British Law

One thing I've noticed about British laws since I've lived in London (and it has to be noted that NZ law is originally based on British law) is that the British tend to legislate for specific instances rather than broader reasons.

An example for this is there are laws effecting parks...and laws effecting Royal Parks. Why do there need to be separate laws - stuffed if I know?!

This can be increasingly stupid when you start to wonder a) why the law wasn't implemented in a universal nature in the first place and b) that when it does need wider application it requires a new law (and all the legislative hassle to go along with it).

This has come to light recently in a spate of shootings in South London - we've had about 4 in the last few weeks. It has to be pointed out that British people (like NZ people) generally don't own guns and are not allowed to. This is so we don't go around shooting people all the time and generally works a treat.

Well, to address this spate of gun crime effecting mainly young men, the Prime Minister Tony Blair (and some other politicians) want to change an existing law which makes it possible to send a person to jail for 5 years if they are illegally carrying a gun. The existing law has the proviso that the law effects people over 21 (I'm guessing that that may be the case because you can't get a gun licence under 21).

Now, this law was most likely introduced to catch people who don't have a gun licence and can you imagine the law making process - "Hmmm, maybe we should let teenagers roam around with guns? That's OK isn't it?". So why with the age limit?!

Now they're talking about changing the law so the "limit" is reduced to being 17 years or older. When all the murders have effected people under 17! Are these people stupid or what?