Do they? Try publishing something about the crown and pedophilia in the UK and get back to us.
US has better free speech protections than UK. But deference to the Crown and some differences in libel laws does not mean Brits are not a free people.
It's a fun exercise. 1 and 2 are sacred and the most important in the entire document. But as I have long argued in the space, having a body politic that respecks #1 above all else matters more than 2. #2 is the back up to #1.Team @PurpleBaze has all kind of guns, but they aren't free because they want to kill each other arguing over who the 12th successor to Mohamed was or some shit like that.
Do they? Try publishing something about the crown and pedophilia in the UK and get back to us.
US has better free speech protections than UK. But deference to the Crown and some differences in libel laws does not mean Brits are not a free people.
Can't carry a pocket knife, can't criticize the crown, definitely don't name your dog Hitler as a joke, pay 40% of your income to the state while your elites offshore their assets.
Do they? Try publishing something about the crown and pedophilia in the UK and get back to us.
US has better free speech protections than UK. But deference to the Crown and some differences in libel laws does not mean Brits are not a free people.
Comments
II
Can't keep any of the others without it.
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed84.asp
To wit, a "bill of rights" will read to a government as an exclusive list of the people's rights.
"Free people" is a relative term.
Alas, we took their model and improved it.