Scribe

It's also not uncommon to encounter rickets and wooden teeth.

In the north of England: "Us" is singular. "Thaa" is plural. "Thaas" is plural possessive. "He were a southern bugger" is an accepted legal defence. All caravans have a satellite dish attached to them. And in some cases, they're worth more than the caravan.

Understood. At ease, Annette.

Languagelounger, rest assured, I was only teasing. I have no idea who the culprit is. The man I'm assuming is the uncle - simply because he shares more intimacy with the bereaved than anyone else, so far - is the chap who takes the teacher hostage (again) with Theis, who he seems to share a personal history with. The combination of both examples of familiarity suggests that he may be Theis' brother. Annette, what on God's green earth are you blathering on about?

Languagelounger, you're quite clearly exhibiting the first, telltale signs of a sartorial obsession. But you're quite right, detective Lund changes her cloths less frequently than Noddy. I haven't read the script, but I'm going to put her mother's silence down to the possibilty that she knitted said, canal sodden, morgue reeking jumper herself, so avoids raising the question of a change of clothes with her stubborn daughter. Oh, and if you must know, I've checked, and it was the girl's uncle who kidnapped and murdered her.

I'm a huge fan of all the crime thrillers that have come out of Scandinavia over the last decade. And I find myself strangely attracted to The Killing's Sofie Gr?b?l. I've also met and had my my photo taken with Lena Endre at Ascot racecourse. She's the actress that played Kurt Wallander's chief prosecutor, Katarina, in series two of the Swedish version. She also played Erika Berger in the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo trilogy. P.s. I don't think the teacher they took hostage (again) in last night's installment of The killing is involved in the girl's murder.

Eh? As far as I'm aware, I don't "know" anyone called "Larry", whatever you mean by that. Anyway. So you aren't from the Midlands?

Whatever helps you sleep at night, fyvum. Now, you'll have to excuse me, for one has to prepare some bread an' drippin' for the dog. Eckythump now thar, Rover. Ah've got some riigghhtt posh scran for yer tinigh'.

Well, that doesn't apply to me, as I haven't contributed to that particular shambles, RosieH. But at least down south we bury our dead. But tell me, RosieH, what part of the Midlands do you hail from?

Hardly what you'd call "proper research", now, is it? For a genuine, unbiased example of how economic and social trends in the north of England have stagnated over the last thirty years, have a look at lifted from an article in last month's Economist. Thought-provoking material, as I'm sure you'll agree.

Indeed they are, Brum. I know that the Constantine coin is a rare and subsequently valuable collector's item amongst the traders and collectors of antiquity, but I don't know if I could ever bring myself to sell it. And they both project an undeniable sense of intrigue, and I like to hold them when I read novels about Rome. Sometimes, often when I'm drunk, I stare at them for ages, wondering at their history, and dreaming-up images of the circumstances in which they would have changed hands. And yes, the Romans did integrate barbarian Gods into their own, equally superstitious pagan religion. But this display of respect and tolerance wasn't tolerated during the 4th and 5th centuries, when Rome converted to Christianity.

I've been fascinated by ancient and medieval history since I was little, and some of my most prized possessions are two Roman coins that my uncle and I found on his land in Kent with a metal detector he borrowed. One of the coins was from the time of Claudius (the emperor who sucessfully conquered Britain in AD 43), but the second one is unique in that on one side it has an image of Constantine, the first openly Christian emperor. But the really interesting aspect is on the reverse is an image/likeness of a pagan god. This confirms that the religious transition in the western empire wasn't as smooth as some would like, in that open contempt was being circulated. And in the process, mocking a Christain leader with a pagan deity on the other side of the coin that bares his likeness. And yes, they've both been authenticated.

For clarity, here's an artist's impression (taken from drawing submitted to Bromley council's planning dept) of what the proposed development would look like, and how it would fit into the park: http://www.cpfc.co.uk/javaImages/54/b9/0,,10323~9353556,00.jpg

Current legislation entitles the driver of a Hackney carriage to demand a deposit before accepting a fare. But they're private, self-employed contractors, so I thought that would've been obvious? Hackney carriage licensing conditions.

