Update crime.md

Proposer
BenTrimble
State

Rejected

Vote Score

-1000

Age

2132 days


@BenTrimble edited manifesto/crime.md - almost 6 years ago

A review will be carried out into the composition of juries, especially for complex trials.

Firearms

The right to own firearms for sporting, hunting and pest control will be respected.

The licencing process will be strengthened to include mandatory mental health assessements and regular inspections to ensure safe storage & lawful possesion.

A minimum age of 18 will be instigated for any shotgun certificate application.

BenTrimble

@BenTrimble - almost 6 years ago

This is the problem with removing the usage of the word 'right' - there's not really a more appropriate way to say it,

A society without firearms is not achievable - as covered above, usage in the rural community is considered by them to be a necessity.

Floppy

@Floppy - almost 6 years ago

Agree with @PaulJRobinson here, I'm 👎 as it stands.

What, in your view, needs to change from the current situation that means that farmers (I'd disagree with "rural community" having grown up in the country) don't have the tools they need for pest control?

Bloodsports are not something I'm ever going to agree to. That's definitely not a right in this modern world.

Floppy

@Floppy - almost 6 years ago

I'd say that as a society it's much more appropriate that we consider firearm ownership as "permission in exceptional circumstances" than as a "right". A right is something everyone has and then is sometimes limited with good reason. Firearms are not that.

tmtmtmtm

@tmtmtmtm - almost 6 years ago

A right is something everyone has and then is sometimes limited with good reason. Firearms are not that.

Really? Why so? That seems like quite a shocking claim to me, though it's probably much more deeply philosophical so feel free to move any discussion off to elsewhere. What's so special about firearms that takes them outside the basic principle of "Everything which is not forbidden is allowed"? I have no problem whatsoever with regulating gun ownership and/or usage[1], but that's strictly within the "limited with good reason" approach, not something that transcends that.

[1] Other than noting that this is an area where you need to be careful of scope, as Northern Ireland explicitly has different laws on this as a result of the Good Friday Agreement.

Floppy

@Floppy - almost 6 years ago

Hmm, thought provoking, thanks. I will respond further on that, bear with me.

PaulJRobinson

@PaulJRobinson - almost 6 years ago

a) Anything that's a 'right' means the default is that everyone should have access. Why should everyone have access to firearms? Why do we need this right? The reason it's a 'right' in the US Constitution is because it was written almost 250 years ago under circumstances when renegade colonists needed to defend themselves against an overmighty state and their army. They saw the right to bear arms as an existential question. Without it the USA would never have survived. If it was being written today, I don't think they would be able to argue that particular right should be included in the Constitution (although probably best not get too far into that discussion here). Likewise there is simply no need for us to have a right to bear arms in the UK in the 21st Century.

b) What about other rights to do/own/use certain things? We don't talk about the right to drive a car. We don't talk about the right to build a house. We permit people to drive cars - under certain circumstances. We permit people to build houses - under certain circumstances. It's no-ones fundamental right to do these things. Just as I don't believe it should be a right to own or use a firearm.

c) Who is demanding this right? Where are the oppressed people screaming that their rights are being oppressed because they cannot currently get a firearm? Why is this an issue in modern day UK that warrants a discussion?

d) Are we talking about this being a Human Right and should be reflected in the UN Declaration of Human Rights, or the European Convention of Human Rights, like the Right to Life, Right to Free Speech, Right not to be unlawfully detained etc? If so, then the government would then have a responsibility to protect that right for all humans within that country - visiting foreign tourists; babies; prisoners - just as they do with all other Human Rights. I really don't believe this is something that needs to be protected.

tmtmtmtm

@tmtmtmtm - almost 6 years ago

We don't talk about the right to build a house … We permit people to build houses - under certain circumstances.

My understanding of English constitutional law is that this is completely back to front. Can you direct me at something that will help me understand this better?

PaulJRobinson

@PaulJRobinson - almost 6 years ago

My understanding is that this PR proposes to make owning/using a firearm a 'right'. I interpret this to mean that it would be included as a clause within the Human Rights Act (the only Act on Statute which allows us to walk into the Supreme Court and claim our rights have been denied to us by the Government). If the HRA included a clause on the right to bear arms (however worded) any subsequent law passed by a Parliament which infringes someone's right to bear arms wouldn't by upheld by the Supreme Court, because they would rule that it infringes upon our rights as defined by the HRA.

My position is: I oppose this PR because I don't believe the 'right to bear arms' however phrased, should be included within the Human Rights Act. It's as simple as that.

BenTrimble

@BenTrimble - almost 6 years ago

I think everyone is focussing on specific wording too much. The intention here is not to create a right, it's to make a commitment to not unilaterally take away firearms used for reasonable purposes, but to also ensure the pre-ownership checks are more rigorous.

philipjohn

@philipjohn - almost 6 years ago

@BenTrimble Could you go back to your motivation for this PR please, to help us understand why you think it's needed, and perhaps help with wording if using "right" is taking us down the wrong path...

philipjohn

@philipjohn - over 5 years ago

Closing as it's blocked.