Petition to ban Donald Trump from UK reaches 300,000

[Fartsniffage]

But you can deny it on private property?

Yes.

Then simply consider the UK to be private property when it comes to Donald Trump. Could be pretty interesting if it ever happened though since he owns quite a lot of stuff in Scotland....

[Ethel mermania]

I don't know much about UK politics, but from what I have seen the left wing is going pretty strong

I think that what he is trying to say is that the UK is not liberal at all.

Which would be a fair assessment when you consider the fact we split from Britain because they were not liberal enough.

Britian is not liberal in the sense western Europe is liberal. Compared to america, it is very liberal.

[Fartsniffage]

Indeed, being born with money does not mean one is successful.

Indeed death will come for them one day.

Money is utterly trivial in this continuing cosmic genocide.

Well that, and I've seen an infographic saying that if he'd simply invested the $1 million loan and just sat back then his personal wealth would be higher than it currently is. I've not fact checked it, but it amused me.

[Imperializt Russia]

Not to throw off your groove, but you're aware that Britain's government is controlled by conservatives, right?

I don't know much about UK politics, but from what I have seen the left wing is going pretty strong

Anything vaguely left has been out of power since 2010.
Anything actually left has been out since the 1980s.

[Ethel mermania]

Yes.

Then simply consider the UK to be private property when it comes to Donald Trump. Could be pretty interesting if it ever happened though since he owns quite a lot of stuff in Scotland....

Heh, I was wondering where you were going with that.. did he ever try to buy st.andrews?

[Uxupox]

Let's say hypothetically that he gets barred from entering the UK and he owns private property inside the UK. What exactly happens to that property?

[Fartsniffage]

Let's say hypothetically that he gets barred from entering the UK and he owns private property inside the UK. What exactly happens to that property?

He still owns it.

[Uxupox]

Let's say hypothetically that he gets barred from entering the UK and he owns private property inside the UK. What exactly happens to that property?

He still owns it.

He still owns it but isn't he barred from entering it?

[Soldati Senza Confini]

He still owns it.

He still owns it but isn't he barred from entering it?

Well, not if he can be airlifted to it.

[Fartsniffage]

He still owns it.

He still owns it but isn't he barred from entering it?

Yes. http://www.duchyofcornwall.eu/latest/?page_id=130

[Eastern Equestria]

Let's say hypothetically that he gets barred from entering the UK and he owns private property inside the UK. What exactly happens to that property?

He already owns property in the UK (golf courses), and he'd presumably get to keep and make money off them. Just not actually visit.

[Dooom35796821595]

He still owns it but isn't he barred from entering it?

Well, not if he can be airlifted to it.

Buying property doesn't make it soverign soil of the owners country of origin/citizenship.

[The Hobbesian Metaphysician]

Well, not if he can be airlifted to it.

Buying property doesn't make it soverign soil of the owners country of origin/citizenship.

Well unless you want to pull a sealand move.

[Uxupox]

He still owns it but isn't he barred from entering it?

Yes. http://www.duchyofcornwall.eu/latest/?page_id=130

Can you explain a little bit? Don't understand the difference between crown property and government property? Are they both the same or different?

[Imperializt Russia]

Buying property doesn't make it soverign soil of the owners country of origin/citizenship.

Well unless you want to pull a sealand move.

Note that Sealand is considered sovereign territory by no-one but Sealand and some Dutch commandos.

[Fartsniffage]

Yes. http://www.duchyofcornwall.eu/latest/?page_id=130

Can you explain a little bit? Don't understand the difference between crown property and government property? Are they both the same or different?

At the base of it, all land in the UK is owned by the Crown. You can "own" it and trade it but the government can still ban you from it without taking the "ownership" back.

[Dooom35796821595]

Buying property doesn't make it soverign soil of the owners country of origin/citizenship.

Well unless you want to pull a sealand move.

Sealand also belongs to the UK ever since the national boundaries were increased to 12 miles, it just gets treated like a private residence. There is no escape from the resurrection of the empire, rule Britannia!

[Napkiraly]

1) Sauce
2) And yet amazingly they didn't ban gay marriage and I'd wager most Muslims this time around voted for the Liberals.
3) Except not all Muslims hold those beliefs.

Also since everyone in favour of this ban like going "Think about their anti-homosexuality", I do hope you're against the immigration of Koreans, Chinese, Poles, Russians, Salvadorans, Israelis, Bolivians, and the Greeks it's too close for comfort so them as well.

1. I don't recall the specifics, but it was on local TV news a few years ago and was based on the increase in Muslim population when the Liberals were in office before 2006 and Tory candidates using gay marriage as an outreach tool to Muslim constituents. Here's the closest thing I could find to an online equivalent.

EDIT: Never mind, found something closer. It mentions Asians as well, but obviously selectiveness for opinions is more meaningful than selectiveness for race.

2. Wouldn't be the first time they threw politically inconvenient allies under the bus. Or the last.

3. So is letting them in based on how they interpret the Qur'an acceptable or not? Because it's still discriminatory based on beliefs, just in a more specific way.

Besides, it's in their holy book. In ways open to less interpretation than the Bible's homophobia, though granted part of the reason we're easier on Christianity is because it's the norm. But it's just a microcosm of the broader issue of religion influencing political views, and this effect not always being favourable to the rest of us.

Those are all nationalities, by the way.

There is nothing "moral" about picking and choosing which perspectives can be heard.[/quote]
1. "Mentions Asians as well". Most of the people covered in that article were Chinese. By the logic being spewed there, we should ban Chinese people from immigrating to Canada.
2. Or maybe it's because immigrants aren't single issue voters with that issue being same-sex marriage.
3. Shit, at least, that'd be an attempt to not be stupid.

And religion will always influence politics unless you get a society as secular as that in France, religions lose tons of power, or you bring in state atheism. Gotta learn to live with that.

Yes, nationalities where most or significant amounts of the people don't approve of homosexuality. Should we ban them from moving to Canada as well?

[Uxupox]

Can you explain a little bit? Don't understand the difference between crown property and government property? Are they both the same or different?

At the base of it, all land in the UK is owned by the Crown. You can "own" it and trade it but the government can still ban you from it without taking the "ownership" back.

So ultimately it belongs o the crown then?

[Ostroeuropa]

Let's say hypothetically that he gets barred from entering the UK and he owns private property inside the UK. What exactly happens to that property?

Probably a court case and a constitutional crisis tbh.

If he's smart enough to argue his human rights and common law rights to property.

[The Lone Alliance]

Stupid, I can understand why they'd do it, but it doesn't make it any less stupid.

[Gauthier]

Man, people here talking like Parliament'll approve of the ban and enact it.

[Vassenor]

Man, people here talking like Parliament'll approve of the ban and enact it.

Gideon already said they're not going to do this, no matter how many people sign. It's in this week's PMQs.

[Fartsniffage]

At the base of it, all land in the UK is owned by the Crown. You can "own" it and trade it but the government can still ban you from it without taking the "ownership" back.

So ultimately it belongs o the crown then?

Yes and no. They can't just take back ownership of it without compulsory purchase (eminent domain), but they still do have legal power over it. It's not that much different from the US. You can't murder somebody on private land in the US, nor could a person banned from the US just wander around on land they owned. The law still applies.

[Ethel mermania]

Man, people here talking like Parliament'll approve of the ban and enact it.

No, we are talking about the people who would approve of such a measure.