Torbay weblog davecathy

Jul 22, 2006 at 23:59 o\clock

MEGAN'S LAW

by: davecathy

I will put my head on the block anmd my reputation on the line with a short prediction.

Jerry Sutcliffe MP, a junior government minister, is at this moment leading a team from the Home Office on a visit to the USA to investigate whether Megan's Law would be a suitable way for Britain to go.

My prediction is that he will return and anounce, after a suitable interval, that Megan's Law, while it has certain merits, would not work in this country, at least not without major changes that would make it unrecognisable. Lynch law will not be the way this country is governed. 

Comments for this entry:

  1. insider2 wrote at Jul 24, 2006 at 01:24 o\clock:I hope your head and reputation are not in any great danger! Megan\'s Law does not work in the United States and it certainly will not work in the United Kindgdom. It is a textbook example of a law made in haste and repented at leisure, a law made as a knee-jerk reaction to a very bad situation, in short a law typical of the United States.



    See my earlier piece on this at the link below:



    http://www.blogigo.com/Insider/entry/58823
  2. davecathy wrote at Jul 24, 2006 at 08:20 o\clock:I agree with you, it is a thouroughly bad law. I hope that I am proved right, but I get the feeling that the UK government are going through the motions to placate public opinion as stirred up by the tabloid press, lead by Rupert Murdoch. You cannot or dare not ignore the power that man wields, and have to play your cards very craftily to stop him taking over the whole bloody world. Every single expert on the law or on criminality or on child abuse all say that such a law would be a disaster. I am confident Blair ain\'t so stupid, but is just playing along to minimise the loud voices of the mob, Same with such things as the anti- abortionists, you have at least to pay lip service to their vengeance tactics.
  3. insider2 wrote at Jul 24, 2006 at 16:09 o\clock:In my opinion, Tony Blair is a good man who has made some bad, bad choices, although I do believe in almost every case he thought he was doing his best for his country. Right now he has a superb opportunity to distance himself and Britain from Goerge Bush and America. He needs to stand up strongly as the voice of reason over the current Israeli murder and mayhem in Lebanon and Gaza and the current United States murder and mayhem in Iraq. I\'m hoping to do a piece later today on Britain From The Outside.
  4. davecathy wrote at Jul 24, 2006 at 18:46 o\clock:Trouble is, when Blair agreed to support (conditionally) Bush in Iraq, naturally you get tarred with the same brush as Bush. If he sticks with it, he is criticised by half the country, and if he distances himself from Bush, he is criticised by the other half for being a turncoat or fair-weather friend.

    At least, Blair is all for forcing Israel to accept the 2 state idea, while Bush is for not forcing Israel to do anything.

    If a solution is arrived at that means NATO soldiers going in to S. Lebanon to stop the fighting, you can bet that Blair will be the first to offer troops, as usual to put his money where his mouth is
  5. insider2 wrote at Jul 24, 2006 at 21:32 o\clock:In the words of the old Kenny Rogers song \"You gotta know when to hold \'em and know when to fold \'em, know when to walk away and know when to run\". The so-called special relationship between America and Britain has become hopelessly one-sided (in America\'s favour) and has outlived its usefulness. I would say your half and half assesment of criticism would be more like 75-25 or higher in favour of leaving Bush to hang himself.
  6. davecathy wrote at Jul 24, 2006 at 23:42 o\clock:How about if we agree on 60/40

Log in to comment:

Attention: many blogigo features are only available to registered users. Register now without any obligations and get your free weblog!