Threads
-
corby's innocence
By Zed in forum NOTHING AT ALL TO DO WITH RENOVATIONReplies: 123Last Post: 1st June 2005, 10:37 PM
Bookmarks