would it have breached human rights?
#1
a judge was told that banning someone from wearing a hood and low trousers could violate someones human rights.
source;
Reply
#2
next,women prohibited from wearing make up because it disguises their real features,or get microwaved by scanners at every street corner
  • the partially blind semi bald eagle
Bastard Elect
Reply
#3
if anything i think they'd want people wearing pants round their ass to show they're not wearing suicide underpants.

some people just haven't got a clue.
some of these doddering judges need to retire.
Reply
#4
(05-07-2010, 12:14 PM)velvetfog Wrote:  Woman fined $665 for wearing a niqab in northern Italy
i never knew it was against the law to wear a mask in italy?

i can understand the banning of a face mask at strategic places like airports etc, but trousers something that are part of our culture is going too far lol.
Reply
#5
what strategic places?who decides what's a strategic place?soon all places are deemed to be strategic
  • the partially blind semi bald eagle
Bastard Elect
Reply
#6
hard to answer i know Sj but for me it would be airports. docks. even on public transport such as train stations and bus stations etc.

one thing i am sure of is this, in many countries if we break dress or drink codes which are against their religion we're in deep shit
at places of worship. by all means

sorry if i sound bigoted, i don't mean to be.
sometimes fear makes people drive a hard bargain
Reply
#7
sadly the world is no longer a safe a place to live as it was. not that it was really anyway. but the perception of a safe world has shifted to the stage we now see terrorist on every street corner. and yes, the gov has played a major part in that.

so have the terrorist themselves. i think it hypocritical that countries with such strict laws complain when other countries make less strict laws.
Reply
#8
the question here is,are they introducing this law for anti terrorist purposes,then i don't agree with it,or because it is against women rights?
  • the partially blind semi bald eagle
Bastard Elect
Reply
#9
(05-08-2010, 10:14 AM)srijantje Wrote:  the question here is,are they introducing this law for anti terrorist purposes,then i don't agree with it,or because it is against women rights?
actually, this thread is about trousers and hoodies Smile

but a point that can be made re the burkas is this.

train stations bus stations and airports and ports are all privately owned.

haven't the owners a right to say if or not they will serve or allow someone who wears a burka to use their services? for me the burka question and answers hard to decide for me. while i think the freedom to follow a religious of cultural path should be a right. a country has also the right to make new laws. if a law is wrong then thankfully here in the uk we can protest it and even get it changed sometimes. in some of the islamic countries you mere get locked up and beaten for protesting a law.

as for the pants and hoods.

i think it's a crock of doo da.
Reply
#10
You can't say that's indecent exposure. I mean, why not? Fashion matters for some people. It wasn't as if he was running down the street naked..

I think the Justice system should handle cases that are a bit more serious than someone having their hood up or trousers low.Confusedhy:
Reply
#11
(05-10-2010, 02:56 AM)SidewaysDan Wrote:  You can't say that's indecent exposure. I mean, why not? Fashion matters for some people. It wasn't as if he was running down the street naked..

I think the Justice system should handle cases that are a bit more serious than someone having their hood up or trousers low.Confusedhy:
i agree.
in the uk we have hasbo orders. its a way of keeping scum off the streets. all that have to say is curfew before 9 am and after 6 pm. fashion deprivation means nothing lmao.
Reply




Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)
Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!