Human Rights Act...

[Retlaw]

We already have a Bill of Rights created in the mid 1600's, but you get any one in the present so called government, to admit it exists if you can.
And by law it cannot be changed.

Retlaw.


Scrap it. Lets create a Bill of Rights, created by the British for the British. Have it outside of the parliament act so both houses must vote on changes, thus preventing any government of the time from invading our individual freedoms.[/quote]

[Retlaw]

Originally Posted by jambutty

Your poll is too simplistic blazey.

Really?
Commit a crime against the establishment or state and you get the book thrown at you. Commit the same crime against your neighbour and get a slap on the wrist.

Where the application of the Human Rights Act falls over is in its application.

In a nutshell if anyone is convicted of a crime that incurs a custodial sentence, the criminals’ Human Rights should be suspended for the duration of the sentence and replaced with just Humane Rights.

Here Here.
Relaw.

[jaysay]

I think everybody agrees with the human rights issue, but not with how its applied, the trouble is that the European act is not flexible, and allows people to undermine the laws of the country they are living in.

[polly]

Originally Posted by panther

I agree with human rights, but it should be denied when you commit a serious crime, such as Murder, rape.....and pedophilia, those people IMO lost it the moment they commit!

Panther may be right here. Whilst I agree with the concept of a Human Rights Act, maybe if someone commits a serious crime such as those above they have chosen to forfeit their rights. However I do not think that means we have, as a matter of course, to treat them inhumanly and of course this must only ap0ply to those convicted not those awaiting trial

[derekgas]

criminals should have no human rights, immigrants should only have them after a probationary period!