signatures 3 - closing 9/8/11 hmm popular then
and dont you think that maybe the house has slightly more pressing concerns at the moment ? :bang:
Byker
I think you'll find that the argument is that there should be legislation to permit, rather than no legislation to forbid.
Byker
I think you'll find that the argument is that there should be legislation to permit, rather than no legislation to forbid.
Of course there is a danger in fighting for law to permit may backfire if there's a perceived public opinion that some aspects shouldn't be allowed, which may then get incorporated!
Get 100,000 signatures to have this debated in the house. LINK
but could you define exactly what `rights` you want,
well personaly i'd like the right to 7 terry's chocolate oranges free of charge, to be delivered by the playmate of the month each monday,
and the right to an unending supply of jaffa cakes
maybe i should start a petition to have these important rights debated in the house ?
well personaly i'd like the right to 7 terry's chocolate oranges free of charge, to be delivered by the playmate of the month each monday,
and the right to an unending supply of jaffa cakes
maybe i should start a petition to have these important rights debated in the house ?
The public should be entitled to assume that something is lawful, unless it is specifically prohibited. The opposite is Orwellian.
My argument isn't for a change in the law one way or another. It's to reduce ignorance of the law as it is today - to stop this sort of thing...http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJH9F7Hcluo
Byker
I think you'll find that the argument is that there should be legislation to permit, rather than no legislation to forbid.
!