It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Isn't it about time we have a constitution?

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 7 2006 @ 12:19 PM

Originally posted by Odium
Which is what I just said?

You never told us who "they where" so no.

And no, I do not speak for the majority but since it has been a constant problem one raised in almost every book I've seen on the Judiciary it is logical that a large portion of people would agree.

Really? So you dont think it might be logical to assume that a large portion of the people who WRITE those books agree, or are we assuming they are the majority of the british public?

Also, it was an independent legal commission which first pointed out the problems. The age old conflict of interests...

Problems always arise but do not always warrant a complete change of system.

Common sense displays it as a problem.

Members of the Bar = MPs.
Judge's can get a better job due to these people...

Judges still need to do thier own jobs well before they can be promoted, unless your saying ANYONE can get thier own job without being good in the first place?

Problems can occur, and a lot of in fighting and biased results can and have happened. It is a risk that should not be taken when someone's life is at stake.

Then what do you suggest?

[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]

[edit on 26/02/2005 by devilwasp]

posted on Mar, 11 2006 @ 04:36 PM
It sometimes saddens me how people can have such an infatuation with the written constitiution. And not just any constitution, but the US constitution. Most responses to this thread have been about the fact that the US has a written constitution and GB doesn't.

This has spun off in to myriad different discussions about party politics, whether Labour etc, etc have changed this and that etc etc. All seem to forget the simple structure of the British Govt.

The British system of government is based on a simple principle. That of balance. This is a balance of tyranny, oligarchy and anarchy. Tyrrany in the form of a monarchy, is balanced by the oligarchy in the form of the Houses of Parliament, anarchy as democracy. All must exist to act as a balance on the other. Allowing one to triumph is a failure of the system.

I believe the Roman system was set up similarly to this. Regardless of how successful that was, this is how the British system has been constructed and has been working well and evolving over the last 400 years.

We do not need a written constitution. Why follow in the footsteps of a document that was written as an answer to the British system which was to emulate the British system of government but has ultimately failed because a balance has not been set.

posted on May, 10 2006 @ 04:59 AM
we have one already,
its the Magna Carta 1216

new topics
<< 1  2   >>

log in