DaveR

"Depressing that no one but me seems to have an issue with the use of 'lunatic'. I'm pretty sure it hasn't been an acceptable label in the lifetime of anyone using this forum." Not a word I often use but I'm reasonably sure that 'lunatic' was a widely used legal term until the 1960s, if not later. One of the original jurisdictions of the Chancery Court was in respect of the 'property of lunatics and idiots', with the former being considered a (potentially) temporary condition whereas the latter was permanent.

"Let's just accept that the Law is an Ass, and the lunatics are running the asylum" How about "let's just accept that so far, a single decision has been made i.e. to arrest, which on any view is not obviously unreasonable"? And perhaps additionally "let's just accept that people who like talking about 'filth' and 'scum' are probably both unable to be rational or cautious in their opinions (as well as being, I would hazard, quite unpleasant individuals)"?

"People should have every right to defend themselves and theirs. I hope that the law sides with the gentleman and acts as a precedent that favours victims of crime as opposed to lending further licence to criminals" Crikey, it really is amateur hour round here. The law doesn't side with anyone - it's applied by judges who (in criminal trials) give directions on law to juries. But before it gets to a trial someone has to be charged, a decision made by a prosecutor. Legal precedents, put simply, are cases that decide issue of law and are then applied in future cases. What happens in this case will only set a precedent if (at some future stage) it ends up in the Court of Appeal, say. I don't know what you mean by 'further licence to criminals" - do you?

"Yes Dave R, let's just lock the old chap up for a few weeks as he's obviously a danger to the burglar community, whilst the ever so politically correct CPS fiddle around deciding if this psychopathic pensioner should be charged." Have you ever heard of custody time limits? Police (Detention and Bail) Act 2011? Thought not. Why do you lecture people about things you don't know anything about? Do I come to your place of work and tell you how to sweep up?* *© Billy Connolly

"Perhaps these proselytising bleeding hearts might > feel a little differently if it was their house > and family invaded and threatened in the night by > this vicious filth? I daresay they would- but they would never admit to it!" Calm down boys, sounds like you're getting a bit over excited. Can you just clarify who you're having a go at here? Are you blaming the Plod on the basis that they are the 'bleeding hearts' or have otherwise gone soft? Or are some other bleeding hearts to blame i.e. the Plod would have been happy to let the old boy alone (and even given him a slap on the back) but they're hamstrung because of people like us, with our 'due process' talk and political correctness (gone mad)? Either way, I'm afraid to say you sound like a couple of excited schoolboys, who have no clue about the realities of policing and the criminal law but just love saying (typing) things like 'scum' and 'vicious filth' and 'string em up' (anticipated). Which is a bit sad for two blokes of reasonably advanced age (I'm guessing).

"Only by taking away the choices that financial privilege affords, over things like education, housing, and opportunity, can you address inequality." I find it interesting that you argue that taking away freedom is the 'only' way to address inequality, and that "It is actually an argument against free market capitalism versus socialism". The developed countries that generally top the tables for the lowest levels of inequality (Scandinavian countries most often cited) don't have socialist economies and don't operate by 'taking away choices'. What they do is redistribute income both directly (through higher taxes and benefits) and indirectly (through high level of state supplied/subsidised services). The idea that inequality is driven by the level of social mobility has been largely debunked by looking at actual data, and also the contrast between income inequality and wealth inequality - by the latter measure, the Scandinavian countries don't look much different to the UK, for example. There is an interesting debate to be had about the relationship between class, income and inequality in the UK but your essential proposition is not supported by the evidence. NB I realise I am continuing the "usual BS" so for completeness, on topic, I would have thought two things at least were obvious - the first is that the content on the website linked to is proper, poisonous white supremacist racist stuff, and the second is that every word of this is shit: "Haha cheers some, and most of you on here are very funny people in this thread 😂 very hypercritical it?s unreal All of your hateful comments have made my day my week even Thumbs up to private education hey 👋😂 You mostly know nothing about the issue, study it check it out properly then come back All so worried about my English that u r sadly blinded by the real life Have a beautiful day Snobbery is a big thing on here but gladly there are some straight headed people on here what knows what the real world is all about, the true working class who has never had nothing handed to them on a plate the ones who actually see the real world. Protesting things that u don?t know harm u is a thing what loads of people are doing, because know one knows the true depths of things Anyways I?m sure a lot of u have met up and had some meetings in your nearest Starbucks and had a long good chat about the matter ,hopefully things went rite for the latte liberals"

