Terrorism Act 2000

[Pete Chown]

Ian Jackson wrote:

> Indeed.  However, does this not make it an offence to pay tax ?

Unfortunately I think you are looking at the law like a computer
scientist rather than a lawyer! :-) Lawyers think they follow
legislation to the letter, computer scientists really do...

This was one of the reasons why I found the law so difficult.  Lawyers
apply "common sense" to the law without realising that they are doing
it.  Because I studied computer science first, I was reading legal
materials too literally without realising.

If you try your tactics, though, I would love to know how you get on!
One problem you may have is that the next Finance Act will be an
implied repeal of any conflicting provision in the Terrorism Act.  Of
course, the implied repeal will be the minimum necessary to make the
laws compatible, so it won't affect any real world uses of the
Terrorism Act.

Slight aside: I heard about one man who discovered a very old law
which meant that the council were supposed to pay him a bounty for any
dead hedgehogs that he brought in.  Apparently at that time people
thought the hedgehogs were pests.  To control them they offered to buy
any that people managed to catch.

So this man finds a hedgehog that had been run over by a car and takes
it to the council.  There was much argument and the council decided
that they were going to have to think about it.  A few weeks later
they came back to him with the answer -- the Law Commission had got
there first.  The legislation he was relying on had already been
repealed, along with a load of other obsolete Acts...

-- 
Pete