Brexit - Time to scrap it and start again?

[Alastor]

Honestly?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe...arms_Directive

There you go. That was easy.

I'm not sure I get that. Restricting civilian firearms is bothering you? But the UK apparently has much stricter laws in place than the EU minimum set by that directive requires anyway.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firear...United_Kingdom

[TheLeft]

Honestly?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Europe...arms_Directive

There you go. That was easy.

And no, outsourcing your economy to member EU state is actually TANKING your economy and infrastructure, actually develop domestic industries mean you actually have a good economic base.

And yes, they DON'T want to be subjected to EU laws.

If that is genuinely the reason, then you're barking up the wrong tree with that. The UK's firearms laws are far stronger than the minimums laid out by the EU. To quote your own wiki article:

Certain countries such as the United Kingdom are thus unaffected as they have maintained more stringent gun control laws than those effectively set as a minimum by the European Union

The fact that you can't go out and buy a gun has nothing to with the EU and everything to do with the UK government. If you were a serious gun enthusiast you'd know that, as it took me less than two minutes to debunk your claim.

So if that is the only reason why you don't want to be subjected to EU laws, then I suggest you do a little more research and re-evaluate your opinion.

[REhorror]

I'm not sure I get that. Restricting civilian firearms is bothering you? But the UK apparently has much stricter laws in place than the EU minimum set by that directive requires anyway.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firear...United_Kingdom

Yes, that is one law I cannot be subjected to. Every civilians are to be armed.

And the fact UK has stricter laws do not mean additional EU firearm laws are okay.

[Alastor]

Yes, that is one law I cannot be subjected to. Every civilians are to be armed.

And the fact UK has stricter laws do not mean additional EU firearm laws are okay.

Do you not understand that this argument is nonsensical? The directive sets a minimum required standard of control. The UK already exceeds that standard. If you want every civilian to be armed in the UK, try convincing the UK first, before complaining about the EU.

[REhorror]

Do you not understand that this argument is nonsensical? The directive sets a minimum required standard of control. The UK already exceeds that standard. If you want every civilian to be armed in the UK, try convincing the UK first, before complaining about the EU.

I don't think you understand the point.

UK firearms laws are 1.

EU laws are 2.

I don't want to abolish 1, then work my way to abolish 2. Why do that when I can have just 1 to be abolished?

[Jom]

Yes, that is one law I cannot be subjected to. Every civilians are to be armed.

And the fact UK has stricter laws do not mean additional EU firearm laws are okay.

If you want to own a firearm, I wouldn't recommend living in the UK, unless you want to go into farming and are happy with a shotgun.

I don't think you understand the point.

UK firearms laws are 1.

EU laws are 2.

I don't want to abolish 1, then work my way to abolish 2. Why do that when I can have just 1 to be abolished?

And how likely do you think it is that the UK decides to abolish/alter its firearms laws?

[REhorror]

If you want to own a firearm, I wouldn't recommend living in the UK, unless you want to go into farming and are happy with a shotgun.



And how likely do you think it is to abolish/alter UK firearms laws?

You need to have a gun friendly government. That's all it takes.

Now to abolish/alter EU laws, you need MULTI gun friendly governments.

[Alastor]

I don't think you understand the point.

UK firearms laws are 1.

EU laws are 2.

I don't want to abolish 1, then work my way to abolish 2. Why do that when I can have just 1 to be abolished?

Well first of all because you can't have 1 abolished. Based on the fact the UK is even stricter than the EU requires, clearly the UK doesn't want you armed a lot more than the EU doesn't want you armed. And besides had the UK not agreed to 2 it wouldn't have a 2. But why wouldn't it agree? When it serves their purpose.

You want that changed? Try changing the UK first because, as is rather common with brexit arguments, your problem is with the UK, not the EU.

[Jom]

You need to have a gun friendly government. That's all it takes.

Now to abolish/alter EU laws, you need MULTI gun friendly governments.

And when was the last time a mainstream party mentioned anything about loosening gun controls in their manifesto?

I must say, of all the subjects people have raised in order to complain about the EU, this is one of the oddest.

[Aexodus]

Article 13 is certainly one law I don’t want to follow. However it’s less about the substance of the laws and more about the principle of them being not decided in Westminster.

[Alastor]

Article 13 is certainly one law I don’t want to follow. However it’s less about the substance of the laws and more about the principle of them being not decided in Westminster.

So it's the location where the vote takes place that matters? Yes article 13 was approved by the European Parliament in Strasbourg. The European Parliament is made up of MEPs elected by the EU electorate, which includes the UK electorate. It was then confirmed by the European Council, with the UK being one of the states voting in favour.

[Aexodus]

Well yes Alastor the principle of it being foreign law is important.

[Alastor]

Well yes Alastor the principle of it being foreign law is important.

How can it be a foreign law when your representatives put it in place?

BTW if the UK demanded some sessions of the European Parliament to be held in London in order to avoid Brexit, I think the EU would be willing to consider that. Solving your location problem. I mean it's kind of petty but they did do it for France.

[Jom]

Well yes Alastor the principle of it being foreign law is important.

If you're part of the organisation that implemented it, it's not foreign. That's a truth that some people have never reconciled themselves with: if you're part of the decision, it's not the EU imposing anything on you, it's you deciding along with the rest of your neighbours that something would be a good idea and improve trade, improve the lot of European citizens (people tend to be happier when not being shot at, for example), and that you're reaping the benefits. It's not a foreign overlord telling you what to do at all.

[Aexodus]

I wouldn’t agree with that, as EU law is supreme over British law as of the European Constitution/Treaty of Lisbon.

[Jom]

I wouldn’t agree with that, as EU law is supreme over British law as of the European Constitution/Treaty of Lisbon.

Why should you consider them as being completely distinct anyway? They're more complementary.

Plus, elected officials have the opportunity to debate and amend EU law at two stages before it enters into force: in the Council of Ministers and the Parliament.

[TheLeft]

I wouldn’t agree with that, as EU law is supreme over British law as of the European Constitution/Treaty of Lisbon.

I think you are missing the point.

If the UK helps write the law, approves it at the European Parliament and the ratifies it in the House of Commons, it's hardly a foreign law and certainly isn't imposed on us at all.

[Muizer]

You mean, people complaining about being subservient to Brussels do so by the same logic as the Scots that object to being subject to UK law

[Aexodus]

It doesn’t matter if UK delegates are involved to be honest.

If you don’t understand my point, then you don’t understand why people voted to leave in the first place.

https://lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/0...voted-and-why/

[Jom]

UK delegates taking decisions are equivalent to decisions being taken in the UK. What difference does geography make as long as the decision-makers are elected by the UK population? It makes me question whether some of these people knew how EU directives are actually adopted in the first place, or whether they bought into newspaper headlines that scream about EU bureaucrats deciding everything for them without being elected.