h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Are you aware, that the Magna Carta, of 1215, stipulates the right for free travel in the UK. Therefore, the current system of road tax is in fact illegal?

There are many ways in which our government con the motorist, and I am looking in to them as we speak, to see what we can do to fight back.

More as I get it.

according to websters collegiate dictionary there are 15 definitions of the adjective "free" only one of them refers to cost.
besides they never mentioned free car travel in the MC ~grin~

I beleive the intention is for "free" being unrestricted and without cost.

It goes on to talk about free travel to market, meaning going to and from work, and other things.

Therefore it would take into account more than one of your webster definitions.

I think it probably means unrestricted
but as to whether they intended it to be interpreted as without cost would be open to debate.
that's what lawyers do and the government has more of them than you do. In court you would lose.Sorry.

But hey just cos I'm a killjoy don't mean I'm stupid, if you can come up with a way to pound some sense into the government over petrol taxes I'm right behind you. It will most likely never happen though. However, there may be a ray of hope as far as travelling costs, the US is currently suffering from increases gas prices, mid-west is up to brace yourself $2 a gallon, this means that people are getting more interested in hibrid cars which means production will increase and the price will drop. 70 miles to the gallon sounds like a plan to me. $2 a gallon doesn't sound high and in truth it's not when compared to the UK, but this time last year it was 70c (which is about the lowest its been for decades)

Sureley putting a cost on something is restricting it? Especially to those who cannot meet that cost?

That would settle the argument in both cases.

Nice try, don't think it will fly though.
Where do you draw the line, free space travel
there is no right to drive a car anywhere in the magna carta, I'm pretty sure someone would have mentioned it.
as for cost there is a free mode of travel available to you and pretty much everyone else, shanks' pony as they say. You are free to walk as far as you like

I think you are missing my meaning.

I am not talking about the government having to give us free petrol, I am talking about tolls and taxes on roads as being outside the Magna Carta. There is a difference.

Space does not apply, as it does not use the Queens Highways.

I'm not missing your meaning at all I'm just taking your argument to its logical and ultimately ludicrous conclusion
MY point was the government (Magna Carta), according to you, promises FREE travel and you interpret that to mean free from cost. free from cost does not imply free from taxes but FREE FROM COST. so where do you draw the line.
besides which free from restriction doesn't imply free from taxation, you are free to eat what you want and wear what you want but that doesn't mean you won't be taxed for it. and ultimately you ARE free to travel where you want, you can take your ox to market in whatever town you choose, but car travel isn't mentioned anywhere.

Just because we live in a "free" country doesn't mean we won't be taxed.

Erm.... Exactly WHERE in the Magna Carta does it mention anything about travel, free or otherwise? Maybe I dozed off and missed that bit ...

Apparently in the US the Magna Carta is studied as part of the constitution (I think) not so in the UK at least in my experience.
I have no idea what it says I'm just arguing about his interpretation of what he says it says ~grin~

From the Magna Carta signed by Edward I with his seal in 1297

[29] No Freeman shall be taken, or imprisoned, or be disseised of his Freehold,
or Liberties,
or free Customs, or be outlawed, or exiled, or any otherwise destroyed; nor will we pass upon him, nor condemn him, but by lawful Judgment of his Peers, or by the Law of the Land. We will sell to no man, we will not deny or defer to any man either Justice or Right.

[30] All Merchants (if they were not openly prohibited before) shall have their safe and sure Conduct to depart out of England, to come into England, to tarry in, and go through England, as well by Land as by Water, to buy and sell without any manner of evil Tolts, by the old and rightful Customs, except in Time of War.

-----

The RIGHT TO TRAVEL derives from the inalienable property right, in that, one has the right to exchange or sell property (be a merchant?). The place of exchange or sale of property is the "market" - a term with broad meaning. Travel to market is guaranteed through the property right. Remember, LABOUR and SKILLS are property. Also, the right to travel is included in your right to go to the church of your choice. The travel rights were invoked in ancient times to prevent interference in the exercise of primary rights. The right to travel is part of the absolute right of "liberty". Liberty also entails the right to exercise other rights.


I realised that you were arguing pureley for the sake of it, but I was not aware that you were doing so from a stance of complete ignorance.

