Human Rights Act

[Vivkins3]

Please could somebody explain to me exactly what advantages this piece of legislation was intended to confer on the indigenous British people? As a law-abiding citizen, I thought my Human Rights were ok BEFORE this Act was passed but it seems to be a get-out-of-jail-free card for any crook or scum who wants to break the law.

[Sharingan]

It ensures YOUR rights against government or other intervention which might otherwise curtail your peaceful enjoyment of your existence- for example it guarantees your right to a family life free of hinderence. I wouldn't like to see a world where we didn't have it.

[society]

"it seems to be a get-out-of-jail-free card for any crook or scum who wants to break the law."

How so?

[jackthehat]

Educate yourself here.......

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Convention_on_Human_Rights

[Vivkins3]

Sharingan - At the time the Human Rights Act was introduced, I had lived in England (born here) about 57 years and never had any problem which needed the introduction of new legislation about my Human Rights. Society - I can't believe you've not heard of the abuses of the Act, (Abu Qatada, the guy who stabbed Phillip Lawrence etc etc ect etc).

[Gavmacp]

My father fought in WW11 and lost a leg.
When I was a kid he was humiliated due to his disability. I remember asking him if he angry/upset. He said no! That was why he fought. So that this idiot could freely humiliate my father without fear of repercussion.

[bazwillrun]

@sharingan

youre perfect for this site...with your do-gooder leftie liberal naivety

[Vivkins3]

Sorry but I don't intend to wade through pages of Wikipedia legislative information - I just wanted somebody to tell me what rights it conferred on me that I didn't already have please.

[Vivkins3]

All it seems to have done is to give murderers, rapists and terrorists the right to live here - MY Human Rights to live in a land where such people are not allowed to walk the streets seem to have vanished.

[Sharingan]

Well it depends on who you are and what you do. In your 57 years it would have been illegal to be gay, and lawful to discriminate against ethnic groups and women. Even if the law of the country changed back to that ( which really won't happen) the Human rights act would still protect you against discrimination and harassment.

[jim360]

The thing about Human rights is that they apply to anyone who is a human. The clue's in the name. People who are criminals don't stop becoming humans just because of the crime.

Most law-abiding citizens will never have any cause to protest about their human rights being violated, but that doesn't mean that the law is not important. 50 years ago it wasn't a human right to practise your sexuality if you were gay or bisexual. Today in many countries it still isn't. Nor is there freedom of religion, or expression.

Because in the UK we made many of the necessary breakthroughs in Human Rights before the law came in, it seems to be mostly concerned with criminals. That's unfortunate, and we should perhaps be more careful in the way the law is seen to be applied. Cases like Qatada's have dragged on so long that it sets up that impression of being a protection for criminals or other "undesirables". Which is sad, because the law is actually very important.

Anyone who is Human has, or should have, Human Rights.

[Vivkins3]

No it wasn't illegal to be gay before the Act came in - witness Freddie Mercury, Elton John etc etc etc - all openly gay. The Racial Discrimination Act was in place to prevent racial abuse ... so getting back to my original question, please can anybody tell me what advantages it was intended to confer on law-abiding British people?

[tonyav]

Wasn't it something that the E U sort of forced upon us ?.

[Sharingan]

You've had it explained to you twice and clearly don't want to understand so I'm not commenting further on it for you, it wasn't a question you posted but a desire to rant against something you don't personally like. Have a nice day xx

[jim360]

The answer to that is, hopefully, that you will never notice. But then many Laws tend not to have an effect on the law-abiding. That does not stop them from being important.

[jackthehat]

You don't want to educate yourself?

I'm not sure any of the Articles cover 'The Right to be Wilfully Ignorant', but I could be wrong.

[Vivkins3]

Jackthehat - I was after a simplistic answer - you obviously can't give one other than pasting a link to Wikipedia.

[Vivkins3]

If all you can do is sarcasm please get off my question.

[jackthehat]

Is this more to your liking?

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/42/schedule/1

[Sharingan]

It's not 'your' question, it's in the public domain on a question and answer site and hopefully some schoolchild will come along who is ignorant of the legislation and understand the simple explanation that Jim, Jack and I gave and thus benefit even if you don't want to.