Law.
Refusing to fill out the census
- Thread starter FabienO
- Start date
Law.
That's got nothing to do with it. They wouldn't do that. If we're talking dream land here, you might aswell ask if we'd be happy to shoot our parents once we hit age 21 due to it being a legal requirement. You can't compare forced sperm donation to filling out a form.
Associate
- Joined
- 20 Jun 2005
- Posts
- 457
- Location
- Oxfordshire at the mo'
I didn't enter into a contract to decide or agree to live here, and neither did anyone else... What a load of rubbish!
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Jun 2010
- Posts
- 3,251
Actually, just under two decades ago it used to be the case the police only took biometric data at the point of being charged with a crime.
Now, thanks to last labour government, biometrics are taken immediately even if the case ends up as NFA (No further action)
Forcing all males to make a deposit of semen on the grounds that 'it might help detect a couple of rapists' isn't that much a leap from where we are now.
Last edited:
No, your parents did. And while you lived with them I'm sure they filled out the forms right? Now that you decided to get your own home in the UK it's your turn.
Soldato
- Joined
- 30 Nov 2005
- Posts
- 3,084
- Location
- London
What a tool.
He's probably wearing a tinfoil hat while talking to that woman.
He's probably wearing a tinfoil hat while talking to that woman.
As in eye scanners and fingerprints? That's not quite the same as forcing all males living in the uk to donate sperm every 6 months :/
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Jun 2010
- Posts
- 3,251
DNA
And yes, i know a retired officer who served in the force and his farther before him.
Not everybody in the force is happy with the carte blanche changes to moral/ethical issues
Last edited:
But you enjoy the benefits of doing so. We're all born in a period of history where we cannot decide how to run things. Hundreds of thousands of people have already fought and died to carve out and legislate the way things are. There is not point fighting against it because it will get you nowhere. Whilst I agree with the man that in an ideal world, borders wouldn't exist and nor would I have to do anything I didn't consent to. However, we're born in the time we are with the laws that are and society the way it is. Part of being a functioning adult is to accept these boundaries for what they are and instead learn to pick appropriate battles and chip-away at our chains where and when we can. Taking on the fight the man is over principle alone is stupid as it won't achieve anything tangable except martyring himself.
In the real world, we're born into a society with a code-of-conduct wether we like it or not. It's just the way of things. Of course he has a choice to no give his details, but in doing so he's choosing to be fined up to £1,000 because through virtue of living here he is bound to the same laws which everyone else is bound to that help society function and also protect the rights he does enjoy. If he realised what the census actually goes towards doing, rather than focusing on the pathetic Lockhead argument, he might realise that all he's doing is throwing his toys out of the pram. The census is hardly intrusive. It's just quantifiable data to help create fucture policy and legislation and also a fantastic insight for academics to understand current society and thus help progress it towards his very ideal.
The census is not comparable to biometrics. That's like comparing apples to oranges.
The man needs to get over himself.
In the real world, we're born into a society with a code-of-conduct wether we like it or not. It's just the way of things. Of course he has a choice to no give his details, but in doing so he's choosing to be fined up to £1,000 because through virtue of living here he is bound to the same laws which everyone else is bound to that help society function and also protect the rights he does enjoy. If he realised what the census actually goes towards doing, rather than focusing on the pathetic Lockhead argument, he might realise that all he's doing is throwing his toys out of the pram. The census is hardly intrusive. It's just quantifiable data to help create fucture policy and legislation and also a fantastic insight for academics to understand current society and thus help progress it towards his very ideal.
The census is not comparable to biometrics. That's like comparing apples to oranges.
The man needs to get over himself.
I'd like to think the parliamentary process would prevent such a law, besides, working under "what ifs" is a stupid way of arguing and doesn't help you make a point at all.
What laws do you break then quite happily? And where do you draw a line with laws you don't break? Should criminals be released because they're merely expressing their individuality and besides, it was a "stoopid rule" anyway?
So if I decide I want to drive the wrong way round the motorway that's fine because 'I don't want to obey the law'?
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Jun 2010
- Posts
- 3,251
Somebody refusing to give up a semen sample wont get a lass raped. Driving the wrong way on the motorway will get you, and others around you killed.
Hardly comparable.
Associate
- Joined
- 10 Sep 2008
- Posts
- 1,656
Most laws don't require the people to do anything, they sit in the background protecting us/helping us passively. But the census requires us to do something, which makes it invasive, not as bad as jury service which holds (imprisons if you like) us for many days at a time, in the past we've had conscription as well, all things that were for the good of the people, not so good if you're the person stuck doing the non optional duties though.
His example was equally as extreme. Comparing filling in a simple form once every 10 years to being forced to give a sperm sample every 6 months?
Anyway so which laws do we not have to abide to then if 'we don't want to'? Do you have a list so I know where the line is drawn?
Yes agree. Much better is to firstly not answer the door but if they do catch you off guard, just play dumb and say you forgot and will do it and keep stalling them.
Last edited:
All I can say is twit...
1. I have not entered/signed a contract to accept the speed limit so I can go down the motorway at 100mph....yeah right.
2. My wife traced her family tree back to the 1700s using censuses. Imagine in 100 years his great grandson is doing the same, so he asks his mum about her grandad. Your grandad was a plonker so we know nothing about him apart from this very low res youtube video (it was all the rage back in the day) and didnt fill out the census, now the entire family is poor/dying because he got fined £1000 and could afford "the medicine".
1. I have not entered/signed a contract to accept the speed limit so I can go down the motorway at 100mph....yeah right.
2. My wife traced her family tree back to the 1700s using censuses. Imagine in 100 years his great grandson is doing the same, so he asks his mum about her grandad. Your grandad was a plonker so we know nothing about him apart from this very low res youtube video (it was all the rage back in the day) and didnt fill out the census, now the entire family is poor/dying because he got fined £1000 and could afford "the medicine".