LubeTube, surely?

Yes, I understand that there are literally millions of people living on less than a pound a day, DJKQ, but let's be brutally honest, they don't live very long; nor do they have such ready access to medical help as we do in a conventional, modern-day, anarchy-free society. What I'm attempting to disprove is the parameter set on this experiment, which is a ?1 threshold. We both agree that we can't survive on the nutrients and peripheral needs supplied by just one pound alone. We'd have no choice but to break the restrictions placed upon us in this experiment to survive.

That's all well and good, DJKQ. But you haven't accounted for the water and fuel you're going to need to make that food edible. And, whatever you BMI, could you seriously see yourself surviving on a pack of stewing vegetables every day for the next few months, considering you'd have to eat them dry, or stew them in toilet water?

OK, let's be serious here. This hypothesis is redundant in both extremes. The first scenario is in a conventional, modern-day, anarchy-free dwelling. You give someone a ?1 coin to cover their entire expenditure for 24 hours. Their first concern will be food and water. All they'll be able to afford is cold food, because ?1 can't cover food, water and fuel. It's just not going to happen, so they buy a packet of sausage roles from whereever is the cheapest; although this can't be considered a seriously healthy source of sustenance. Even in the short-term they'll be forced to supplement their diet by theft or foraging, therefore living beyond their ?1 a day budget. The second scenario takes place after societal collapse, the setting this experiment would no-doubt be (hypothetically) preparing the participant for. The ?1 would be of no value in what would now be a barter economy; and personal defense would take precedence over satisfying you stomach. Besides, society has failed and there's no-one to stop you from just taking what you want, by whatever means possible. The only conclusive result you can draw from this experiment, is that when pushed, man will be forced to rely on his or her wits to survive.

Both Labour's Big Conversation and the Tory/Lib Dem coalitions Big Society is otherwise known by the layman as 'hot air', Tarot.

Thank you for seeing the wood from the trees, Ridgley. Buy I think the main issue on this thread is that some people refuse to accept reality. That reality is that a great deal of hunters (such as myself) do still take large game with either a bow or crossbow; even if we have to go abroad to do it. But they've proved themselves unable - or unwilling - to accept what's patently obvious, so there's really no point in carrying on with this discussion.

No, but after watching those links, we're a cringing nation.

Jeremy, who said anything about public humiliation? Although I'm happy to admit that my OP may not be as clear as it should be. I, as a taxpayer, wouldn't want chain gangs performing pointless tasks just for punishments sake, such as breaking rocks all day with sledgehammers. No, I would want them performing constructive tasks, such as providing manual labour in repairing the motorways, contributing to the cleaning-up effort after disasters. Jobs they can feel proud of, not putting themselves in a position where they run the risk of having rotten vegetables and dog feces hurled in their direction. Alhough I'm willing to concede that some tasks would expose them to the general public. Acumenman, I'd prefer it if you kept this thread free of any personal issues that may exist between you and this SeanMcG, if you don't mind. If SeanMcG has served a custodial sentence, for whatever reason, in the past; as far as I'm concerned, he's done his time and is perfectly welcome to comment and offer constructive criticism on this thread without fear of any prejudice you hold against former inmates. In short, this isn't the exercise yard, so play nice.

I'd take the kids down the bottom of the garden, if I were you.

White, middle-class parents of East Dulwich - take little Jonty and Ophelia upstairs to bed before following this link. You could attract a few puzzled glances if you don't.

I wasn't aware of this present obstacle, Hal 9000. But do you think the majority of the general public would support a change in current legislation to accomadte this proposed measure? This scenario would undoubtably put the proposal of introducing chain gangs at risk in its very infancy, KidKruger. Perhaps convicts could be put into a hypnotic trance during their time outside of the prison environment, with a pre-programmed hypnotic 'suggestion' mentally implanted in their subconscious that blocks them from escaping, voluntarily or otherwise?