Should the UK abolish the Human Rights Act?

No, but criminals should lose rights depending on the severity of their crime/crimes.

Only for people who committed crimes against children, rape or sexual assault or any other crime that can fall under this category

The question is far too broad to answer accurately.

Should amend it

People who have committed crimes inflicted on children and vulnerable people, such as sex crimes, homicide, etc, should loose these rights.

Add something that protects and solidifies human rights and civil liberties more than the HRA, that cannot be removed or infringed by government

No, but criminals should lose part of their rights depending on the severity of their crimes The Right to a Free Trial should be a constitutional amendment that cannot be changed.

Yes and they should make a new one based on each individual, depending wether they are a good person or bad. they should get mord punishments for breaking this act.

A distinction should be made for criminals who use the humans rights act as a way of staying in the country for example the grooming gangs leaders in Rochdale who made themselves stateless and still in the communities being paid for by tax payers.

no, but people who have committed serious crimes (rape, podophiles, murder) should not have the right

I believe there should be situations - not just criminals, whereby this can be overruled. Become less of a snowflake country

Those who murder, rape or unnecessarily commit violence to other people or animals should have their human rights revoked until the sentence has been served.

They should only abolish the human rights act for convicted rapists, murderers and terrorists or even strip them of their citizenship if convicted of terrorism offences

Yes, replace it with a bill of rights that must be approved upon and announced by the majority of people beforehand.

Whilst still having human rights. Reducing the chance of people abusing them because of “protected characteristics”

No, an complimentary and comprehensive bill of rights must be passed first before the Human Rights Act is repealed to create a legal barrier to abuse of power.

Yes, it should be layered. The HRA has been taken advantage of by non-citizens. Not every person who steps on our soil should be afforded the same rights

I believe in more right leaning system of governing. Current system easily leads with corruption. Old scripts like Baskillion Doron.

No, only criminals that have committed certain crimes and/or are repeat offenders should have reduced rights

I believe the Act does have some merits to it however I believe that Britain should withdraw from the ECHR in order to deal with illegal immigration properly.

No abolishing the human rights act would create a negative image in where a democratic peaceful nation like Britain does not value international legislation. This will encourage other countries to withdraw in ,particular authoritarian countries with human rights abuses, therefore internationally the importance of protecting rights decreases across the world.

No, however criminals of serious crimes like rape, intentional murder for no reason , Paedophiles, child sex traffickers should have all or most of these rights taken away.

No but strip the human rights from offenders of major crimes such as murder, rape, human trafficking etc.

Certain points need to be maintained - it needs to be more flexible maybe - but certainly not abolished.

No, the human rights act protects everyone fairly. The only reason people would want to remove it is so they can reduce the amount of people coming in to the country, basically their logic is drapped in racism

If it is it should be replaced by a constitutional document that is dealt with separately from standard constitutional sovereignty similar to Canada

Not all criminals should lose their human right, but murders (not in self defence etc) and sexual offenders should

No, unless you as a person abolished another person's, aka murder, rape, paedophilia. Then they should have no rights

Yes, the UK should not have to submit to the ICJ and have to try its soliger's in a foreign court furthermore the act is superfluous as the counterys that sign it tend to follow them anyway.

The UK should do more to allow people basic human rights. There also needs to be major changes to wording and rights afforded. '

The human rights act needs serious reform. Criminals should Not be protected by it and not should anyone abusing it including law firms. The likely hood is that reform will be too slow so put a UK bill of rights in place first then worhdrawer if suitable reform looks too far away.

No however there is a need for some amendments in domestic law which will then help to comply with the ECHR as well as modern day trends

Yes, whereas the act itself is fine - unfortunately the case law that has now embedded itself around the act allows for too much misuse and excuse and it now does not follow its own spirit

No, although the Human Rights Act only tied our hands to the EU courts etc, but us doing a stupid thing like that will lead to other countries in the EU that are puritan to do the same. Hungary being an example!!

Only if the government cements our rights such as freedom of speech, freedom of expression and the right to self defence in law and that it clearly states that those rights superceded all other laws in perpetuity.

should be a more in depth human rights with focusing on on humans business military wars and criminals

No, but criminals of major sentences should have some of their rights reduced/ limited for a set time period both during and after sentence

Copy and paste much of it into British law i.e. British Convention on Human Rights (BCHR) but have it so we don't have to accept free movement of asylum seekers like the ECHR.

The ok should have more control over human rights in our country. I also think it should be completely overhauled. Criminals should be treated like criminals.

Yes, the UK should create a written constitution for a federal republic than includes a declaration of rights

no, human rights apply to ALL humans regardless of criminal status and any attempt by the government to weaken these rights to pass legislation should worry the general public

A codified constitution, like the United States has, would benefit us as a society, though it depends on what would go into that constitution.

No, but given Brexit has occurred we should be reviewing any central policy implemented through the EU for suitability in a UK-centric purview

No, but illegal migrants should not get any rights in the UK and terrorists and pedophiles and child killers should have rights stripped.

Everybody should have basic human rights, abd be able to use drugs for personal use. Free medical care for the poor and focus on the homeless and mental health of UK citizens.

Yes, but there are some regulations that are ridiculous. This needs a discussion as to which regulations are over the top n take ownership of people for their stupid decisions.

Yes, and replace it with a constitution-style article which provides greater control to UK institutions.

NO abolishing internationally recognized rules will encourage regimes that violate these rules that democratic safe nations like Britain do not care about human rights abuses and violations of international law and therefore will encourage dictators to abuse these rights

Yes and replace it with a form of bill that the prime minister controls and is signed by the monarch in charge

We should create a constitution of sorts like the US which is written in law and cannot be taking advantage off by governments. Citizens will have rights and the government cannot violate those rights under any circumstance

All poeple regardless of what they do in their lives equally deserve the same standard rights such as those within the Human Rights Act.

