[Info-vax] Goodbye VAX

[Dave Froble]

On 1/11/2022 6:36 PM, Chris Townley wrote:
> On 11/01/2022 23:20, Dave Froble wrote:
>> On 1/11/2022 1:59 PM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>> On 2022-01-11, Dave Froble <davef at tsoft-inc.com> wrote:
>>>> On 1/11/2022 8:48 AM, Simon Clubley wrote:
>>>>> On 2022-01-11, David Wade <g4ugm at dave.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> ... probably end up being extradited to the USA to face charges on
>>>>>> things that happen outside the USA when we, the fully BREXITed UK can't
>>>>>> manage to get US citizens to face charges for things they did in the UK..
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That last part really sucks. She should never have been allowed to
>>>>> flee the country.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ya know, for someone who believes in following the rules, you sure are
>>>> ambiguous.  I don't know much about that event, other than regardless of best
>>>> efforts, shit still happens.  But, If you're going to subscribe to diplomatic
>>>> immunity, you should not do so until you decide "maybe not".  As Yoda
>>>> mentioned,
>>>> do, or do not.  Nor do I have much of an opinion about the practice, but, as I
>>>> mentioned, if you're going to have a rule, then follow it, always, not when you
>>>> maybe want to.
>>>>
>>>
>>> That's because there's a very open question about whether she had
>>> diplomatic immunity or not. She didn't have it for herself but claimed
>>> she did as a result of her husband having it.
>>
>> Ok, why would diplomatic immunity exist?  To protect designated people from
>> any pressures or such so they could do their jobs.
>>
>> Now, if you are married, and have your family with you, and they didn't have
>> the same protection as you, would not then you be subject to pressure from the
>> host country, by them pressuring your family?  That pretty much screws any
>> such protections for you.
>>
>> Note, I'm not arguing whether she should have had such, but, because she did,
>> then it's absolute.  If it is not absolute, then it doesn't exist at all.  If
>> the USA claimed it, or Britain agreed to it, then it exists.  The most that
>> could be done is expel the person.  Oh, wait, that's just what you're
>> complaining about.
>>
>>> However the CPS disagrees:
>>>
>>> From https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-49984737
>>>
>>> |The move to charge Mrs Sacoolas comes after a file was handed to the Crown
>>> |Prosecution Service (CPS) on 1 November. The CPS said immunity did not
>>> |apply to dependants of consular officials outside of London.
>>>
>>> There are also some rumours that the UK government let her leave in
>>> order to avoid an incident.
>>
>> And there would be an incident.  Diplomatic immunity is one of the lubricants
>> to international relations.
>>
>>
>
> But a killer should be subject to the penalties of that under the law.
>

I suggest you research diplomatic immunity, wikipedia has some information, then 
reconsider your statement.

I may not seem "right" at times, but there are good reasons, rather important 
reasons.

-- 
David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef at tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA  15486