|
Debate On Liberties
You may recall 'Another draconian Threat To Liberties' in last months issue. Here
Some very valid points made by Mark [EastMids MAG]: On the whole very interesting but I'd seek to add some alternative views which aren't often considered.
Firstly it's not cars which drive on the road with no insurance, its people.
So confiscating and crushing private property isn't addressing the issues.
Although having fewer uninsured vehicles on PUBLIC roads is a good idea its easy to get carried away with this and arrive at conclusions which don't follow.
The arguments put forward, to some extent, defeat themselves.
As is common knowledge - where people are encountered by the polis these are frequently people on their umpteenth offence so confiscation isn't "fixing" the actual problem unless you're of the firm belief that cars drive on the road rather than people.
There are also unexpected consequences and costs to taking an over-simplistic and naive confiscation approach.
Firstly it undermines the general principles of British Law in that 1) the punishment should fit the crime 2) that confiscation of private property is both immoral and illegal (under the UNCHR).
Secondly it has a direct social consequence in that it teaches a generation of kids that "theft" is ok, moral and even legal. It ought to come as no surprise that kids will learn from their experiences.
Monkey see, monkey do. Up to now a crook stealing your mobile phone knows he is a crook but in future generations we will see complex moral and political selflegitimacies emerge where crooks will have an absolute belief in their "rights" to steal.
Unfortunately, it's too late on this - and these principles have been lost already.
Whilst those focusing very closely on the issue of mini-motos might claim small victories it is at the cost of a much bigger defeat for society as a whole.
We are seeing attempts to expand the "legal" principle of confiscation of private property within many other areas of society.
This is bad enough when moderated by a strict and moral legal code but some of those with a finger on the political pulse may have spotted the true purpose of ASBOs - to circumnavigate "due process" and to move the judicial process from the current and supposedly judicial body into the hands of extremely politically biased bodies such as local councils.
One other issue is, as already pointed out a "green" one.
The bikes haven't committed the crime the person has.
The punishment should apply to the person not the vehicle.
In an age where everyone understands the need to reduce consumption of raw materials crushing a vehicle which has taken a substantial amount of them is, in itself a crime against the environment. Its no good saying that the bike is "recycled".
This is a bluff which ignores the wasted energy and the lack of a 100% efficient recycling process.
|
