Extend the use of common sense in law re: assisted suicide to include euthanasia

There exists an underworld of victims of crime and accidents that are being kept alive in the UK despite being 'clinically brain dead'/'in a vegatative state'. In SOME cases, not all, they are kept alive despite overwhelming evidence that relatives and medical professionals feel this is not the best choice for the patient, that the patient has no quality of life; and, in a lot of cases, is causing the patient pain that is immeasureable because of their condition. These are the kind of issues considered by authorities in Switzerland regarding euthanasia. The UK has started to use common sense in assisted suicide cases – this has not been extended to euthanasia. There are a range of individuals and groups in the UK who have tried to have a voice, are experts on the subject, and vie with the Media to get the facts printed. A debate in the public arena would help improve awareness about disabiity caused by brain damage as well as inform a move towards putting euthanasia back on the table for consideration by politiicians.

Why is this idea important?

There exists an underworld of victims of crime and accidents that are being kept alive in the UK despite being 'clinically brain dead'/'in a vegatative state'. In SOME cases, not all, they are kept alive despite overwhelming evidence that relatives and medical professionals feel this is not the best choice for the patient, that the patient has no quality of life; and, in a lot of cases, is causing the patient pain that is immeasureable because of their condition. These are the kind of issues considered by authorities in Switzerland regarding euthanasia. The UK has started to use common sense in assisted suicide cases – this has not been extended to euthanasia. There are a range of individuals and groups in the UK who have tried to have a voice, are experts on the subject, and vie with the Media to get the facts printed. A debate in the public arena would help improve awareness about disabiity caused by brain damage as well as inform a move towards putting euthanasia back on the table for consideration by politiicians.

Repeal Of The Foxhunting Ban

Repeal this ban that is necessary for the control of foxes throughout England ,Scotland and Wales.Not only is it necessary to bring back foxhunting but also to restore it back to an integral part of our heritage.

Restoring this will bring back a wrongly banned sport which was only banned because of the class inferiority that labour felt it had and had nothing to do with animal welfare.

Why is this idea important?

Repeal this ban that is necessary for the control of foxes throughout England ,Scotland and Wales.Not only is it necessary to bring back foxhunting but also to restore it back to an integral part of our heritage.

Restoring this will bring back a wrongly banned sport which was only banned because of the class inferiority that labour felt it had and had nothing to do with animal welfare.

Repeal of the Hunting Act 2004

The Hunting Act 2004 has no practical purpose. The Chairman of the Government Inquiry into Hunting with Dogs, Lord Burns, told Parliament that there was no evidence that hunting was cruel and the last Government did not even try to measure the impact of the Hunting Act. Wild mammals are still being managed to exactly the same extent as they were before the Hunting Act with no benefit to animal welfare and very possibly an increase of suffering especially where alternative methods are less effective in dealing with sick and injured mammals.

The Better Government Initiative described the unting Act as a 'notorious example of bad Government' and a Crown Court Judge has said that it is "far from simple to inerpret or to apply". Thousands of hours of police time are being wasted trying to enforce an unworkable law whilst hundreds of ordinary people face potential criminal charges every time they attempt to carry out legal hunting activity. The Hunting Act should be repealed and hunting controlled by independent regulation.

Why is this idea important?

The Hunting Act 2004 has no practical purpose. The Chairman of the Government Inquiry into Hunting with Dogs, Lord Burns, told Parliament that there was no evidence that hunting was cruel and the last Government did not even try to measure the impact of the Hunting Act. Wild mammals are still being managed to exactly the same extent as they were before the Hunting Act with no benefit to animal welfare and very possibly an increase of suffering especially where alternative methods are less effective in dealing with sick and injured mammals.

The Better Government Initiative described the unting Act as a 'notorious example of bad Government' and a Crown Court Judge has said that it is "far from simple to inerpret or to apply". Thousands of hours of police time are being wasted trying to enforce an unworkable law whilst hundreds of ordinary people face potential criminal charges every time they attempt to carry out legal hunting activity. The Hunting Act should be repealed and hunting controlled by independent regulation.