Eu: In or out?

Scroll to see replies

But your rather facile analogy does not hold for EU fishing grounds.

Britain lost the 3rd Cod War to Iceland and as a result it lost its traditional fishing grounds in what became Icelandic waters.

But it does hold for fishing grounds, UK waters are a more fertile than for example, Spanish waters, hence all the fish live there.

Reply 401

nulli tertius

Original post by EuanF

But it does hold for fishing grounds, UK waters are a more fertile than for example, Spanish waters, hence all the fish live there.

I am afraid what trawlermen tend to do is overlook that large portions of the North Sea belong to the Dutch, the Danes, the Germans and the Norwegians. They overlook the huge territory belonging to the Irish; that the Faroe Islands add massively to the Danish territory. They ignore British shell-fishermen and they ignore foreign fishermen in the southern countries who are catching fish other than Atlantic whitefish.

In other words British fisherman treat everything up the beaches of our neighbours as rightfully theirs and anything that is not eaten with chips as not being fish.

Reply 402

EuanF

Original post by nulli tertius

Are you stupid or just pretending?

How is this supposed to be an argument against the fact that UK national waters are more fertile than other EU waters?

Reply 403

Snake_God

[video="youtube;J-ywMne-7lk"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-ywMne-7lk[/video]

Reply 404

Snake_God

[video="youtube;y01_rggDofA"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y01_rggDofA[/video]

Reply 405

Snake_God

[video="youtube;wG--OxNKCt8"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wG--OxNKCt8[/video]

Reply 406

kennyboy69.5

Vote in

come at me bro

Reply 407

stoltguyboo

Out.

As the people on the European Court cannot be voted out or in by me or you.

They are unelected bureaucrat who are champagne elitists.

COME OUT PEOPLE OF THE UK!

VOTE OUT LIBERATE YOURSELVES AND SAVE A TONNE OF MONEY AS WELL!

Reply 408

nulli tertius

Original post by EuanF

Are you stupid or just pretending?

How is this supposed to be an argument against the fact that UK national waters are more fertile than other EU waters?

Because the waters we have are part of the same seas; the North Sea, the North Atlantic, the Irish Sea and the English Channel as those of several other EU nations. The seas of other European nations have plentiful fish, but not the ones we particularly care about. Our trawlermen ignore the fact that 30% of our catch by value is shellfish which is virtually all taken by our fishermen.

Reply 409

nulli tertius

Original post by stoltguyboo

Out.

As the people on the European Court cannot be voted out or in by me or you.

You mean like every judge in the UK?

Reply 410

trapking

Original post by Snake_God

[video="youtube;wG--OxNKCt8"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wG--OxNKCt8[/video]

I was initially going to vote in but after watching this i'm going to vote out. Those are some solid points.

Reply 411

newpersonage

As I said, someone would attempt to minimise and deride each aspect of British culture in my list item by item.

Original post by Pmh1

Eu states don't have juries? what? I know France has Juries not sure on other countries.

"In France, a defendant is entitled to a jury trial only when prosecuted for a felony (crime in French) that is an offence which may bring least 15 years' imprisonment"

In Italy "Only serious crimes like murder can be tried by the Corte d'Assise." ie: with a perfunctory jury.

"In Sweden, juries are uncommon;"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_trial

"Germany used jury trials since medieval times, but during an Article 48 (of the Weimar Constitution) state of emergency, and about one month before the February 1924 trial of Adolf Hitler for the Beer Hall Putsch of November 1923, the Emminger Reform (a Notverordnung, or emergency decree) was passed in January 1924 abolishing their use and replacing them with a mixed system of judges and lay judges which is still used today."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judiciary_of_Germany

Common law vs civil law don't know the difference so can't argue here.

Europe used to have a legal system based on Romano-Dutch law, this was amended by that great proponent of European Union, Napoleon, who introduced the Napoleonic code over much of Europe. The Code Napoleon is a regulatory system of law imposed by state appointed judges. Guilt is assumed.

This difference in legal systems is no small matter. Should you really be voting in this referendum if the EU that you imagine is so different from the reality?

As for the other comments, you missed the point that British culture is those attributes and many more taken together and, as I noted, anyone can attack each in turn as worthless or also present in Timbuktu - many have a qualitative effect - such attacks really do miss the point that EU countries, and the UK in particular, have precious cultures.

Reply 412

newpersonage

Original post by nulli tertius

You mean like every judge in the UK?

Or every judge in the EU. Worse still, in most countries of the EU the judge is also the prosecution and the investigating officer! This will be coming to the UK a decade or two after a Remain vote.

