[BundEnhamma]

Then you should go ahead and let the government listen in on all your phone calls as you are obviously not discussing anything illegal while on the phone, so why should it matter?

Sorry if i went on a rant, it's just when people say "you got nothing to hide, why not?" it bothers me.

Well put and the way I see it if you have nothing to hide then there is even less reason for a policeman to be invading your privacy. There seems to be even less reason to give up your rights to a cop if you've done nothing wrong and are a law abiding citizen.

The U.K has a bill of rights that although not constitutional, are still deemed law and are somewhat similar to the laws in the U.S.

in fact the U.S based it's laws for the most part on the U.K

Come on that's a bit of a stretch. Many of those things found in the Constitution are a direct reaction to Britain and an avoidance of it's system of governance. The rights mentioned in this video are amongst those. The American Constitution does something that the British have yet to do and I don't just mean rejecting Monarchy, it puts the people first before the Government and that is what sets it apart.

I'm not trying to undermine the significance of the British Bill of Rights, The Charter of Liberties or the Magna Carta but those were all documents written by the powers that be telling people what they would allow them to expect of their them. Conversely, The American Constitution is a document from the people telling those that will govern them where the limits of their powers are and is the natural successor to the English Bill of Rights, but it is unfortunately not a step that England ever managed to achieve.

For instance look at these examples:

1st Amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That's good, establishes my right as an individual to free speech and expression.

English Bill of Rights: The freedom of speech in Parliament, in that proceedings in Parliament were not to be questioned in the courts or in any body outside Parliament itself

Doesn't really do me any favors but allows MPs to lie, slander and avoid civil prosecution.

2nd Amendment: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Establishes my right as an individual to own a firearm for the defense of myself, my rights and my property

English Bill of Rights: Freedom (for Protestants) to have arms for defence, as allowed by law

Which just goes to show how weak the Bill of Rights was some politicians in the UK would even like to take away the freedom to own an air rifle.

[Hitfaromarf]

[mybooboo]

That's Benjamin Franklin you better recognize!

Keep in mind you shouldn't use quotes without giving credit, it's rude.

Also, when you quote such a thing to defend you position try to use something a little more current. This particular quote was before there was drug traffickers and cars.

While i do agrea that i should have said who the quote was from, keep in mind i was also not taking credit for it either. As for having something more current, it shouldn't matter the time the quote is from, it's still a valid quote. Times change, idea's like that dont' have to change with time.

[kesFockplek]

In all honesty I believe the reason politicians can trample on the U.K brill of rights is simply down to lack of awareness in the British public.

American schools are always harping on about "the constitution" and "our rights". I can't remember a single thing mentioned about "our rights" when I attended school growing up in the U.K.

Yes, a lot of the laws in the U.S basically enhance the existing U.K legislation, the difference is, in America people kick up a stink if someone even farts in the direction of bending the rules slightly.

In the UK things are up for interpretation, in America everyone has a pretty good idea of what their rights mean to them.

That said, both countries us the Anglo system of law, as does most of the anglosphere, therefore there are very little differences when things actually come to court.

[Intory]

Wow. I would NEVER consent to this! If the police came to my house without ANY evidence that my son or daughter had done something wrong, but wanted to search my house anyway, I'd give them an earful and tell them that the next time I see them, they'd better have a warrant in hand! I would be so insulted over this. Just the fact that they want me to waive my rights when they have no evidence of a crime would push me off the deep end! The sad part is, is that plenty of people will allow them to do it. Rights don't go away over night. They start small, eroding ever so slightly until people don't even realize that they once had them. Take a little here, give a little there, and before you know it, your right has been dissolved. [thumbdown] And some people wonder why I despise the police...

Boston police are launching a program that will call upon parents in high-crime neighborhoods to allow detectives into their homes, without a warrant, to search for guns in their children's bedrooms.
The program, which is already raising questions about civil liberties, is based on the premise that parents are so fearful of gun violence and the possibility that their own teenagers will be caught up in it that they will turn to police for help, even in their own households.
In the next two weeks, Boston police officers who are assigned to schools will begin going to homes where they believe teenagers might have guns. The officers will travel in groups of three, dress in plainclothes to avoid attracting negative attention, and ask the teenager's parent or legal guardian for permission to search. If the parents say no, police said, the officers will leave... http://www.boston.com/news/local/art...guns_in_homes/

[BundEnhamma]

That said, both countries us the Anglo system of law, as does most of the anglosphere, therefore there are very little differences when things actually come to court.

But one important difference one is a (decrepit) Monarchy and the other is a Republic. The jury system maybe similar but for instance it would be a very different case if I was stopped with my handgun in my car here and if I was stopped with a handgun in the UK for instance.

[assonomaf]

I want to party with that Troy guy. Dude's a badass.