I think Southwark and most schools are much tougher now than before. The guidance changed to only authorising absence in 'exceptional circumstances' (in about 2013?) and Southwark also decided fairly recently to implement the penalty notice regime (not sure exactly when but they did not adopt it immediately). In practice because schools have to record absences it's easier for them just to say no to pretty much every request, and then record any absence as unauthorised - then it becomes largely the local authority's problem. These days I think it's safest to assume that any request for absence for a holiday will be refused and there's a risk you'll get a penalty notice - I have no idea how efficient and how tough Southwark are in reality, but the policy is here and is pretty blunt: https://www.southwark.gov.uk/schools-and-education/information-for-parents/behaviour-attendance-and-truancy/penalty-notices-for-irregular-attendance-and-term-time-leave

If you have a family member or someone else close who can have your toddler for a weekend, things might seem a bit better after a night out and a lie in! More seriously, most of the people I know who have moved out have either gone 'home' i.e. a place they already know well and have connections, or to a commutable town/village (more expensive commute but not always much longer in terms of time), or as a result of a particular job coming up. It's a very big step to move to somewhere essentially unknown, and of the people I know who have done that most have moved again within a few years, either back to London, or further away. What seems to be a theme is that trying to recreate London life somewhere else will never work, though you might find a different life that, for all sorts of reasons, you end up preferring. I know a couple of families who moved to seaside towns who now can't imagine not being near the beach. I would also say that although there are some things that you can't do with small kids there are lots that you can, and it changes fast as toddlers get older. I can still remember the feeling of freedom when we no longer need to take a pushchair anywhere, or nappies, and when the kids would sit in a cafe and do some drawing, at least for long enough to properly eat lunch. It creeps up on you then suddenly life is different. Then school, then secondary school, GCSEs...

"Ah Jimlad you have gone very quiet, have you no opinion?" Just because you're self-righteous doesn't mean someone has to debate with you, nor does it mean that you have 'won'. It just means you're a bit childish. On topic, it makes sense for the armed forces to have outreach events at schools - they still recruit in significant numbers and some kids are likely to find a career (short or long) in the forces very rewarding.

"...schools are no longer accountable to the LA and can do whatever the hell they like with their admissions" Obviously not https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/389388/School_Admissions_Code_2014_-_19_Dec.pdf

The promoters and contractors for the event appear to be up to the job and have some history/substance, and Southwark seem to have identified many of the obvious concerns and addressed them through licensing conditions. I can understand that people who live close by or use the park and the common frequently might still be concerned, and there's definitely going to be some impact, but I can't see any reason for predicting disaster. I can also understand people whose strong feeling/expression is simply that they don't want this sort of thing in the park at all (I'm looking at you J Barber, opportunist par excellence) but hopefully there is sufficient insight to understand that others disagree with equivalent sincerity, and there's nothing inherently unreasonable about these types of events. NB - I suspect I'll be going away for the weekend!

"Completely uneccesary comment. There is a huge difference between an animal hunting from hard wired instinct and hounds being bred to kill." Being a bit pedantic, perhaps, but pack hunting is absolutely hard wired instinct for dogs and that's the reason why they were domesticated and bred so successfully for this purpose. It took a lot more effort to breed dogs to do a whole bunch of other things that are more for our benefit than theirs (not least the majority of hunting dogs who are bred not to kill). I don't agree with uncleglen's sentiments but it is fair to say that owning a domestic cat is not uncontroversial - ask a bird lover. On the general question of having a cat in the countryside, I would be concerned if there was a local hunt very close by. Cats don't tend to have very big territories (even in the countryside) but you wouldn't want to take the risk of that overlapping with hunt territory. NB - most farmers will take a very dim view of a hunt charging through a corn field!

A very left field suggestion (but maybe good for architects) would be EUR - a suburb that was originally the intended site of the 1942 World Expo and consequently has a whole bunch of Fascist era "Rationalist" buildings, as well as some interesting post war areas used for the 1960 Olympics, and a couple of galleries. There are also plenty of shops and places to eat, and it's a few stops from the centre on the underground. I only know the area at all because I stayed there with friends a couple of times many years ago, and if you visit I suspect you may be pretty much the only tourists!

"I couldn't care less about your insulting me, but loosely chucking the term fascist at people and groups with whom you happen to disagree is pathetic. Several of my family died fighting real fascism, do grow up and find some arguments instead of tasteless and meaningless insults." Do you really think you're the only person who could wheel out dead relatives, or are you the only one so pathetically desperate to pursue your idiotic point from the moral high ground that you are willing to throw it in here, an online discussion about furry coats? Back on point, and as observed above, there isn't any real dispute about what materials Canada Goose use, where they come from, how they're obtained etc., so how you feel about it will probably depend more on your view of wearing fur in principle rather than judgments about what's cruel and what's not - after all, eating meat necessarily involves animals being killed, which might be regarded as cruel however it's done. However, the fact of a PETA protest cannot be assumed to indicate that rules are being breached or some specific acts of cruelty are being perpetrated because they oppose any use of any animal products for clothes, full stop.

