The Offensive Weapons List Protest Pack
This series of images is meant to bring to light some of the illogical & absurd entries present on the United Kingdom's Offensive Weapons list.
By exposing some of the poorly thought out & overbearing elements in these entries, it may call in to question the necessity of such laws, and bring an awareness to such poorly worded legislation that affects the lives of all U.K. citizens to varying degrees.
While the Offensive Weapons list does have some valid entries, the aim of this pack is to highlight some of the non-sensical & bizarrely specific items that have no business being prohibited by out-dated, unclear legislation open to abuse.
Disingenuous interpretations of intent (for who can determine someone else's intent with certainty), design (who is to say what an object is designed for but its designer), & definition (many things can fulfil the definitions of things they are not - Plato's definition of man as "a featherless biped" for example) that follow the letter of the law may be used to undermine the spirit of the law. Ambiguous legislation & “common sense” arguments are too abusable to have a legitimate place in our laws.
As this pack only targets a specific set of legislation, while relevant, the wider debate about the decline of personal freedoms & the right to defend oneself within the U.K. may be considered a parallel discussion. I would invite the reader to research & inform themselves about such matters.
By exposing some of the poorly thought out & overbearing elements in these entries, it may call in to question the necessity of such laws, and bring an awareness to such poorly worded legislation that affects the lives of all U.K. citizens to varying degrees.
While the Offensive Weapons list does have some valid entries, the aim of this pack is to highlight some of the non-sensical & bizarrely specific items that have no business being prohibited by out-dated, unclear legislation open to abuse.
Disingenuous interpretations of intent (for who can determine someone else's intent with certainty), design (who is to say what an object is designed for but its designer), & definition (many things can fulfil the definitions of things they are not - Plato's definition of man as "a featherless biped" for example) that follow the letter of the law may be used to undermine the spirit of the law. Ambiguous legislation & “common sense” arguments are too abusable to have a legitimate place in our laws.
As this pack only targets a specific set of legislation, while relevant, the wider debate about the decline of personal freedoms & the right to defend oneself within the U.K. may be considered a parallel discussion. I would invite the reader to research & inform themselves about such matters.
Posters/ Infographics
