DeletedUser
Guest
lol... A retard is someone that claims a) then support his claim with something that relates to B)....
Matt?.. you decide
Matt claims: It would take millions to pass a law
Matt then supports this claim with: List of legal battles costing 10s millions...
Now, I'd never call anyone a retard...
But surely someone that isn't a complete idiot understands that a court rules based on the laws that exist. The cost of creating a law, is no where near a million... A study in America found the cost to be less then $1,000, obviously the process in the Britain is different but as the founding fathers based the American government and legal system on the English system any sane person can understand why it would not cost 100,000 x more in the uk...
That one thing I bolded made me lol. I'm glad you've decided to do some tiny research in something you know nothing about, but let me assure you that the legal system in the UK is FAR different to the legal system in America. Christ, all you need to do is watch Judge Judy to figure that out /FACEPALM.
Ok, I will once again explain... Never mind CBA. I'll quote myself, it's quite clear that you only see what you want to see so I'll just have to show you again.
Let me briefly elaborate on Case Law:1) There are 3 types of law in Britain.
Considering that you're an idiot, I'll have to point out that such a law will have to be passed through either parliament or Court. I'm guessing you'd understand why it would take millions if not tens of millions for it to be passed through court? Oh ofcourse not, you're a fool.The first and most common are Bye-laws. These are laws such as Dog litter fines, created by local councils and businesses. Cheap to create.
The second are statutory laws. Example: The Road Traffic Act - These are laws created in Government.
The third is Case Law (common law). Judges make these laws. Considering the media attention and controversy surrounding the sex thing the likely way to create the law here is getting it to the supreme court. Which would take many years.
Many many years = Many many fees.
Although it's possible for ministers to amend laws - Which technically would be happening, nobody other than mancunia would think that situation is even plausible. The law would be discussed (In considerable length) in the Commons. They will then vote on it, the law will then go to the House of Lords. Then they vote on it. Finally the law will need the Queens signature. This would not cost less than a million.
2. Erm... My scenario did not include anyone underage (Lrn2Read) It included the inevitable mess with the "bands" proposed.
Why don't you:
Do your research
Read what you're replying to.
Make sense. "Why don't you check the HUGE truth"? WTH does that even mean. You mean whole truth? idk.
A High Court Judge could create law (But it would be unlikely due to the controversy over the age consent thing). In any-case in no way did I insinuate laws (In general) cost millions.
I take it English isn't your first language, because that made no sense.If Matt, in your unclear what you meant to say was that the total cost of a change to the law can be in the millions then yes, it can...
What? :icon_confused:So lets not have any laws as they cost too much money...
Now that would be a retarded thing to say...