TV LICENCE why should people pay when paying for Sky?

[Total Chaos]

Prove me wrong then, show us some evidence to support your claim

 

I will

 

http://s1287.photobucket.com/user/wmm1973/media/sprayedtvlicense_zpsac5e31ee.jpg.html

 

---------- Post added 06-04-2013 at 18:41 ----------

 

Yes. A big one too.

 

 

Its a lie. Its a big fat fib in order to get your money.

The "law" is an act.

The act requires your compliance

Dont give it?

They cant do a thing.

Oh and send them a letter. Say in the letter you have " removed implied right of access from your property"

Go on. Save some money.

 

 

 

Nope. Do the research.

Or ask me nicely and i may help you save money (and face )

 

At last someone who does not have there head buried in the sand,a ellow freeman

[onewheeldave]

 

Your reasoning seems to be akin to those who steal TVs from Dixon's during a riot - effectively they'll never get caught so it's obviously fine.

 

Another strawman- not paying for a 'license' that is unenforcable, is not stealing.

 

 

 

 

Suggesting that I need to "stand up and take the consequences" of complying with the law and not blame those who seek to indulge in criminality, simply because they effectively can get away with it, is so wrong-headed that I don't think we have any common ground for debate.

 

 

I said take the consequences of not complying with a law that you don't need to comply with, as the law won't be enforced if you choose not to comply.

 

 

 

You openly admit to breaking the law and enjoying content that I pay for. You think this is OK. It's not.

Did I? Where?

 

As for you paying for it- that's your choice. If you have a big problem with others watching programs that you feel you've paid for, then either cease your voluntary financial contribution, or, continue it but maybe consider being a bit more relaxed about others watching the TV.

 

After all, due to the BBCs crooked licence extortion racket, it's impossible for those people to simply enjoy programmes from broadcasters other than the BBC i.e ITV, ch4 and the hundreds of others who finance their programing via adverts etc, without being 'required' (in law) to give the BBC an annual £150 even if they never actually watch a BBC program.

 

You should maybe think about that, and, all the other dodgy aspects of the bbc licence fee, and ask yourself who's really leeching off who here?

[TJC1]

How do you know? Are you immune to cancer, degenerative diseases, accidents?

 

Yeah, I'm superman.

[andygardener]

Another strawman- not paying for a 'license' that is unenforcable, is not stealing.

 

I said take the consequences of not complying with a law that you don't need to comply with, as the law won't be enforced if you choose not to comply.

 

Did I? Where?

 

As for you paying for it- that's your choice. If you have a big problem with others watching programs that you feel you've paid for, then either cease your voluntary financial contribution, or, continue it but maybe consider being a bit more relaxed about others watching the TV.

 

After all, due to the BBCs crooked licence extortion racket, it's impossible for those people to simply enjoy programmes from broadcasters other than the BBC i.e ITV, ch4 and the hundreds of others who finance their programing via adverts etc, without being 'required' (in law) to give the BBC an annual £150 even if they never actually watch a BBC program.

 

You should maybe think about that, and, all the other dodgy aspects of the bbc licence fee, and ask yourself who's really leeching off who here?

 

Well quite, and well we're at it why the hell should we pay for the nhs? And dole people. We're healthy working sorts so why pay for something we don't need right now?

 

You're brighter than this dave. We can't pick and choose what laws we want to obey. The TV licence is an anacronism, but its a law and freeman on the land **** doesn't change that. We either obey the law or we don't - if we don't we are criminals and that's not a good place to be.

[onewheeldave]

Well quite, and well we're at it why the hell should we pay for the nhs? And dole people. We're healthy working sorts so why pay for something we don't need right now?

All strawmen- I've not suggested not paying for the NHS and/or benefits. I have suggested not obeying highly flawed laws which are unenforcable, one of which is the TV licensing law. If there are other laws I consider to be reasonable to not comply with, rest assured, I'll let you know- in the meantime, please cease to try 'putting words into my mouth' and/or constructing more strawmen.

 

 

You're brighter than this dave. We can't pick and choose what laws we want to obey. The TV licence is an anacronism, but its a law and freeman on the land **** doesn't change that. We either obey the law or we don't - if we don't we are criminals and that's not a good place to be.