Human rights are now political and are for the many not the few so in theory it’s good but currently no .. needs sorting

No. Keep it but put the Bible above it and then slowly have the act fall apart as the Bible becomes the Ultimate authority

Create a better bill of rights that is more upto date with the times and have it reviewed every 10 years

I don’t think we need to abolish the HRA, but what we can do is stop being members of the Refugee convention which we don’t honour anyway

We need to get touch. We have better tech now to make sure if someone in guilty, its 100% But we cannot generalise. More staff to make sure each story is listened to and worked out. I think we should have our own rules in the UK.

This should not be abolished but their are certain people who should be given less rights, for example criminals, people who harm children.

Yes but replace with a bill of rights that gives the UK more legislative control and strips criminals of many of their rights.

Some points should be kept, however other points need to be amended to more up to date circumstances within the uk. This act is manipulated heavily by both nationals and foreign nationals. However the manipulation allows many people to get away with this, especially foreign nationals who travel over illegally knowing they can commit crime and for the best part get away with it. We have enough home grown criminals to deal with let alone every other nations criminals.

Yes. replace it with a bill of rights that gives UK citizens more rights such as freedom of speech and protection over their data, whilst keeping all original protections in place.

No. but it should be a rule that if you have knowingly infringed another persons human right, then you should not expect to rely on these human rights to defend yourself.

Yes, replace it with a bill of rights that gives priority to public safety not the rights of criminals and terrorists

Men cant do what women can do (etc, give birth)
Women can't do whet men can do (etc, produce sperm)
Trans take precautions to far. They can not do what the opposite sex they were born with can do. They should not be able to access other sex changing rooms and restrooms (women and female). Men cannot relate to women. Women cannot relate to men. If children can decide if they want to man or women, whats stopping a child saying they identify as a cat, or identify as an 18 year old, that should be served alcoholic drinks at a bar. You cant have it both ways. People are taking equality to far.

There is too much red tape around areas that do not need it and less red tape around areas that do need it. It’s detrimental to all that there is fair chance and opportunity

Yes in the sense of repealing it - the rights are already achieved through common law or legislation passed since the 1960s

Remove excessive ones such as misgendering leading to arrest but keep basic ones such as the right to water

No, but modify the Act to require individual human rights to be balanced against community rights in certain cases.

No, but create a Bill of Rights which supersedes or enhances protections currently offered in the Act which gives the UK more legislative control

No but criminals who have raped, abused, murdered or in any way can be said to have taken or ignored someone else’s basic human rights should forfeit all of theirs, and the ultimate price should be the death penalty for those who have intentionally robbed another of their right to live.

Some human rights should be reconsidered, such as the right to religion where that includes the right to indoctrinate children or the vulnerable, or the protection of doctrines that encourage behaviour contrary to our laws and values.

More discrimination to the TQ+s and Jewish. I love all other races and women and men and the LGB and some of the Trannys

No, but criminals should lose some of these rights until they've proven themselves that they're okay with society.

modernise the human rights act to better fit society now, whilst still protecting rights that are inportant

The human rights act should be completely changed and include up-to-date modern legislation that gives ALL citizens freedom, equality and free from discrimination as well as having the necessary rights

Yes for criminals who committed inhumanly crimes such as paedophiles murderers (not including self defence) or terrorists

Does not exist, UK should follow this. They break the law. UK government should be fined for breaking the law.

We need to be given the right to freedom of speech, the right to defend ourselves and our property against attackers, remove the rights of repeat offenders

No, but criminals who have been convicted with undoubtable evidence should lose many of these rights

No. As long as the human rights act is Not built on full support of ideologies to the detriment if people who were already protected to become marginalised.

No, but it should be strictly interpreted by the courts, any extension of Rights must go through Parliament

I want cheaper stuff give me child labour Can invest in them Over 5.5 T-shirts made over 90 minutes

No, but it should be reviewed from time to time to make sure it is all still relevant and if anything is deemed to be irrelevant or outdated then it should be updated

Create a British constitution based upon the US constitution, guaranteeing freedoms and rights within law that cannot be amended or removed.

Human rights are important. Very important. However, human rights must be adapted to changing times.

Yes idealistically, if replaced with a bill of rights, however no as any bill of rights the current UK government would devise would be terrible and miss several key rights.

No but criminals lose most of these rights unless its a minor crime which in this case should only lose 1 or maybe 2

Yes, replace it with a new, reformed bill of rights that every British citizen has no matter what as long as they're on British ground

No abolishing internationally recognized legislation in democratic Britain is sending a sign to nation with a poor humans right record that human rights are disposable

human rights is absolutely necessary this question is pathetic im assuming this is in response to Israel violating human rights laws its wild how human rights are being taken away i dont understand how a normal sane person can look me in the eye and say human rights should not exist its crazy laws should not bend in peoples favor

No abolishing the Human rights act and its enforcement in Britain encourages other states to do the same. This will lead to less diplomacy between west and east countries

Human rights should be abiding. There too many people been abused, mentally, physically and now been neglected which in term have turned or setup to Be criminals. Fix these people. Eliminate our moms there fat and monsterrus.

No abolishing international legislation in Britain will send a negative message to countries with human rights violations that Democratic nations do not care about there human rights abuses

No the human rights act guarantees basic freedoms and protections for every individual. The uk replacing it will encourage other nations to do so. This means less legislation to protect freedoms and rights

No the human rights act is important for Britain to keep and enforce to ensure global human rights and put pressure on autocratic countries like North Korea and China

No but criminals with serious felonies should lose many of their rights.

Reform the human rights act and make them more protected

No but the Government spend taxpayer money enforcing UN laws only UK laws