Talk:Riot Act
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Now, presumably when a Queen is in office... the wording changes?
--65.2.113.102 01:36, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- No idea, but I would guess so. Meanwhile, does the US have the Riot Act (in some form) on the books?
- [-- 134.198.64.18 16:08, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)]
-
- I would think so. Read the stuff about unlawful assembly etc in the main article here, also search for "Riot" in just about any state criminal code. - knoodelhed 17:09, 30 Aug 2004 (UTC)
Could someone provide a cite for the claim that a prosecution was thrown out due to lack of "GOD SAVE THE KING!"? The Canadian version and the original version from the UK both have a saving clause ('or like in effect') that would seem to preclude that.
Contents |
[edit] Death or imprisonment
There are a number of references elsewhere to "The pains or penalties were penal servitude for life or not less than three years, or imprisonment with or without hard labour for up to two years". Can anyone confirm the claim in this article that clouds had to disperse "under pain of death".
NGB
- Section I: "...such continuing together to the number of twelve or more, after such command or request made by proclamation, shall be adjudged felony without benefit of clergy, and the offenders therein shall be adjudged felons, and shall suffer death as in a case of felony without benefit of clergy." [1], and various other sections have similar rules.
- Section III also has a handy clause which basically says "once the Act is ignored, then any injury or death that happens whilst the crowd is being dispersed is entirely their own fault - which is, in effect, a license to be killed. But there's certainly explicit reference to execution in the Act. Shimgray | talk | 18:45, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Revision of the article
I've completely rewritten and expanded the article, and so have removed the Cleanup tag. However, I claim no expertise on this topic, so it would certainly be useful if someone who knows about it can verify it and improve it where necessary. But I think that it's overall a much better article, now. Silverhelm 22:07, 9 February 2006 (UTC).
[edit] See also
I've removed the reference to Miranda warning, as this has no particular connection to the Riot Act. The only tenuous connection would seem to be that it is something that is read to a (potential) offender, but the equivalent to the Miranda warning in the UK is the police caution as explained in the Miranda warning article.
Also added Redirect page from "Read the Riot Act" + minor edits
TrevorD 21:07, 19 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Treason??
I am sure I read somewhere that those deemed in breach of the Riot Act were thus also deemed to be guilty of treason for disobeying the monarch - hence the death penalty. Can anyone confirm this? Abertyllgoed 16:01, 5 June 2006 (UTC)
- That sounds rather spurious to me; and by that logic, every criminal offence would deserve the death penalty! Anyway, the text of the Act itself is quite clear: "the offenders [...] shall be adjudged felons, and shall suffer death as in a case of felony, without benefit of clergy". Silverhelm 21:04, 6 June 2006 (UTC).
[edit] Reading the Riot Act
To severely reprimand? The way I've always seen it used, it's pretty much "verbal open season, all out, all guns blazing." Severly reprimand seems a bit tame.
