quote:

Originally posted by divil:I suspect the NI gun laws are marginally less draconian so agents of Empire can protect themselves.

I'm sorry to bring you up to date with a bang, but there is NO 'Empire' here.

I used Empire as shortened way of saying serving the UK government.

Typical politician missing the point. Go after the sharp pointy things, but totally ignore the fact that a known terrorist, who is a FOREIGN NATIONAL (Sri Lankan) is running around free on your streets. Ever think that maybe instead of allowing this, and using police resources to "monitor him 24/7", you either should have a.) Put him against a wall and shot him in the head when you first convicted him of terrorism (I know, I know....that's not socially acceptable these days), b.) Kept him locked up, or c.) Deport his ass? I mean, for crying out loud, he's not even a citizen...and he's a KNOWN CONVICTED TERRORIST...why let him stay in your country?

Because he will continue to commit crimes that will allow the Gov to impose more restrictions and seize more power. Don't think we don't do the same shit here in the US?

quote:

Originally posted by tacfoley:
Yup, Members of Parliament ARE elected by the popular vote.

To clarify for other readers: Members of Parliament (MPs) are the members of the House of Commons, aka: the lower house.

quote:

Originally posted by tacfoley:
But the first one to stand up and ask for the repeal of the Firearms Act in favour of one less draconian would be looking for a job after lunch.

IOW: They'd be out on their ear after the next election, yes? Near as I've been able to find out, they cannot be "fired" except for certain types of misbehaviour.

So you are getting a government for which more of your fellow citizens than not* have voted. Despite that fact you may feel it an idiocracy in some ways**, it is that for which more people than not have asked.

Only way to fix it is the same thing we'd have to do to fix our mounting problem: Fix the schools and the joke that passes for "news" in your country. No democratic form of government can survive an uneducated, misinformed electorate.

* U.K. MPs are elected by first-past-the-post (FPTP), which means the one who gets the most votes, even if it's less than 50%

** Again: Not criticizing. E.g.: We have Biden, Pelosi, Schiff, Waters, etc., so we're in no position to be throwing stones.

quote:

Originally posted by tacfoley:

quote:

Originally posted by divil:I suspect the NI gun laws are marginally less draconian so agents of Empire can protect themselves.

I'm sorry to bring you up to date with a bang, but there is NO 'Empire' here.

Wellll... *cough*... It is the United Kingdom and, technically speaking, the only difference between "empire" and "kingdom" is the former is headed by an emperor and the latter by a king. Some might argue a distinction without a difference

quote:

Originally posted by divil:
I used Empire as shortened way of saying serving the UK government.

The term 'government servant' is used to describe a person who serves the interests of the population, at the behest of the democratically-elected government - you know, like just like YOUR police, judges, prison officers armed forces etc do.

You are doing your best to make them like the kind of people used by Hitler and his NSDAP. Despite all the crap you might read, or even believe to be fact, the UK is not like that. Almost two million dead made sure of that.

Who puts this stuff in your head?

quote:

Originally posted by ensigmatic:Wellll... *cough*... It is the United Kingdom and, technically speaking, the only difference between "empire" and "kingdom" is the former is headed by an emperor and the latter by a king. Some might argue a distinction without a difference

Oh dear, this IS getting a mite too heady for me, TBH.

There are a number of kingdoms in Europe - let's just list them for your edification -

Belgium, Spain, Norway, Denmark, Sweden and The Netherlands.

And the UK.

All have kings and/or Queens. All are also constitutional democratic monarchies where the monarch is the titular head of state, but not a 'ruler' in the old-manner. None of these kings or queens can do a thing by themselves. The government proposes, and the monarch usually rubber-stamps the deal.

Only the UK is 'united' kingdom, as it is comprised of three one-time separate countries and part of another that was once all ruled by the reigning monarch. The Netherlands was once in the same boat, and so was Germany up to the end of WW1

You don't have to like it - in fact, you plainly don't.

But you know what?

I really don't care any more.

My email is in my profile Tac, if you wish to further the discussion. I don’t mind further discussion and clarification if you are so inclined, but this isn’t the proper venue as this thread has already drifted too far.

Guys, do see what you're doing here? You're placing the burden of an entire country onto the shoulders of one forum member. tacfoley is one of our own, as much as any American in this forum.

The Americans here- are you personally responsible for the condition of this country? Then, in God's name, why would you expect one single forum member to take on that burden for his country? Do you love your country? So does tacfoley. He shouldn't have to feel as if he's going into battle each time he comes here. You wouldn't put up with that, so why should he? And why in the world would he continue to visit this forum, given all of this?

tacfoley is my guest, as are you all. Take it easy on my guests.

I'll have more to say about this, but, for now, my remarks should suffice to put a stop to this.