Reply 413

newpersonage

Original post by kennyboy69.5

Vote in
come at me bro

Are you sure that the EU you imagine is the same as the reality? Did you know that most countries in the EU have judges that investigate, prosecute and then judge crimes? Did you know that the EU commission, an unelected body, proposes the laws in the EU? Did you know that the UK has a £100bn pa current account deficit with the EU now and the EU is an economic disaster for the UK?

Did you know that the EU is uniting at two speeds, a fast, Eurozone track that may have political union by 2025 and a slow Denmark and UK track that will be marginalised entirely by the Eurozone when it is united?

Did you know that the BBC, FT and Economist attended the meeting that set up "Stronger In Europe" to ensure that we are fed a bunch of lies and diversions in the referendum campaign?

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 414

username2049387

Original post by newpersonage

As I said, someone would attempt to minimise and deride each aspect of British culture in my list item by item.

In no way am I attempting to minimise or deride what you said or any aspect of British Culture all I wanted was for you too explain your points better otherwise it looks like you made groundless accusations. I argued/questioned each item individually to make it easier to follow by saying this it looks to me that you have little confidence in your own arguement and so are accusing me of minimising/deriding British culture to avoid an arguement.

Original post by newpersonage

So too an extend juries are used just not as commonly. Fair enough.

Doing some quick research on whether Jury trial or bench trial is better I want to just list the common arguments that I've seen of why jury trial is better and why it is better
Pros of a jury trial over a bench trial:

More likely to be influenced by other factors (this can be both a benefit and a con) such as how sorry a defendant is or how much damage they've caused.

Less likely to be influenced by previous similar cases

Less likely to be corrupt

(more of an issue with a judge trial but meh) Sometimes the Judges can be ****s or may have just had a bad day and could be harsher on you. (or just be unprofessional like this guy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dByhN2NAGc )

Cons of a jury over a bench trial/Pros of a bench trial:
A judge is less likely to be affected by pysical appearance, religious beliefs and race/ethnicity (apparently)

A judge is less likely too be swayed by the media (If the case is heavily reported and the media shows a bias which it sometimes does)

A judge is less likely to be swayed by weak evidence/weak cases where the prosecution has made a weak case.

Can be quicker and cheaper than jury trial.

I also saw something about if it's a complicated case/ very technical then experts may need to explain the law to the Jury what the law is. ( I found a good example of this relating to money laundering but I can't find it again sry)

Anyways both systems there Pro's and cons as for which is fairer then it depends on the person being judged a Judge is more likely to see past society biases but there is a risk that they can be unprofessional and have other biases. (Most of what I looked up will probably be about the american system I'm not sure if we have any differences that address these issues.) Based on what I have read (Some of which may not apply) Juries aren't inherently fairer that Bench trials as each have their flaws but a common theme that I saw was that jury trials can be better for a defendant if the jury is more likely to be bias towards him (I.e a well respected public figure).

Original post by newpersonage

Did some more research on the differences and I read that many places often use a mixture of both.Anyways now for my arguments after doing more research the main difference was that the Judge's in common law had the ability to alter the law slightly if it didn't cover the case properly whereas in napoleonic law they are unable to do this so it is less fluid and can be less specific.Either way you have yet to tell me why these other systems lead to unfairness all I can see is that the systems are just different (this also applies for juries as I couldn't find much saying that Judges where more likely to be unfair)

Original post by newpersonage

As for the other comments, you missed the point that British culture is those attributes and many more taken together and, as I noted, anyone can attack each in turn as worthless or also present in Timbuktu - many have a qualitative effect - such attacks really do miss the point that EU countries, and the UK in particular, have precious cultures.

We do have differences in cultures but in terms of our law making they only difference is how we go about trials neither systems seem fairer that the other just different depending on each person. Based on what you said in your post I don't see much difference between our culture and that of many Europeans (mainly western) we have slightly different systems and we're probably a more proud people but other than that not a massive difference.

Also you only really responded to two of my arguments a simple acknowledgement of the others would've been nice.

Reply 415

SaucissonSecCy

Original post by Snake_God

[video="youtube;y01_rggDofA"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y01_rggDofA[/video]

It's a great interview. The bit at 16mins just breaks my heart, I don't know how any patriot, who knows anything of our history, can vote remain, given this chance.

In

Simple :biggrin:

Original post by newpersonage

Yep knew all that and heres why i'm still in... Do you and all other students want to experience all the short term economic costs of a brexit? for example a weak pound and ****ed up markets, making it harder to get a job in the next 5 years. Its a sinister world get the stick out of your ass and try and make a living.

Reply 418

EuanF

Original post by kennyboy69.5

I won't be out of uni in the next 5 years and I intend to enter the RAF after that, so it doesn't bother me

Would you rather be remembered as the generation that took down the EU or just be totally forgotten as a useless generation?