On Sun, 11 May 2008 11:47:58 -0700 (PDT), s_pickle2001@yahoo.com wrote:
>On 10 May, 12:31, Palindrome wrote:
>> Cub Reporter wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> > What's more to the point, if you go to a country with the *same* AOC
>> > as here (16), have . with a 16-year-old, you could be prosecuted
>> > when you come home.
>>
>> > Presumably this would also apply if you took your 16-year-old
>> > girlfriend. If you were also 16, she could be prosecuted too. This
>> > might happen to married 16-year-olds unless there is a 'marriage
>> > exception' to the law.
>>
>> > I'm surprised that contributors to this thread are failing to see the
>> > implications.
>>
>> You lost me on that one. If the act wasn't illegal in the country that
>> you were in at the time, why would you be prosecuted for it?
>
>When the exchange control was in force, it was still illegal for a
>British citizen living abroad to set up a bank account in a third
>country, even if it was legal in the country where he lived. (He may
>have needed to be domiciled in the UK as .) There was some story like
>this about Geoffrey Robinson. This is certainly a precedent for
>British law for making acts committed abroad by British citizen
>criminal, even though they are legal where they are committed.
When I was studying the anti-terrorism laws (I forget which ones,
there's been so many), I recall coming to the conclusion that going to a
country where it is perfectly legal to do so (the USA for example) and
shooting guns/receiving training in shooting guns, could leave you open
to being prosecuted on your return to the UK.
That would probably only apply if you were sufficiently 'dark' though.
If you're a white yob, you should be fine going to one of the eastern
european countries where you can have a fun day out firing off a few
automatic weapons and RPG's. |