Red diesel

[Guy90]

errrrr..... no. I dont think so. If there was any justice in your system then I would, just as I would with a real crime*.  



* "Real Crime" being defined as an action that is dealt with by the judicial system not by non accountable tax collectors.

Bob,

All I can say is that is not for you or I to decide what is a real crime and what is not. It is for Parliment to decide what constitutes an offence and the penalty framework for committing that offence. It is then down to the relevant department to enforce that decision.

There are a whole raft of criminal offences across the whole spectrum of law enforcement in this country which never see the inside of a Court. It does not make the crime any less real.

Of course, in this country, if we do not like the legislation that parliment enables or the way in which it or the Goverment dictates it should be enforced, we can vote for someone else.

Guy

[Bob696]

Parliment to decide what constitutes an offence and the penalty framework for committing that offence.

BUT

With the judicial system there is a whole raft of safety mesures to try and stop miscarriges of justice, CPS>Magistrates>county court>high court>appeals court>Law lords>house of lords>european court (and STILL some get through). With HMC&E there appears to be NONE. If some tax man decides you have commited an offence then you lose, end of story.

You can even be within the law and lose out on a wim (thinking of importing goods from the EU for personal use here and dont even get me onto the subject of detaining people without charge at ports of entry).

I am amazed that a so called civalized society is prepeared to put up with an organisation of tax men that have more power than its security service (MI5/special branch).

There are a whole raft of criminal offences across the whole spectrum of law enforcement in this country which never see the inside of a Court. It does not make the crime any less real.

Could you name some please (might be worth me getting on my high horse about them as well) Please exclude offences where people plead guilty by sending a cheque off (such as speeding cameras)

[Guy90]

Bob,

They are mainly cases where the offence is a civil one, therefore they are mostly taxation based offences.

Detention without charge, within prescribed time limits, is allowed under The Police & Criminal Evidence Act. Extentions to that are allowed on application to a Judge.

I can assure you that officers in my department do not act on 'a whim' but entirely within the law. Those that don't, and like all organisations we have had bad apples over the 800 years since our creation, get thrown out and the full weight of the law is brought to bear.

I can't see the injustices that you see in the system but if you see them then you should protest. It is only because of that that we are not saddled with some of the rather more unpleasant legislation that has exsisted though history. There is as big and as equal a role to play for those who seek change as those that enforce the status quo. Many of the powers that you rail against date from the time of King Charles II. Prehaps you are right to argue for change. However whilst I am asked by my department to act and that request is a lawful one then I will do what is required of me and by the letter of the law and with due notice to official guidance. It is at times dangerous (8 C&E officers have died on duty in the last 20 years), long hours and unpleasant working conditions. and you certainly have to see things that no person should have to see. All the officers in my department do this. There's no space for those that don't.

If I felt the percieved injustices as you do then I would be standing at your shoulder but what I do is lawful and my concience is clear. Where I do stand at your shoulder is ensuring that your questioning of the system and the status quo is allowed a voice.

As Voltaire said (approximately) I'll disagree with you but I'll fight for your right to do so.

Guy