Jump to content

3 out of 4 want HRA dumped.


Is the Human rights act good for the UK ?  

62 members have voted

  1. 1. Is the Human rights act good for the UK ?

    • Yes: Keep the Human rights act
      30
    • No: Scrap the Human right act
      32


Recommended Posts

Well according to the Sun... 3 out of 4 of us want the human rights act dumped, so I thought I would set up a poll to see if Sheffield forum users reflect the same sentiment as those who read the Sun.

 

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/4257750/Three-out-of-four-Brits-want-rights-act-dumped.html

 

 

I for 1 think its turned into a joke and has given the minority a veto over the rights of the majority. What is best for society has always been the case for hundreds of years and laws to reflect that have been in place, and amended as need be, without the need for the HRA which gives individuals rights over what's best for the general population. This is my view on it anyhow, I'm sure you all have opinions so look forward to reading them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The European Convention on Human Rights is a worthy agreement and something that we should all try and live by.

 

However, the UK Human Rights Act that insists that we abide by European Commission and Courts interpretation & implementation of that Convention is seriously flawed and allows miscarriages of true justice.

 

For example:

 

Many cases come to light when individuals gain what is often unfair protection under Article 8: Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.

 

The same Article does also allow for this 'right' to be affected by:

'... the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.'

 

I believe that when someone has been convicted of a crime, the rights/freedoms of others affected by that crime should take precedence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Article 8 is a very good example of why the HRA as it stands in process is causing so many problems. It is the most used article by foreign criminals seeking to not be automatically deported at the end of their sentance. Yet the aritcle iself is very explicit that it should not be used for such a purpose stating "There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

 

UK law is very explicit that foreign criminals (over 12 month sentances and below that in certain offence categories) should be deported and that this is conducive to the public good. The article clearly states that is a permitted exception. So why the hell are we even entertaining article 8 appeals at a cost of millions when both uk law and the echr are actually singing off the same hymm sheet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The HRA is fine, it's the abuse of it that people object to.

 

Those of you who want to scrap it should remember that the HRA was created to prevent millions of innocent people just like you being sent to the gas chambers ever again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The HRA is fine, it's the abuse of it that people object to.

 

Those of you who want to scrap it should remember that the HRA was created to prevent millions of innocent people just like you being sent to the gas chambers ever again.

 

 

I think that you may be confusing the European Convention of Human Rights with the The Human Rights Act of the UK Parliament 1998?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.