Thread: New Updated Arms Code 2017

con·spir·a·cy (kən-spîr′ə-sē)
n. pl. con·spir·a·cies
1. An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.
2. A group of conspirators.
3. Law An agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime or accomplish a legal purpose through illegal action.
4. A joining or acting together, as if by sinister design: a conspiracy of wind and tide that devastated coastal areas.

a) Subversive - changing that status of A-Cat, particularly when it is already defined'ish/accepted - Tick

b) More than one person - hard to have a meeting with just yourself - Tick

c) Illegal - doesn't have to be by definition - Tick

d) Does not involve people - not sure what you're on about here, it all involves people - Tick

Any closed session of parliament is conspiring to do something because it is secret.

Sorry got letters instead of numbers... might have caused the lack of clarity a-d = 1-4.....

a) Defined where...?? Just in Statute? The law can be challenged at any stage any time as part of recognised process, one of the basic principles of a free society... how is that subversion? The law is not settled until the court rules. If the police now attempted to apply what they have been told was unlawful by the court - then it could become subversion, but that hasn't happened has it. And the code and any incompetant AO hasn't been established as being that...
NOTE: to subvert is a deliberate policy of breaching the law..

b)Unless illegality is intended, no conspiriters exist... having private meetings does not make people conspiriters.. Point 1 has to be true before this can apply

c)Yes it does, you're own definition requires it..

d)Thats a metaphoric example not involving people. It is not possible for the winds and tide to make agreements..

by the way... show me where secrecy is a requirement?