>>4505293>What the fuck do you even mean by personal liberates? Apart from muh guns that shits practically the same in both our countries.It's not. You have a fundamental misunderstanding of what our constitution is (one protects the liberties of the people) versus what your constitution is (one which protects the powers of the government).
Take a look at the Supremacy Clause: our 10th Amendment to the United States; the last amendment derived from the Bill of Rights.
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."
This is commonly referred to in understanding the relationship of the Federal Government versus the State Governments, but the more important element is that anything not directly legislated by the governments is an assumed liberty of the people. You cannot punish people for doing things that are vaguely not allowed. The concept of 'nulla poena sine lege' is enshrined in our Bill of Rights and our Constitution.
How does this play out in actuality? Take for instance the recent Nazi Pug punishment. The actual crime he was convicted of was "grossly offensive content" pursuant to Article 127 of the 2003 Communications Act.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/21/section/127"A person is guilty of an offence if he— (a) sends by means of a public electronic communications network a message or other matter that is grossly offensive or of an indecent, obscene or menacing character;"
This essentially means that if you send anything that the presiding judge finds adequate to meet the "gross offence" portion of this law, you are penalized by up to 6 months in jail or a Level 5 fine, which is currently 5000 GBP.
A law like this could never exist because it is poorly defined. "Grossly offensive" is such an umbrella term that it could be, and already is, applied to literally anything -- even Nazi pugs.
You have no rights.