Why do you continue to waste my time?

once again you resort to personal attacks shade try argument instead. of course you can quote as much as you like your lack of understanding is the problem. figure out what you mean.
there is no such thing as an inalienable right specified in the MC if you can find that phrase anywhere in it then show me.
the Magna Carta was rescinded by the catholic church and reinstated at a later date. that doesn't doesn't sound exactly inalienable
and once again we come to the word Liberty which is distinctly different from free as in free of charge it obviously means freedom to come and go not the right to come and go without charge.
it doesn't take study to understand simple english. get a life shade stop whining about how much you have to pay to drive dangerously on the roads. EOL

The catholic church has no jurisdiction in protestant England, and the Magna Carta cannot be legally rescinded since it is a treaty and not a statute.

Where do you get off accusing me of personally attacking you? By your own admission you are coming from a position of ignorance by the fact that you have not read the text in question.

You can also see from above that the Magna Carta does gaurantee Liberty, which includes the rights of free travel. The right to property comes from the common law, the "law of the land" mentioned often in the MC. Again this has nothing to do with statute law, and is irrefutable.

Now quit stalking me and go bother someone else.

Why so touchy Shade?
You seem so immersed in 'Free Travel' that you are not allowing Kubulai and myself the right to 'Free Speech!'
Everyone has an opinion, and you can't go through life telling everyone to quit bothering you when they don't agree with you.
Lighten up, have a laugh and maybe you will find more people taking notice of your opinions.

I don't see in the M.C. the right to travel for free - I do see merchants beeing able to come in and out. One word - Customs. The M.C. was written a long time ago, and some of it has been overwritten by more recent legislation. So stop arguing. As goes free speech - I think the admins here would object if I started going on about organising crime, illegal drugs, pornography etc. No one has truly free speech, or any thing for that matter. You are free to wave your fists about, but that freedom stops at the end of my nose.

King john was ordained by the Catholic Church. The Church of England was not in existence until about 300 years later when Henry 8 wanted to get a divorce and the pope wouldn't let him. between these two dates the magna carta was signed and rescinded and reinstated again (who is coming from a position of ignorance? ) I'm interested to hear why a treaty cannot be rescinded (I believe in this case the pope decided that the King could not give away rights that were given him by the church and his signing it was therefore not legal, but that is pure supposition on my part and I may be wrong (which I occasionally am (and even more occasionally admit to)).
I don't have to have read the MC to know that LIBERTY and FREE are not entirely synonymous, free as in freedom to do something is synonymous with liberty, but free as in free of charge is not, so your initial argument that the tax in petrol and road fund license is illegal would not fly in court. which is what I told you in the first place. I never said I had read the MC I simply stated that your "quote" from it was open to interpretation the most likely of which was freedom of travel not travel without charge, since you now tell me the word used was liberty I am even more confident of my "ignorant" position as opposed to your informed but flawed one

You are still at liberty to walk (or cycle I believe) anywhere you like in the queens highway without hindrance except on the motorways where you would probably cause a hazard. Motor travel however is obviously considered a luxury rather than a necessity and therefore subject to taxation. I personally am more upset about vat on heating fuel than petrol, which effects everyone (even people without cars)

Petrol Tax IS too high so is tax on cigarettes and alcohol these three are apparently considered by successive governments top be fair game and historically they are luxuries, the governments have reached the point where they are supported by these taxes and are unable to get rid of them.
If you can think of a good argument to force tham to stop I'm right behind you, this one, sadly, is not good
as you said im ignorant and not even a lawyer and I could see the obvious flaw in your logic. any judge in any court in the UK (which has no written constitution and is a country where power devolves from the crown not from the people) or even in the US (which gas a Written constitution that states that power devolves from the people.)
I'll tell you what, you take the goverment to court over it and if you win I'll admit that you're right but as I said way back at the beginning, you won't win!

I will now bow to you pleadings and leave you in peace I think my point is made.
I'm not saying you aren't entitled to an opinion but when you publish your opinion on the web you shouldn't get upset if someone takes issue with it.
I appologise If I have upset you, I didn't realise you were so fragile ~grin~

All this talk about free travel and Magna Carta etc. Who cares anyway. There is just NO WAY the Government will actually REDUCE fuel is there?

The Government will continue to make a steady income from ALL common drugs such as alcohol, tobacco, TV and motoring. If you say these are not drugs, just try giving any of them up!

Shads

Shadowfax, my comment was to Kublakhan who has seems to pop up in my conversations and immediately take a contrary viewpoint. I have no objections to your own free speech.

All this talk about free travel and Magna Carta etc. Who cares anyway. There is just NO WAY the Government will actually REDUCE fuel is there?

The Government will continue to make a steady income from ALL common drugs such as alcohol, tobacco, TV and motoring. If you say these are not drugs, just try giving any of them up!

Shads