Tell us something we don't know!
In my "Law of Unintended Consequences" threads I've detailled just a few of the stupidly vague catch-all laws that Labour have passed while in office, which do far more than their original intention. I suppose the lawmakers do it "just in case" to prevent loopholes, but all that happens is that innocent people or people the law wasn't intended to cover get swept up by the "catch-all" nature of wide open legislation and prosecuted when there wasn't an original intention to prosecute.
For instance with knife crime: yes, it should be a crime to go out with the intention to use a knife as an offencive weapon. It should NOT be an offence to carry knives home from Argos or Ikea (which it technically is).
I keep banging on about the violent pornography laws, but it shouldn't be a criminal offence to own an image of an act that is entirely legal.
The majority of times Labour enact laws that are too broad in their scope and show no imaginatiuon: concentrating on being too vague and catch-all, whithout being clear and stating the intent of the law and defining the act it is wishing to proscribe.
I still would like a big repeal bill in the next Parliament. The report by The Better Government Initiative reinforces the need for such a bill to be enacted.
The 25 Hour News and the Saturday Obituary - Until I was ten, portrayals of school in fiction seemed stuck in the 1950s or even further back. ‘Tom Brown’s Schooldays’ serialised on Sunday teatimes on ...
5 hours ago