Muda69 Posted June 14, 2019 Share Posted June 14, 2019 https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/britains-unexplained-wealth-orders-give-the-state-too-much-power Quote It's like, "Your papers, please," but for things you own. Authorities in Britain have begun trying out a new police power called unexplained wealth orders under a law that took effect last year. The police go to a court and say you're living way above any known legitimate income. The judge then signs an order compelling you to show that your possessions (whether a house, fancy car, or jewelry) have been obtained honestly and not with dirty money. In the meantime, the boat or artwork or other assets get frozen, and you can't sell them until you've shown you obtained them innocently. The kicker: The burden of proof falls on you, not the government. If you don't prove the funds were clean, Her Majesty may be presumed entitled to keep the goodies. ... The new British law doesn't allow the police to seize just anyone's assets. The target has to fall into one of two categories. The first is those a judge finds to be reasonably suspected of involvement in serious crime, or connected to such a person. That doesn't sound so bad, but remember that "serious crime" can mean lots of things, not just being the next Bernie Madoff. For example, in the opinion of our own government it's a serious crime to offer Americans online gambling from overseas servers, even if you run an honest house and pay all the winning bets promptly. The second group is called Politically Exposed Persons, and it includes foreign officials from countries outside the European Economic Area, plus their relatives and associates. Obviously, a law like this does help in catching some baddies. Specifically, it gives the authorities major new leverage in cases where a suspect has not yet been convicted of anything. Proceeding carefully, authorities have so far chosen a target likely to command little sympathy. But advocates want this to be the start of hundreds of seizure actions against other rich foreigners in the British capital. Some are already calling for bringing a law like this to the United States, and maybe we're halfway there already. Asset forfeiture laws, blessed by the Supreme Court, already let police seize your property on suspicion of involvement in a crime and make you go to court to get it back. We've been chipping away at financial privacy in this country for decades, through Know Your Customer, suspicious-activity reports, and FATCA (expatriate tax) rules. The reversal of the presumption of innocence troubles many Britons, too. For the moment, use of the orders is limited to a few elite law enforcement agencies. One of those agencies, however, is Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs — the tax collectors. It's not wrong to worry about where this idea is headed. Police State. Why anybody who values personal freedom would actually want to live in Great Britain is beyond me. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanteEstonia Posted June 17, 2019 Share Posted June 17, 2019 On 6/14/2019 at 5:52 AM, Muda69 said: https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/britains-unexplained-wealth-orders-give-the-state-too-much-power Police State. Why anybody who values personal freedom would actually want to live in Great Britain is beyond me. Because Britain is free from all of the things that make the USA crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muda69 Posted June 17, 2019 Author Share Posted June 17, 2019 3 hours ago, DanteEstonia said: Because Britain is free from all of the things that make the USA crap. An enumerated list would of these "things" would be greatly appreciated. Also if Great Britain is so great why haven't you moved there yet, Dante? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanteEstonia Posted June 18, 2019 Share Posted June 18, 2019 On 6/17/2019 at 2:03 PM, Muda69 said: Also if Great Britain is so great why haven't you moved there yet, Dante? The weather. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Impartial_Observer Posted June 19, 2019 Share Posted June 19, 2019 On 6/17/2019 at 1:53 PM, DanteEstonia said: Because Britain is free from all of the things that make the USA crap. If dental hygiene is indicative of their free healthcare.....I’ll take a pass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muda69 Posted June 19, 2019 Author Share Posted June 19, 2019 15 hours ago, DanteEstonia said: The weather. Well I guess Great Britain ought to make a law to force the weather to be like you want it to be, right? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Muda69 Posted June 20, 2019 Author Share Posted June 20, 2019 Britain keeps knocking them out of the park, this time with an assault on free speech: https://reason.com/2019/06/19/the-u-k-has-banned-harmful-gender-stereotypes-in-advertisements/ Quote Men can't cook, and women are bad at sports. Those stereotypes are just two of many that, as of last week, are illegal in British advertisements. Indeed, the United Kingdom's Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) instituted a ban on gender stereotypes "that are likely to cause harm, or serious or widespread offence." According to the ASA's overview, setups that will likely be in violation of the law include but are not limited to: An ad that depicts a man with his feet up and family members creating mess around a home while a woman is solely responsible for cleaning up the mess. An ad that depicts a man or a woman failing to achieve a task specifically because of their gender e.g. a man's inability to change nappies [diapers]; a woman's inability to park a car. Where an ad features a person with a physique that does not match an ideal stereotypically associated with their gender, the ad should not imply that their physique is a significant reason for them not being successful, for example in their romantic or social lives. An ad that seeks to emphasise the contrast between a boy's stereotypical personality (e.g. daring) with a girl's stereotypical personality (e.g. caring) needs to be handled with care. An ad aimed at new mums which suggests that looking attractive or keeping a home pristine is a priority over other factors such as their emotional wellbeing. The ban was implemented following an ASA review which concluded that stereotypical depictions pave the way for "real-world psychological, physical, economic, social and political harm for individuals and groups." Specifically, it mentions that the media portrayals may influence which toys children play with, "which can have long-term impacts." In adults, a stereotypically feminine rendering of women's roles can decrease their "motives and ambition, attitudes to involvement in politics, performance on maths tests and preferences for leadership roles." Certain scenarios are exempt from the new law. An ad may depict "a woman doing the shopping" or "a man doing DIY," so long as it is not presented in a light deemed insulting by the ASA. It also permits gender stereotypes when the ad explicitly challenges them. Gender stereotypes "constrict people's choices," says the ASA review. Yet the ban itself does precisely that, as it limits companies from advertising their products as they see fit and shields consumers from ideas associated with wrongthink. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts