meles meles wrote:Could we have the Attorney General's opinion on that ? Based on the 'self defence' argument ?
how about this ! the 1987 and 1997 ban acts are illegal and voild under the bill of rights act 1689! since a contitutional law cannot be impliedly removed (in this case by vitue of the above acts) then the 88 and 97 acts are not legal !
*however unlike many other eu countries, none of our contituional laws really bind the government as they can easliy and legally pass a bill that would either expressly remove the right to arms from the bill of rights or have the whole act deleted!