LadyDeliah

He'd be in with a better chance though.

Is it safe to turn on Radio 4 again yet?

What about Viz, Mick?

Lol

I look forward to reading them DJKQ.

Things may have changed since I left in the 80's, but I know from my brother, who still lives up there that downtown Birkenhead still isn't safe on a Friday or Saturday night. Anyway, I know there are loads of nice people who live on Merseyside, but I think there is also a very big underclass who don't follow the 'nice' rules and live a pretty brutal life. That's why the hideous acts of violence exhibited by young kids in instances like this, never surprise me. I don't think denying there is a problem with violence in tbe area helps anyone.

Not sure which part you grew up in, but I expected to get jumped any time I had to walk through neighbouring areas and actually did on more than one occasion. It was even worse for my brothers. The police were just as brutal. When I came to London, I was really surprised that some people argued fiercely without glassing each other and I lived in Elephant & Castle. I was most shocked by the fact that people were able to shout at police without getting dragged into a van and beaten up. No matter what DJKQ experienced in Liverpool, the experience of many people I know who grew up in Birkenhead was totally different. Just remembered the last time I was out in Liverpool centre at a club about 5 yrs ago and there were bouncers every 10ft inside the club. On that one night, I saw someone get glassed, another person got bottled indide the club and a guy outside had his shirt off, covered in blood, shouting to some other guys to fight him if they were hard enough. I'd forgotten how often I'd witnessed scenes like that both in Luverpool and Birkenhead. The only time I've ever seen anything close in London was at The Henry Cooper down Old Kent Rd in the 80's.

Birkenhead, over the river, is the capital of random violence. Growing up in Birkenhead made me think random violence was part of everyone's life. Much as I'd like to blame it all on Maggie, there is a long history of violence there. I have no idea why it's so bad on Merseyside, but it makes me sad.

I think the reason people are posting about the dog is that the title gives the impression the dog was also involved in the attack. I thought that when I read it and obviously discovered that not to be the case when I read further. The OP must have been in shock when she posted so I would imagine the whole group, including the dog was in her mind when she thought about the attack. It might help if she removed the reference to the dog in the title, even just to get her thread back on track, but I think it's understandable that in the aftermath she didn't differentiate between the human assailants and their dog.

I didn't say it was. I was just correcting MM's post. However, I wanted to go but heard about the likely heavy handed policing. I can't afford to get arrested do I stayed at home. I imagine there were others who felt the same as I did.

Marmora Man Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Tonight's BBC News: 300 - 500 protesters at > Trafalgar Square, scarcely a mass demonstration of > support for the obsessed left? Actually authoritative estimates of who turned up are between 2,000 - 3,000. Plus don't forget the protests in Liverpool, Belfast, Glasgow etc.

Voyageur Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > LadyDeliah Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > The Thatcher family are millionaires. Why > should > > I pay for the witch's funeral? > > HUGE yawn..... Public services being cut and my taxes are going to pay for this disgusting piece of crap's funeral despite her familiy's massive wealth and recently revealed dodgy tax crimes. Seriously makes me sick.

The Thatcher family are millionaires. Why should I pay for the witch's funeral?

polla2256 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Tell them what you think via wifi - change you're > ssid to something like "My neighbours suck balls" Genius! lol

I'm with ecotricity for elec & gas and they are pretty reasonable, but I decided a couple of years ago to take my central heating and hot water off the automatic timer and just press the one hour button to heat them up when I needed to. I am in a 3 bed house with 3 adults and 1 teenager but my last gas bill, which was for a month and a half and in winter, came to ?54. We do tend to put jumpers on though and only bother with the heating when it gets pretty cold.

I agree it's arguable, but don't agree that there must be an interference with the pysical structure to be considered to be damage. The CPS website says: The Criminal Damage Act 1971 (the Act) repealed the common law and statutory offences of arson. Only a few of the offences contrary to the Malicious Damage Act 1861 remain. The Act is now the primary source of offences of damage to property. Damage is not defined by the Act. The courts have construed the term liberally. Damage is not limited to permanent damage, so smearing mud on the walls of a police cell may be criminal damage. What constitutes damage is a matter of fact and degree and it is for the court, using its common sense, to decide whether what occurred is damage (Archbold 23-6). The damage need not be visible or tangible if it affects the value or performance of the property. Also see: The authorities show that the term "damage" for the purpose of this provision, should be widely interpreted so as to conclude not only permanent or temporary physical harm, but also permanent or temporary impairment of value or usefulness Morphitis v. Salmon [1990] Crim. L.R. 48, Q.B.D.

I didn't suggest they be arrested, I was merely pointing out the legal position. I couldn't care less whether the Fusion gum wish to enforce their rights against people such as the OP, that wasn't my point. You were wrong, so why not just accept it? And in furtherance of your legal education, a plaintiff is someone who brings an action in court, not the person having the action brought against them, but is referred to as a claimant or appellant in English law, depending in the context and the one defending would be the Respondent. However in criminal proceedings, such as in cases of criminal damage, it would be the prosecution (usually the state) who brought the action against the defendant. Better now?

Glenda Jackson nailed it: Lest we forget.

UncleBen Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'll dance when Thatcherism is dead, not an old > lady. I dispised her politics, its effects back > then, its effects now and the way her politics > made the majority selfish and greedy. The condems > are repeating them now. I'm good for two dances :-)

Err, my point was that leaving a bike lock on a pipe belonging to someone else without their permission and requiring someone to cut it off to remove it, could technically be criminal damage. You said it wasn't so I dug out authority to show you that it is. Also saying something constitutes an offence, means it forms the parts of an offence, so not sure why you think mentioning that something forms part of an offence is different from saying the behaviour is technically an offence. Definition of constitute con?sti?tute [kon-sti-toot, -tyoot] Show IPA verb (used with object), con?sti?tut?ed, con?sti?tut?ing. 1. to compose; form: mortar constituted of lime and sand. 2. to appoint to an office or function; make or create: He was constituted treasurer. 3. to establish (laws, an institution, etc.). 4. to give legal form to (an assembly, court, etc.). 5. to create or be tantamount to: Imports constitute a challenge to local goods. Should I type that a bit more slowly, so you can catch up?

Yeh or we could have turned into a Socialist country. My guess is as good as his.

I disagree Loz, she was the beginning of an onslaught that has smashed it's way through our education, health and other public services for the benfit of her millionaire friends and to the detriment of the majority of the rest of us. This is another good article but a bit more political than Brand's which explains why some of us hate her and want the current lot to join her. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/jan/04/margaret-thatcher-state-funeral-protests

Also nice to an old classic being resurrected: http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/music/news/ding-dong-the-witch-is-dead-could-reach-number-one-following-margaret-thatchers-death-8566042.html

Loz Wrote: ... > I don't think anyone would reject the idea of a > debate of her, but those posters advocating > 'celebration' of her death are truly loathsome. > How would they like the local community to cheer > happily at their mother's death? My mother didn't ruin thousands of people's lives and refuse to listen to their pain, she just did it to a few of us! Re: the Brand article, I agree it's fantatsic and it's also here in the Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/russell-brand/margaret-thatcher-our-unm_b_3046390.html?utm_hp_ref=tw

Sorry Rosie, but I fight the current shower and I fought the inbetween lot, but I'm happy to reserve a bit of bile for the woman who cared nothing for the people whose lives and communities she destroyed and replaced with consumerism, greed and rabid selfishness. Hated her when she was alive and nothing's changed now she's dead, other than a small black cloud that's lifted from my grim Northern past where the sun has momentarily poked through. Just wish she'd take a load of the current lot with her.