On May 10, 7:50 pm, Palindrome wrote:
> TimB wrote:
> > On May 10, 6:36 pm, Palindrome wrote:
>
> >> Yep. If a person chooses to go to another country and chooses to break
> >> its laws - then, subject to a fair trial and fair treatment, they should
> >> suffer the consequences. If they and the country concerned are willing
> >> to accept a trial and punishment in the UK, then, why not?
>
> > But that's not what's being proposed. We're talking about a person who
> > chooses to go to another country and break *our* laws, doing something
> > which may in fact be entirely legal in the host country.
>
> > What's the next step? Police waiting in the arrivals lounge of all
> > incoming flights from Amsterdam, ready to arrest travellers for the
> > drugs they legally took while there?
>
> I'm sorry - but haven't we had that for years? If you take the old wife
> out on a boating trip beyond the 12 mile limit and drop her overboard
> fixed to an anchor and smeared in tinned tuna - won't the police get a
> tad interested?
Of course. However, if you take her to France and top her, you would
expect the *French* police to be interested. Let's try a different
example. Suppose I want to sunbathe . on a public beach. Under UK
law I'd very possibly be arrested for some kind of public decency
offence. So, I pop off to a country where . sunbathing on a public
beach is legal. Should I be arrested for sunbathing . on my return
to the UK?
You've made the argument in this thread that visitors to another
country should respect the laws of that country, and expect to be
punished if they break them. I'm simply arguing that the reverse
should also be true - if I travel somewhere and don't break any of
their laws, I should not be punished just because what I did was
illegal under UK law. |