Page 3 of 3
Re: Here we go again.......new ban discussed today in Parliament
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 1:22 pm
by Christel
Same reason why RFDs and pornography is the same when we talk bank accounts.
Re: Here we go again.......new ban discussed today in Parliament
Posted: Mon Mar 14, 2022 10:47 pm
by Sim G
Les wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 11:44 am
What I fail to understand is why firearms and hate crimes come under the same banner? As far as I know, most mass shootings in this country are not aimed at any particular group ( no pun intended). The victims could be anybody that the shooter comes across, or am I (probably/usually
) missing something?
Members Bill, as opposed to Governments Bill. So the member introduces his Bill of what he would like to be made law. In this case, Hate Crime. As Plymouths first openly gay MP he may have a particular passion in what is either termed or should be included as Hate Speech/Crime and so drafts his utopia. But, he also has become somewhat of a champion of gun control on the back of the shooting in his constituency. So, by lumping gun law on the back of his hate law, he can double the appeal of his proposed law to a wider audience in the House, who perhaps wouldn’t necessarily be interested if only one aspect was tabled.
Cynical politics on the back of either victims families or those victimised in society. But despite his failure, he has no doubt solidified his support from those two groups of voters who will be told that the Government doesn’t care enough…
How mediocre men keep their seats in the House, it often appears…
Re: Here we go again.......new ban discussed today in Parliament
Posted: Tue Mar 15, 2022 8:23 am
by Blackstuff
Sim G wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 10:47 pm
Les wrote: ↑Mon Mar 14, 2022 11:44 am
What I fail to understand is why firearms and hate crimes come under the same banner? As far as I know, most mass shootings in this country are not aimed at any particular group ( no pun intended). The victims could be anybody that the shooter comes across, or am I (probably/usually
) missing something?
Members Bill, as opposed to Governments Bill. So the member introduces his Bill of what he would like to be made law. In this case, Hate Crime. As Plymouths first openly gay MP he may have a particular passion in what is either termed or should be included as Hate Speech/Crime and so drafts his utopia. But, he also has become somewhat of a champion of gun control on the back of the shooting in his constituency. So, by lumping gun law on the back of his hate law, he can double the appeal of his proposed law to a wider audience in the House, who perhaps wouldn’t necessarily be interested if only one aspect was tabled.
Cynical politics on the back of either victims families or those victimised in society. But despite his failure, he has no doubt solidified his support from those two groups of voters who will be told that the Government doesn’t care enough…
How mediocre men keep their seats in the House, it often appears…
This!
Its exactly what they did with the lever-release/MARS guns, they lumped them into the same bill as one for 'offensive weapons', after all, who is going to commit political suicide by voting against laws supposedly stopping people being killed/stabbed/sloshed with acid in the street?? Disgustingly effective tactics.
