IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Up skirting; why the issue?, About time lawyers started to do their job properly.
On the edge
post Jun 16 2018, 08:02 PM
Post #1


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,826
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98




I've got a sneaking sympathy for Master Chope. He's been well and truly shafted by his Tiry mates,simply so they can 'look cool' - no surprises there though. Although he's probably got the rationale well and truly muddled, in essence, he's right. We really don't need a new specific law, we have sufficient remedy already. Creating a new and very specific law would simply encourage the continued inept and unintelligent behaviour of todays senior police and prosecuting lawyers. The offence is already covered because it can be considered and outrage to public decency. It's exactly the same as capturing on film people using the loo etc. Ok the maximum penalty might need lifting, but the offence is covered already. So, Master Chope should have suggested that size twelves need applying to a few policemen, whilst a good few CPS people could do with some intensive re education.


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
gel
post Jun 17 2018, 07:37 AM
Post #2


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 910
Joined: 11-September 09
From: Thames Valley
Member No.: 337



What I find worse was his blocking of the bill to give more protection to police dogs/ horses injured by toe rags when committing crimes.
Some fellow Tory's should ensure he's not in the Chamber when such Private Member's Bills come up for discussion.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
SirWilliam
post Jun 17 2018, 08:47 AM
Post #3


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 765
Joined: 6-March 14
From: West Berks
Member No.: 10,341



One thing having the necessary legislation, quite another applying it in the real world. most antisocial behaviour, from murder downwards, is covered but it still occurs despite the machinations of those in high places. Most of us probably were not aware that "upskirting" even existed but we do now and I can't help feeling that it may become de rigueur in certain corners of the pond.


--------------------
Si non prius succederent.......... relinquere
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Jun 18 2018, 08:20 AM
Post #4


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,821
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



Having a definitive law means flexibility to adjust penalties for the specific offence. Thr Tory burk hasn’t done himself or his party an favours.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Jun 18 2018, 03:52 PM
Post #5


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,826
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Jun 18 2018, 09:20 AM) *
Having a definitive law means flexibility to adjust penalties for the specific offence. Thr Tory burk hasn’t done himself or his party an favours.


Quite right, but he's been on this trip for quite a while and other such issues have similarly crashed because of his input. Yes, on the face of it he's a Tory Burk, BUT his mates on the Tory benches are even more so; they should have stopped him several years back. Leads me to think he's simply a fall guy for the party; who want to be seen to be supporting popukar causes and then quietly stangeling them when no one is thought to be looking.

In strictly legal terms, this would have been bad law and almost unenforceable. Proper parliamentary scrutiny would have made it work - that's what he was trying to do.


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Andy Capp
post Jun 18 2018, 04:29 PM
Post #6


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 11,821
Joined: 3-September 09
Member No.: 317



QUOTE (On the edge @ Jun 18 2018, 04:52 PM) *
Quite right, but he's been on this trip for quite a while and other such issues have similarly crashed because of his input. Yes, on the face of it he's a Tory Burk, BUT his mates on the Tory benches are even more so; they should have stopped him several years back. Leads me to think he's simply a fall guy for the party; who want to be seen to be supporting popukar causes and then quietly stangeling them when no one is thought to be looking.

In strictly legal terms, this would have been bad law and almost unenforceable. Proper parliamentary scrutiny would have made it work - that's what he was trying to do.

That may be true, but it brings our democracy into disrepute.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
On the edge
post Jun 18 2018, 07:36 PM
Post #7


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 7,826
Joined: 23-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 98



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Jun 18 2018, 05:29 PM) *
That may be true, but it brings our democracy into disrepute.


Wholly agree; the way they carry on, that seems to be Tory policy.


--------------------
Know your place!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
x2lls
post Jun 18 2018, 07:52 PM
Post #8


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,517
Joined: 25-November 09
Member No.: 511



QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Jun 18 2018, 05:29 PM) *
That may be true, but it brings our democracy into disrepute.



There are far more serious issues/groups bringing democracy into disrepute. Namely, the government.


--------------------
There their, loose loser!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 17th October 2018 - 06:06 PM