8 ms·
The nazi dog was in Scotland, this is in England. they are different legal jurisdictions. Edit: England, not Britain.
by FooHentai 4y ago
The nazi dog was in Scotland, this is in England. they are different legal jurisdictions.
Edit: England, not Britain.
- nohuck13 4y agoScotland occupies the northern third of the island of Great Britain.
- ybaervervys 4y agoSolid pedantry attempt, but missed the mark. Scotland is a part of Britain. Scotland is not part of England nor Wales, but Scotland, England, and Wales are all part of (Great) Britain.
- UnpossibleJim 4y agoAh, poor Wales. You'd have to murder your wife to sit on the throne there.
- FooHentai 4y agoAppreciate the gotcha, nearly as fun to post as pedantry. I only made the same mistake OP did, however. The actual point still stands. If you're going to take a dig at a legal system, country, or culture, don't try to back up your point with an example from a different one. Scotland is not England legally or culturally, and the scots will be the first to make that point clear.
- DiggyJohnson 4y agoPlease explain how the difference in these legal systems is worth the pedantry.
- FooHentai 4y agoSure, although this does feel like it's becoming painfully drawn out. Let's use a simple parallel example: If someone's having a laugh at, say, Trump. Then they use that as an example of how those those silly Canadians are always electing daft politicians. You're probably going to point out that Trump was not in fact the president of Canada. That the example is not relevant. Likewise, it is a mistake to lump the Nazi dog case in with the other case. One occurred under Scottish legal jurisdiction, the other under English legal jurisdiction. The example is not relevant.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- Jon_Lowtek 4y agoIn both cases the relevant law was Section 127 of the Communications Act of the United Kingdom.
- FooHentai 4y agoThat is a very fair point and rebuttal, thank you.