What crazy laws did the UK parliament pass without help from the EU?
May 21, 2016 3:05 AM Subscribe
With the impending EU referendum in the UK, the 'leave' side have made a lot of noise about ridiculous laws passed by the EU. However, not much has been made of ridiculous laws that originated in the UK, and in the interests of balance, I'd like to find them.
The problem I'm facing is that many of the apparently ridiculous laws ('it is legal to shoot a Welshman with a bow and arrow in Chester') aren't actually laws at all - they are often based on rumour and hearsay. This excellent source http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Legal_Oddities.pdf debunks most of the commonly cited 'silly laws'.
A good example of the kind of law I'm looking for is the ban on 'handling salmon in suspicious circumstances', mentioned in the link above. The laws should be pointless, unnecessary or just nonsensical.
What other ridiculous laws from the Westminster parliament do you know of, and where is a good place to find more?
The problem I'm facing is that many of the apparently ridiculous laws ('it is legal to shoot a Welshman with a bow and arrow in Chester') aren't actually laws at all - they are often based on rumour and hearsay. This excellent source http://www.lawcom.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Legal_Oddities.pdf debunks most of the commonly cited 'silly laws'.
A good example of the kind of law I'm looking for is the ban on 'handling salmon in suspicious circumstances', mentioned in the link above. The laws should be pointless, unnecessary or just nonsensical.
What other ridiculous laws from the Westminster parliament do you know of, and where is a good place to find more?
Not a funny example, but patently ridiculous: clause 28
posted by crocomancer at 4:37 AM on May 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
posted by crocomancer at 4:37 AM on May 21, 2016 [1 favorite]
The fact that British citizens living overseas (especially the ones living in the EU!) don't automatically get to vote in this referendum is patently absurd. Hopefully the courts will smack the government upside the head on that one, but I'm not holding my breath. It's dumb that you lose the right to vote after 15 years overseas, but can at least be rationalised by saying it doesn't really make sense to count you as belonging to your last constituency, even if you're still affected by things (remember when they wanted to make everyone appear in person at least once to get a passport? good luck if you live hundreds of miles from a consulate), but how it's reasonable to prevent people on voting for something that affects their right to live and work where they do, I don't know.
When the nationality law changed to allow children of British mothers born overseas to inherit British citizenship, it wasn't retroactive. So if you were born December 31, 1982 overseas to a British mother (but not a British father), you're not British, but if you were born January 1, 1983 you are. There's all sorts of nonsense about whether your parents were married when you were born of subsequently married, too.
posted by hoyland at 10:10 AM on May 21, 2016
When the nationality law changed to allow children of British mothers born overseas to inherit British citizenship, it wasn't retroactive. So if you were born December 31, 1982 overseas to a British mother (but not a British father), you're not British, but if you were born January 1, 1983 you are. There's all sorts of nonsense about whether your parents were married when you were born of subsequently married, too.
posted by hoyland at 10:10 AM on May 21, 2016
Best answer: The 1944 Education Act had a provision that if your child was " infested with vermin or in a foul condition" and you didn't act on warnings to remedy the situation, they could legally kidnap your child to wash them and their clothes.
The exemptions from prescription charges for medical reasons in England is basically a list of conditions that in 1968 had both long-term medical treatment and a voluble patient group. If you have any of the conditions you get all of your prescriptions for free, regardless of whether they are for that condition at all - it's now for all intents and purposes a completely random list that has significant financial implications for people with chronic illnesses.
The new legislation on 'legal highs' is an unenforceable pile of ridiculous, which if it didn't specifically say that it was ok, would have made coffee illegal.
There is a legal maximum height for hedges, but only if those hedges are predominantly evergreen.
(If I think of any more I'll post them)
posted by Vortisaur at 4:25 AM on May 22, 2016
The exemptions from prescription charges for medical reasons in England is basically a list of conditions that in 1968 had both long-term medical treatment and a voluble patient group. If you have any of the conditions you get all of your prescriptions for free, regardless of whether they are for that condition at all - it's now for all intents and purposes a completely random list that has significant financial implications for people with chronic illnesses.
The new legislation on 'legal highs' is an unenforceable pile of ridiculous, which if it didn't specifically say that it was ok, would have made coffee illegal.
There is a legal maximum height for hedges, but only if those hedges are predominantly evergreen.
(If I think of any more I'll post them)
posted by Vortisaur at 4:25 AM on May 22, 2016
« Older About how many total bullets and missiles did WW2... | Somewhere to watch England v. Russia in Boston... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by pipeski at 3:41 AM on May 21, 2016 [1 favorite]