I'm similarly unkeen on being lectured by the EDF's resident bleeding heart PITA who thinks c&p from an online dictionary gives him the upper hand.

"PETA might be an extremist propaganda organisation, but it has a role to play in educating consumers about provenance" This sounds a bit like saying "UKIP are a bunch of single issue fanatics but it has a role to play in educating voters about the economic effects of immigration". FWIW I also think it's pretty silly wearing full on Arctic gear on the streets of comparatively balmy London but I'm b*ggered if I'm going to be lectured by super-vegan fascists.

The only information I could see on the PETA website about the use of down in clothing, for example, was entirely generic criticism without any evidence and certainly none about Canada Goose. Plus, I'd be dubious about views on cruelty from an organisation which explicitly considers any use of down to be inherently wrong; they're not exactly objective. My own view is that PETA is an extremist propaganda organisation, and I wouldn't trust them as an accurate source of information about anything, but that's just my view. Canada Goose evidently have specific policies about using animal products and people can decide for themselves what to do.

PETA is an organisation that opposes the 'wearing' of any animal product in any circumstances so the issue (at least for them) is not about fur per se or humane farming. If you're a vegan you won't wear Canada Goose. If you're not, you're on the wrong side for PETA whatever else you do.

If you are interested in that site it's worth looking at the LSE Booth Project: https://booth.lse.ac.uk/ The most interesting that I've found are the notebooks - you can search for your street name or any other keywords here: https://booth.lse.ac.uk/notebooks For example, this is the beginning of the account of a walk round East Dulwich/Peckham in November 1899 by one of Booth's reporters, accompanied by PC 'Taffy' Jones: https://booth.lse.ac.uk/notebooks/b375#?cv=3&c=0&m=0&s=0&z=76.1703%2C-12.0275%2C2330.4593%2C1386.1111 Quite a lot of the content is limited to the appropriate colour for each street (for the 'poverty map') but there are some fascinating additional comments, particularly in the 'general notes' at the end. For example: "North of Upland Road to East Dulwich Road is a lower middle class area. Shoals of silk-hatted people leave these roads every morning for the City."

The Noise of Time by Julian Barnes is fantastic. It's a fictionalised biography of Shostakovich during the 'reign' of Stalin.

I've been thinking about a scenario where I would think breastfeeding was "inappropriate, inconsiderate and selfish". I can't think of one, including the 'tea at Claridges' which seems to be regarded as a good example. Now that's only my view, and of course there may be others who feel differently. But that doesn't mean they are entitled to interfere in someone else's behaviour, nor expect that the proprietor should impose rules to suit them. Years ago lots of people would have objected strongly to seeing kids in pubs at any time, and some still do, but the world has changed, and I'm afraid people have to get comfortable with that.

The issue of 'cultural misunderstanding' re fishing and the Polish community has been around for years - the Environment Agency got a roasting years ago for putting up signs in Polish warning about the need for a licence and the limits on catches. I'm not sure this is a great example of something to call out as 'hateful prejudice'

Had two kids at Goodrich - younger now in year 6, older now year 9 so a 'Goodrich parent' for the last ten years or so. I like the school a lot, particularly the head teacher - very passionate about standards but not narrowly focused on academic results. I like the fact that they have specialist teachers in particular areas e.g. music and PE which means there's a lot of opportunities, and they also have lots of trips of all types, including . It also always seems like generally a nice, happy place - lots of noise from the playground - and my kids have been very happy, always felt safe etc. I should add that I have lots of local friends who have/had kids at Heber and they've always been pretty positive about their experience. I don't know much about Bessemer or Harris but absolutely no reason to doubt that they are very good - the consensus seems to be that we're pretty lucky with primary schools in the neighbourhood, the problem is lack of capacity.

Any more suggestions for this? Not just baby clothes but also kids clothes, toys, equipment. I'm also trying to give away a mattress in the other section but also happy to donate if anywhere could make use (it's obviously not new but in decent condition).

The key point about McCarthyism was that almost everybody targeted was innocent of the key accusation i.e. that they were traitors. Most weren't Communist sympathisers at all, but even the cases involving those that were Communists did not show any evidence that they were working against the US. My instinct (and it can only be that) is that the majority of the recent harassment allegations are sincere and are likely to contain a significant element of factual truth. However, that will capture an enormously wide scope of situations, from clumsy attempted flirting at one extreme all the way through to rape at the other extreme. In the short term the hope is that sensible debate remains possible, but even that may not be achievable - we live in immoderate times.