Lack of Olympic Cycling Spectators

[mr_hippo]

FM - you are the expert of answering questions with questions.
You talk of human rights such as freedom of expression and equality under the law. Do you have those in the UK?
If freedom of expression existed then there would be no need for slander and libel laws or DA Notice laws (formerly D Notice).
Equality under the law? Joe Soap commits a motoring offence and is fined £1000 and banned for 5 years; a media or sports celebrity commits the same offence and gets a caution and no ban, is that equality?
I said why it is impossible to answer hypothetical questions so you just keep posting them.
You asked "If you were subject to imprisonment, torture, or execution because of an unjust law, would you think this was fair or right?" I will answer your question but not hypothetically.
In 1917, on the Western Front, there was a young corporal - married with one child and a second due in 3 months times. His company was ordered over the top on a dawn raid but he was rooted to the spot - he couldn't move. Call it shell shock or PTSS or whatever. He was taken behind the lines, court-martialled and executed for cowardice in the face of the enemy.
His widow was very reluctant to talk about it but she eventually said "It was war, he could have been killed in any number of ways. The question of right or wrong does not come into it, it was the law at the time'
Who was the corporal's widow? My maternal grandmother and the unborn child was my Mum.
So think very, very carefully about asking that question again.

 

[Flying_Monkey]

FM - you are the expert of answering questions with questions.
You talk of human rights such as freedom of expression and equality under the law. Do you have those in the UK?
If freedom of expression existed then there would be no need for slander and libel laws or DA Notice laws (formerly D Notice).
Equality under the law? Joe Soap commits a motoring offence and is fined £1000 and banned for 5 years; a media or sports celebrity commits the same offence and gets a caution and no ban, is that equality?

Why would you think I would approve of unjust laws anywhere? You seem to be under the impression that people 'represent' the law in their country and automatically approve of everything where they happen to live. That is rather a strange basis to judge anything. I object to many things about the law in the UK. Indeed being a security and surveillance researcher a lot of my research and activism specifically concerns this. And I have broken the law in the UK many times when I felt it to be necessary.

There is undoubtedly more freedom in the UK than in China, despite its faults, just as there is more security in China than in Somalia. However I don't 'represent' the UK state or have to answer for it any more than you 'represent' the Thai state and have to answer for it.

I said why it is impossible to answer hypothetical questions so you just keep posting them.

It isn't impossible to answer them - it's called thinking. And indeed your story is an answer of a sort.

You asked "If you were subject to imprisonment, torture, or execution because of an unjust law, would you think this was fair or right?" I will answer your question but not hypothetically.
In 1917, on the Western Front, there was a young corporal - married with one child and a second due in 3 months times. His company was ordered over the top on a dawn raid but he was rooted to the spot - he couldn't move. Call it shell shock or PTSS or whatever. He was taken behind the lines, court-martialled and executed for cowardice in the face of the enemy.
His widow was very reluctant to talk about it but she eventually said "It was war, he could have been killed in any number of ways. The question of right or wrong does not come into it, it was the law at the time'
Who was the corporal's widow? My maternal grandmother and the unborn child was my Mum.
So think very, very carefully about asking that question again.

It's a moving story and thanks for telling it. But that is your grandmother's opinion. I disagree. So what's your opinion? Are you avoiding the question again or do you think the law is always right whatever it is?

I'll return the favour by telling you another story. The Jewish family of a good friend of mine (now deceased) were sent to a concentration camp in the early 1940s - because it was the law. Fortunately some compassionate people broke the law by helping my friend's parents escape capture and so he eventually ended up in Britain where he lived a long and worthwhile life. Indeed a huge war was faught all over the world partly to prevent the imposition of such laws on others. Five million of my friend's co-religionists (an indeed some of my family, most of whom had luckily fled persecution from an earlier set of pogroms against Jews and were already in the UK) were exterminated and up to five million others of other beliefs and ethnic backgrounds too.

The law in that country at that time was behind the exterminators. Do you think that was justified too? I don't. I think laws have to be judged on their fairness, their morality and also their conformity to recognised international standards that should be the same for all people. Humanity is working that way - the UN Charter is a start, the laws on Crimes Against Humanity, the International Criminal Court and so on.

Perhaps it is you who needs to think rather more carefully...

 

[zimzum42]

I agree with FM there, there ought to be absolute standards...

But I still reckon people are hypercritical of China. I wouldn't mind if only they would be consistently hypercritical of every other state in the world. Give Tibet back to the Tibetans and there would still be those who would have a problem with something there. It's not like the place would automatically become some haven of perfection and justice!

 

[Flying_Monkey]

Give Tibet back to the Tibetans and there would still be those who would have a problem with something there. It's not like the place would automatically become some haven of perfection and justice!

Of course not - but they should at least have the choice and the chance.