Originally posted by Lil Drummerboy
Ok, In England

Was there not an issue of the women saying it was there right to cover their faces just recently? and didn't they win that argument?

I am not sure of the story you allude to, but if they won their argument, then that is down to the British authorities - you can't blame the women for that.

EDIT: Double Post.


[edit on 8-8-2010 by Sherlock Holmes]

Originally posted by StevenDye
Try stripping down to a bikini and walking through you local shoppin centre in England...I doubt you manage to stay there for long before being forced to leave or having the police called to move you along...

Why such a shock that in a country where modesty is even more important...it would still not be allowed.

She wasn't on a beach here people...she was in a shopping centre, bikinies arn't shopping centre clothes. (even if I wish they were )

[edit on 5-8-2010 by StevenDye]

Oddly enough, it isn't actually illegal to be naked in public in England (although inS cotland they take a slightly stricter line). It is only illegal to expose oneself if their is intent to cause distress or if it is of a sexual nature (ie flashing).

There is nothing on the statute books to stop a totally naked person walking through a busy town centre, although a shopping mall is private property so the owners could expel you.

As for this woman - silly cow. A good analogy would be you are smoking a big reefer when someone comes up to you and says "thats illegal - don't do it". In response, you pull out a bong and really go for it. What do you expect will happen after that? The law is the law and like people have said, "when in Rome"...

Personally, I would never visit those places for preceisely this sort of nonsense. a couple of years back a British man was arrested in one of the Emirates for posession of cannabis and drug smuggling charges as he transisted the desert kingdom on an international flight.

Turns out he had less than 0.01 gram of the stuff on his shoelace from an unknown source (he maintains he has never smoked it in his life). Such a tiny speck could have come from anywhere, so if they are going to be that anal about things, you can count me out.

Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
And once again, what this woman did would be against the rules in Britain, England, France, Canada, Germany....

No, it wouldn't. Aside from Canada (which i assume has similiar laws but I have no experience) all those countries listed wouldn't bat an eyelid if someone was shopping in their swimwear. You might get some funny looks of some, might get some lustful looks off others, but the Police would not touch you one iota.

I believe that guy with the drugs on his shoes got four years jail, straight off.

It is incredibly strict here - if you have any sign of illegal drugs on you, even the very smallest amount (as in the case you refer to), then you're off to jail without question. They also list many "over the counter" drugs as banned substances, and bringing them in can also land you in trouble. It is wise to bring your prescription if you have to bring medicinal drugs in, as if they are on the banned list, and you don't have a prescription, then you are in trouble.

Bizarrely enough, poppy seeds are also banned, as they are classed as opiates! So if you eat your salad sandwich at Heathrow, with poppy seeds on the bread, you will fail a drug test when you get to Dubai and off to prison you go. And they WILL show up in your blood or urine - i saw it on Brainiac (that top class science show) and they proved it by dope testing a vicar they made eat sandwhich rolls covered in poppy seeds.....

Some Radio 1 DJ fell foul of the law too - got caught with some cannabis - and he went off to jail. He did about 18 months i think, before getting pardoned by the Sheikh at Ramadan.

[edit on 8-8-2010 by BlueOrb]

[edit on 8-8-2010 by BlueOrb]

I was going to ignore this, but I do enjoy feeding trolls. It's like giving Pigeons rice, let them fill themselves up and watch them explode...

posted by nobodysavedme
Well britain is part of America too as we saved you from hitler in ww2 and gave you billions of aid money otherwise you would be all living in caves or in bombed out buildings.

Ok, firstly we're not part of the US any more than China is. You didn't save us, we saved ourselves, Hitlers plans for the UK were finished after the BoB. We didn't get "billions in Aid", we got billions in loans which had interest and conditions attached (such as giving up our Empire) which we only paid off in 2005.

Your final comment in this paragraph is just nonsense. Caves? What the hell?

posted by nobodysavedme
American laws are superior based on democratic principles as deemed by the constitution...

Superior? To whom? I find many US laws silly, outdated or just down right non sensical, but whatever floats your boat in your country. You are, of course, aware that most US law is based of English Common Law, including the Magna Carta (1257) and the Bill of Rights (1689).

posted by nobodysavedme
that is WHY millions of mexicans and other foriners want to smuggle into America every year.

Because the work pays more than ion Mexico? I am willing to bet that even of you had laws on the books banning people from Speaking Spanish and eating Taco's that Mexicans would still flood over the border. It has bugger all to do with "freedoms" and much more to do with simple economics.

posted by nobodysavedme
We have law and order.we are civilized .we have plenty of food.we have organization.nice clean sidewalks.we have security.we have systems.

Not sure if your still tirading against mexicans or just anyone here, but the vast majority of the world has the things you list above, bar some backward places in Africa.

posted by nobodysavedme
we have judiciary.

Even a "failed state" like Somalia has a Judiciary. Or is the US the only country with Judges?

posted by nobodysavedme
She was arrested by their secret police.

No, she wasn't.

posted by nobodysavedme
how do you explain all the mandatory HOMOSEXUAL SEX in MENs prisons?

BECAUSE THERE ARE NO WOMEN!

Wow..

It's MANDATORY to be gay in prison? Is that just in the US or worldwide?

I know all of this will fall on deaf ears and you'll still believe you are the world's best at everything, but at least I have made the effort to out you and your views as those of someone who would have difficulty debating with a child.

Made all the more ironic by your latter assertion to a comment made by Westcoast that the US is second to none in the debating field. Your not exactly a poster boy for your own comments here, as I have actually yet to see you engage in any real debate at all, just alot of ego rubbing and back slapping to those who you agree with.

Originally posted by BlueOrb
In effect, the British woman's story is corroborated by the fact that she has not been charged with any offence.

Trust me, if there was any evidence of her having done something, she would have had the book well and truyly thrown at her. I thought i had read that the CCTV proved she did not strip off.

Their is a charge of making a false complaint, which could have been levelled at the local woman, but that never, EVER, happens here.

Well, that doesn't corroborate her story.
It just means that she wasn't charged, even if, as you say, they would have charged her if there was any evidence; it just may be that the evidence is not conclusive or not enough to base a case on.

As far as I know, it's only the woman herself that claims that the CCTV exonerates her. I have not seen any cctv evidence, so I cannot comment on the veracity of her claims.

Originally posted by BlueOrb
In effect, the British woman's story is corroborated by the fact that she has not been charged with any offence.

Trust me, if there was any evidence of her having done something, she would have had the book well and truyly thrown at her. I thought i had read that the CCTV proved she did not strip off.

Their is a charge of making a false complaint, which could have been levelled at the local woman, but that never, EVER, happens here.

Well, that doesn't corroborate her story.
It just means that she wasn't charged, even if, as you say, they would have charged her if there was any evidence; it just may be that the evidence is not conclusive or not enough to base a case on.

As far as I know, it's only the woman herself that claims that the CCTV exonerates her. I have not seen any cctv evidence, so I cannot comment on the veracity of her claims.

I do not understand why people even visit those savage nations. Why risk being arrested or loosing your head for such a trivial thing as giving someone a kiss in public or for wearing a bikini?