 

Yes we can. That's the point. The majority of people break laws routinely. Anyone who has/does smoke cannabis is a law breaker. Most drivers have broken laws. I think it's a fair guess that over 50% of the population have chosen, at some point, to break a law.

 

Do you disagree?

 

Your reference to "freeman on the land " is another strawman- i've not mentioned it, nor will I, as I consider it to be mainly rubbish.

 

Some laws are incredibly destructive and harmfull, such as the current UK drug laws- I fully support anyone who ignores or fights against those laws- IMO, it is those who support those laws who are immoral.

 

The TV licensing laws are not as destructive as the UK drug laws, but they are harmful, they are nonsense and, to boot, unenforcable.

 

If you consider people who choose not to waste their money on a TV license as criminals, and, if you consider those who fight the UK drug laws to be criminals, then fair enough, I guess there's no shame in being such a criminal.

 

Criminals like that are in good company, which includes those who opposed apartheid and those who disobeyed the 'laws' imposed when the Nazis occupied various European countries in WWII.

[andygardener]

All strawmen- I've not suggested not paying for the NHS and/or benefits. I have suggested not obeying highly flawed laws which are unenforcable, one of which is the TV licensing law. If there are other laws I consider to be reasonable to not comply with, rest assured, I'll let you know- in the meantime, please cease to try 'putting words into my mouth' and/or constructing more strawmen.

 

 

 

Yes we can. That's the point. The majority of people break laws routinely. Anyone who has/does smoke cannabis is a law breaker. Most drivers have broken laws. I think it's a fair guess that over 50% of the population have chosen, at some point, to break a law.

 

Do you disagree?

 

Your reference to "freeman on the land " is another strawman- i've not mentioned it, nor will I, as I consider it to be mainly rubbish.

 

Some laws are incredibly destructive and harmfull, such as the current UK drug laws- I fully support anyone who ignores or fights against those laws- IMO, it is those who support those laws who are immoral.

 

The TV licensing laws are not as destructive as the UK drug laws, but they are harmful, they are nonsense and, to boot, unenforcable.

 

If you consider people who choose not to waste their money on a TV license as criminals, and, if you consider those who fight the UK drug laws to be criminals, then fair enough, I guess there's no shame in being such a criminal.

 

Criminals like that are in good company, which includes those who opposed apartheid and those who disobeyed the 'laws' imposed when the Nazis occupied various European countries in WWII.

 

Comparing not paying your TV licence to the Rote Kapelle is more than a little pathetic. You're too tight to pay for telly, you ain't Mandella or Harro Schulze-Boysen as a result. Just a deadbeat not paying his way.

[onewheeldave]

Comparing not paying your TV licence to the Rote Kapelle is more than a little pathetic. You're too tight to pay for telly, you ain't Mandella or Harro Schulze-Boysen as a result. Just a deadbeat not paying his way.

 

No. That post was in response to your generalisation that disobeying a law is wrong. Hence my several examples of laws which it clearly was not wrong to disobey.

 

Additionally, your generalisation that those who don't pay for a TV license is necessarily down to 'tightness' is also incorrect- many other reasons have been clearly given in this thread, many of which are based on not wanting to support a company (the BBC) which is seen as crooked.

[Richard 111]

We cant afford sky.

[andygardener]

No. That post was in response to your generalisation that disobeying a law is wrong. Hence my several examples of laws which it clearly was not wrong to disobey.

 

Additionally, your generalisation that those who don't pay for a TV license is necessarily down to 'tightness' is also incorrect- many other reasons have been clearly given in this thread, many of which are based on not wanting to support a company (the BBC) which is seen as crooked.

 

If you believe the company is crooked you can take a principled stand by not having telly and thus having no need to pay them.

 

Do that, or you're just another deadbeat who wants to shirk their bills.

[Richard 111]

If you believe the company is crooked you can take a principled stand by not having telly and thus having no need to pay them.

 

Do that, or you're just another deadbeat who wants to shirk their bills.

 

We dont have sky so pay the bill.