Yes, well let's move on. The thing that jumps out at me from the manifesto is I think the first item which is the requirement for a written constitution. I find that quite interesting, as I follow US politics quite closely and there's a lot of stock put in their constitution and the amendments.
Is there not a feeling that a constitution binds us in? One of the unintended consequences of a written constitution is that you are bound to theoretical possibilities ad infinitum. In the States there is a huge debate about gun control and whether people who own AR-15s or Magnums can claim to be part of a "well-regulated militia" is up for debate. Is not one of the benefits of not having a constitution in the UK is that the citizens aren't constrained by such theoretical readings of a constitution. We have the freedoms we have until we get to some sort of legal barrier where the law says you can't do this because obviously it has an impact on yourself or society. What do you think about that?