weird laws - no pigs called napoleon

[Ken Gargett]

was cleaning out crap in the computer and came across this. did it a while back for a mag i used to write for.

i am hoping that one of the very few (only?) positives from Brexit will be the elimination of laws such as the size of drinks law. but i would not hold my breath. hopefully some of the others have also been repealed.

 

Years spent in a past life as a lawyer have convinced this scribe that young Charlie Dickens did not go far enough when he described the law as an ass. It is an entire herd of mules, donkeys and mad cows, with the odd snake and shark tossed in. Why else would France still have a law on its books banning its citizens from naming a pig 'Napoleon'. Unless you reside in the much lamented sitcom, 'Green Acres', why would you name a pig, Napoleon or anything else? Never mind.

Ohio must have debated long and hard before passing a law which prevents its citizens from getting a fish drunk. How do you get a fish drunk? Tipping a few litres of vodka into the home aquarium would probably kill the inhabitants long before they got pissed, and what an inspired use of the bottles for which you've forked out a considerable whack of your hard-earned. I have visions of someone catching a shark and pouring a few bottles of wine (perhaps from the West Aussie winery, 'Flying Fish' or even that delicious champagne, Billecart-Salmon) down its gullet, then watching it go off and hit on the seals, on which it would otherwise dine. Amorous sharks crooning 'Mac the Knife'?

No doubt more standard laws will be enforced when a somewhat strange gentleman and his two friends, imbeciles all, front court in Missouri. The best laid plans...

The trio concocted a cunning plan to rob Fish's Quick Stop in De Soto, apparently a bottleshop. One raced in wearing nothing but a hula hoop and proceeded to do an erotic dance in front of bemused staff. A second took the opportunity to grab a case of beer from the shelves and bolt (one suspects that the reason behind all this was that they had already knocked off a number of cases and simply run out - you couldn't come up with this sober), while the staff remained distracted (mortified, more like). The third was the getaway driver. All worked rather well but they had forgotten to account for the bystander who happened to be outside near the car and whom promptly wrote down the number plate. And had the driver been in Alabama, it would have also been illegal for him to drive away while wearing a blindfold. 'Cause drivers do that.

In Vermont, no woman may wear false teeth without the written permission of her husband. What happens if she is not married? Well, if she is unmarried and resides in Florida, then she is not permitted to parachute on Sundays, teeth or not. Concealed weapons are regularly in the news in the States but residents of Kentucky better be careful. It is illegal for them to carry a concealed weapon if it is more than six foot long. So anyone with an anti-aircraft gun hidden down their trousers better think again!

England, inevitably, leads the field when it comes to the bizarre. Don't forget that this is a nation where half the blokes going to watch cricket suddenly turn into cross-dressers. It is illegal to die whilst one is in the Houses of Parliament. I would love to know the penalty for that! It is considered treason to put a postage stamp of the Queen upside down on a letter.

Cabs in London have it tough. They are prevented from carrying rabid dogs and corpses. Why would anyone want a rabid dog anywhere near them in the first place, let alone locking one in a small confined space with you, and what if a passenger dies en route? Is he immediately dumped on the footpath? It is also illegal for anyone afflicted by the plague to hail a cab. So hail a cab to go to a hospital and be saved and then be subsequently fined or die? And should a whale be washed up onshore in good old Blighty, then the head automatically belongs to the King while the Queen gets the tail (the theory being that tail-bone whalebones make better corsets).

I know, you think that all of these laws are ancient oddities that have never been cleaned out of the books. Well in 2006, the UK Parliament added one. The Tax Avoidance Schemes Regulations makes it illegal not to tell the taxman anything you don't want him to know (there are a vast number of things I don't want anyone to know and that I cannot imagine would be relevant to tax but...), however, it is perfectly legal not to tell the taxman anything you don't mind him knowing. It would appear that Monty Python wrote the English tax laws.

It doesn't end there. There has always been a degree of antipathy between the English and the good folk of Scotland. The town of York had a solution, making it perfectly legal to murder a Scotsman, provided of course he is within the city limits and carrying a bow and arrow. Robin McHood be warned.

Many of these do date from centuries ago (witness the requirement that all men in London over 14 undergo two hours of longbow practice a day, and I suspect that does not involve drinking cider) but stupidity really is just as prevalent today. Some of London's wine bars and retailers were offering customers tasting small samples or selling extremely expensive wines by the glass in small portions, usually 25mls. One offered customers the chance to buy a small glass (the said 25mls) of 1996 Petrus for 32 pounds. A hefty sum but many winelovers would be keen to try such a famous wine. Sensible? The only other choice was 950 pounds for the full bottle, a little more than most winelovers' budget. Imagine what a wine bar would charge for a sip of the imperial of 1961 Petrus about to go under the hammer, time of writing, and expected to bring at least US$150,000.

Braindead bureaucracy and ridiculous red tape stepped in. Outrageous. A wine glass must contain either 125 mls or 175 mls, not 25 mls (yes, what a good idea making people drink more than they would wish). To serve 25 mls is deemed illegal. No wonder these people are stupid enough to work for politicians. My letter of complaint mysteriously had an upside-down stamp.

[Jeremy Festa]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ken Gargett]

19 minutes ago, Jeremy Festa said:

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

a weird bridge opening up under dots? i have no idea what that means???

[godpheonix]

haha. i have no idea either! to many emoticons out there!

[PigFish]

This one is just for you Ken...

Members... this is not to inflame yet another augment regarding guns... I thought it might be of particular interest and related to the subject.

From Wiki:

Background of the case[edit]

The National Firearms Act of 1934 required the registration of certain types of firearms. Miles Edward Haynes was a convictedfelon who was charged with failing to register a firearm under the Act. Haynes argued that, because he was a convicted felon and thus prohibited from owning a firearm, requiring him to register was essentially requiring him to make an open admission to the government that he was in violation of the law, which was thus a violation of his right not to incriminate himself.

Majority opinion[edit]

In a 7-1 decision, the Court ruled in 1968 in favor of Haynes. Earl Warren dissented in a one sentence opinion and Thurgood Marshall did not participate in the ruling.

As with many other 5th amendment cases, felons and others prohibited from possessing firearms could not be compelled to incriminate themselves through registration.^[1][2] The National Firearms Act was amended after Haynes to make it apply only to those who could lawfully possess a firearm. This eliminated prosecution of prohibited persons, such as criminals, and cured the self-incrimination problem. In this new form, the new registration provision was upheld. The court held: " To eliminate the defects revealed by Haynes, Congress amended the Act so that only a possessor who lawfully makes, manufactures, or imports firearms can and must register them", United States v. Freed, 401 U.S. 601 (1971).^[3] The original Haynes decision continues to block state prosecutions of criminals who fail to register guns as required by various state law gun registration schemes.

 

... Of course I have a lot to say on the matter, but won't. -Piggy