-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
At 04:23 PM 6/14/00 -0400, David Honig wrote:
>At 04:12 PM 6/14/00 -0400, Declan McCullagh wrote:
>>What makes anyone think Sealand is outside of the UK's jurisdiction
>>after the government in the 1980s extended their territorial
>>limits to 10 miles? Sealand is 6-7 miles offshore.
>>
>>-Declan
>
>The 3 mile limit came from the range of the Guns at the time.
>Problem is, our guns now reach around the world.
>
>Where does the 12-mile limit come from? (Probably, from
>the credo of govts these days: "whatever we can grab", with
>more than 12 miles causing too many conflicts if generally applied)
>
>Sealand seemed to take the generally-followed position when land is
>too close: split the difference.
>
>What do marine charts say? Does it vary according to publisher?
>(e.g., do the french give Sealand full due, just to piss off the
>Anglos?)
>
This is not something I'd like to think about, but my understanding
is that a country can be declared if it has enough arable land to
support 3 people.
This from a layman, when it comes to law.
This from a source I can no longer remember.
Would that make Sealand a ship, in british waters? Even if it is
privately owned and not flying british colors? Or did Prince Roy and
family think ahead and put a garden on the deck?
Good luck,
Sean
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPfreeware 6.5.1 for non-commercial use <http://www.pgp.com>
iQA/AwUBOUltnJHDoiHtqFDZEQL5twCg/EWwJ9koZ95e/Ojgzl2QcalcxDgAn3qj
bNpAwtid594JjBXgTUR2VZW1
=9nQN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
