Showing posts with label Private Property. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Private Property. Show all posts

Sunday, 13 January 2008

Gordon Brown to push for transplant organ harvesting without explicit consent

The matter of presumed consent over organ ‘donation’ will probably see some considerable posting onthe net and I have seen a couple of good posts already. Never-the-less it seems Gordon Brown has now shown his true colours and inclinations at last, in a wider sense, over the matter.

In his own words Gordon Brown is throwing his weight behind a presumed consent form of organ ‘donation’ where unless the ‘donor’ registers an objection then their organs may be ‘harvested’, or more correctly, requisitioned by the state.

Personally it would make me just a little uncomfortable if I felt those who had charge of my medical care, when I was most vulnerable, were not just working for my best interest - but were also scouting for potential organs and might view me as a valuable resource in that respect.

God forbid they have targets or we might be in danger of seeing something similar to the sudden increase in young babies being taken into care when adoption targets were set for social services.

It conjures up a cartoon image of a starving man on a desert island looking at his companion and seeing a roast dinner instead.

No one can help but feel for those who are in need of a replacement for a failing organ It is an emotive issue and such a scheme would undoubtedly increase the supply of organs. There again so would re introducing the death penalty for murder and then harvesting the organs that become available as a result.

Just because it might solve the problem does not necessarily make it desirable, right or acceptable. Efforts to find other solutions have not really been pushed properly.

Patients’ groups have indicated they are "totally opposed" to the idea because it would take away patients' rights over their own bodies.

Joyce Robin of Patient Concern said "They call it presumed consent, but it is no consent at all," "They are relying on inertia and ignorance to get the results that they want."

She pointed out that the Government had made very little effort to persuade people to register as donors. "Where is the big media campaign, where are the leaflets? Why, when I go to see my GP, doesn't he ask me about organ donation? These are the things they should be doing - not taking away our right to decide what happens to our bodies."

John Locke said: ”Every man has a property in his own person. This nobody has a right to, but himself.”

Not according to Gordon Brown it seems - The fact that he is apparently willing to support such a scheme says a lot about the way he thinks.

In a way it is another for of taxation - to be paid in flesh.

He clearly believes that the state, though he would no doubt wish to euphemistically couch it in terms of ‘society’, or even that much abused term ‘the community’, has a greater right to an individual’s private property than the actual owner. Especially when said owner is unable to express an opinion, be that property bricks and mortar, cash or their own person.

What next? Once the state has established the precedence in having a proprietorial interest over the individual’s own body, regardless of their personal wishes? Will it then be happy to permit you to fail to maximise it’s effectiveness by not taking enough exercise, or for you to damage it by over eating, or drinking any alcohol?

That might make the organs less likely to be of use and you to be an unreasonable drain on the NHS taking precious resources that could be used on something more sociably useful such as another manager.

To presume consent is to take without consent and to presume the right to do so.

Saturday, 6 October 2007

Gordon Brown - His hand always in your pocket

Broon’s got to pick a pocket or - not just two, but every householder in Britain.

Gordon Broon, no doubt with an eye on electioneering, is announcing that he is planning to pour yet more money into the NHS, an extra £1.4 billion per year.

Side bets on how many times he announces this extra spending and in how many different permutations.

Now the typically sneaky Broon part - The average council tax bill is set to go up by a staggering £200 (double the expected the rate of inflation) over the next three years to cover it!

This might even almost be acceptable - if anyone imagined for a moment that it would make any improvement to what we actually get out of the NHS.

The Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR), calculates that Council tax will rise by five per cent a year. Nu-Lab is naturally enough trying to keep this under wraps. By 2011, the average bill will be around £1,500 or more.

Since NU-Lab came to power Council tax bills have consistently risen well above the rate of inflation, as Gordon brown cynically used them to stealthily increase taxation, whilst apparently successfully fooling the sheeple by distracting them with relatively reasonable headline income tax rates.

This disproportionately and punitively shifts a greater proportion of the tax burden on to householders and their families, whist others avoid the burden.

Sunday, 12 August 2007

HIPs Inspectors complain they have been hard done by

It seems that there is much perturbation on the Home Inspector Forum website. Inspectors are attacking the Government for failing to fully implement the scheme. They are bleating that they may face financial ruin if the delay in implementing HIPs (Home Information Packs) continues.

An inspector from Eastbourne, East Sussex, complained that if they could earn their training fees back they would count themselves lucky and get out of the business. Another felt they had wasted £4,000.

All true - and normally most of us would probably have considerable sympathy for anyone who had suffered as a result of State incompetence.

In this case though – sympathy somewhat lacking.

We are all acutely aware that when this EU inspired stupidity was first mooted it looked like it would be a licence to print money for the so-called inspectors and a convienient means for the State to spy on households, for tax raising purposes.

The people who ‘trained’ up to be inspectors clearly did so in that belief - and they must have known they would be milking people selling their homes, thanks to yet more pointless state forced unnatural regulation in the honest lawful exchange of property between individuals.

So to hear these inspectors complain that their parasitic careers may now be still born and that their ‘investment’ in training may have been wasted is not exactly guaranteed to elicit sympathy.

From the point of view of a homeowner it looks more like natural justice.

Let’s hope it puts off any likeminded individuals who might hope to profit from honest citizens by participating in some future state oppression of the populace.

Thursday, 9 August 2007

Homeowner arrested after burglar falls to his death

A 56 year old homeowner in Manchester woke up to find a 43 year old intruder in his 4th floor flat, after some sort of confrontation the intruder fell 40 feet from a window. He suffered severe head injuries and later died in hospital. An occupational hazard you might be forgiven for thinking.

Needless to say the police arrested the householder and have now released him on bail, no doubt after fingerprinting him and taking a DNA sample. He could now face questioning on suspicion of murder.

The CPS (Criminal Protection Service Crown Prosecution Service) and ACPO (the Association of Chief Police Officers) have said that any householder can use reasonable force to protect themselves or others, or to carry out an arrest or to prevent crime.

Why was it necessary to arrest the householder? The police could hardly claim they didn’t know where he lived and one would have thought the aggrieved householder would have been willing enough to make a statement, or they would have within most people’s memory…

It used to be that the police had some care about arresting apparently law abiding citizens attempting to thwart a crime.

It used to be that the police made some attempt to catch burglars and prevent burglaries themselves. Sadly, since they have had to jump through hoops to meet ridiculous ill conceived state targets and political initiatives, it begins to seem as if they find it so much easier to find reasons to arrest the non criminal ‘community’ and improve Nu-Lab’s dubious crime statistics and inflate the DNA database.

A local voiced what many people will be wondering:

"If the guy who fell out of the window was breaking into the property then why was the homeowner arrested?"

Why indeed…