*Bob*

Humour me.. I've lead a sheltered life. What exactly is 'clown porn'.

Could we get them legalised in the next month or so? I've got a couple of festivals coming-up and I hate having to fish a ziplock bag out of a pot of Brylcreem.

I'll watch, but if it turns out to be one of the Scottish or Welsh ones, I'm going down the pub.

Plaxo is just a simple means of determining who you really want to keep in touch with. By which I mean, if you get a Plaxo invitation from somebody, you can delete their number from your phone.

What was the password?

I don't begrudge them the light bulbs. I mean.. they had a measly ?200k profit to show for their three years of ownership.

At least they didn't take everything. Ours took the light bulbs.

'more power to their elbow' Jesus Wept.

Our downstairs bog is vintage - and certainly has a nice patina to it. I'll ask the missus. You never know.

Never mind. It's all come out in the wash. Have you been offered any cut-price stylish vintage furnishings yet?

A ten year-old who finds a gun in father's study and shoots his little sister deliberately. A woman who's been beaten by her husband every weekend for fifteen years. Someone who's profoundly mentally-ill slips through the care net and is released. Euthanasia. Someone kills your child, so you find out where they live and kill them. They're all murder. All the same? Hang them all? Nonsense.

What sort of murder? I mean, it's not like there's just one. Just like life, even murder isn't black and white.

Actually I don't want to steer this back to more P'ston-bashing. I'm not anti, I'm neutral, based on my last visit. And neutral is disappointing when you're expecting a treat. I'll certainly be visiting again so we shall see.

Not now, I'll admit. Consistently serving up a very high standard of food has allowed them to put the prices up - something for P'ston to aim for?

Suppose I ought to have checked. Current: lunch ?30, Dinner ?40. You turn your back for a year or so, and oh, I dunno. Still, it's possible to come out of dinner having paid not much over ?100.

Last time I went: Chez Bruce: 3 course lunch ?25. 3 course dinner ?29. Come off what, Jeremy?

When the first 'Gastropubs' (shite phrase, but let's go with it) appeared (The Eagle and their like) everybody pissed their pants because shock! here was somewhere which was willing to serve-up good food in an informal environment for a price which was affordable enough for you to bop on down there on a Sunday without having to think too hard about how much it cost. They're everywhere now, and London is all the better for it, but in a number of them, the prices have crept up without a matching what's on offer. You compare some of them to 'proper' restaurants (with their crisp table linen, wine waiters who actually know something useful, professional waiting staff) and it's all a bit confusing, even before you've tasted what's on the plate. There's a place for both of course, but it has to make sense and feel right. Basically the food is decent, but when a pound or two more per course gets you to Arbutus, Moro, Chez Bruce.. I kind-of feel some of them have lost their raison d'etre. Of course whilst there are bums on seats that's enough of a raison. 'Destination' restaurants like CB started as neighbourhood restaurants that just got better, as opposed to neighbourhood restaurants doing well on a combination of ok food, prior good-feeling and unwillingness of local punters to travel somewhere else.

The bloke who organised yesterday's protest (doing the rounds last night on C4 News and Newsnight) was completely hopeless - more like an exuberant 18 year-old signing-up to the Anti-Nazi League on the first day of Uni, rather than grown man who's supposed to have had a decade to hone some sort-of reasoned argument. I half expected him to offer John Snow a copy of Socialist Worker at the end of the interview.

My emotional feeling is "if you go round with a knife, one day you might end-up sticking it in someone, maybe even me, so if there's a mandatory sentence - great - you deserve it, you little git" but My rational feeling is "if you lock this person up, there's a chance you might prevent a crime, but the chances are that (in the long run) you'll cause ten more in the process".

bigbadwolf Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- They go to prison, hinder further > chances in life.........tough, they were warned. This is true, but (ultimately) the decision to bang 'em up will be tough for you, as well as for them.

Did you carry one anyway?

Let's say (for the sake of argument) there are 100000 people carrying knives around - for one reason or another. In scenario A, all 100000 are stopped carrying a knife and go down for a five year stretch. As a result of our current parole system, 50000 of them go on to be serial offenders with little in life to lose, and 1000 of them go on to commit further serious crimes throughout their life. In scenario A, during the course of a five year period, 100 serious crimes are committed by those 100000 carriers. The others get lucky (ie don't get caught, nothing happens, don't get into a situation where they use them). They grow up a bit. They get an education. They get a job. They get a life. They don't carry a knife any more. Obviously I'm making the figures up. But essentially you have to balance up the understandable desire to come down hard and make and example of people with the knowledge that it'll come back to bite you later in life ten-fold. At least before these people go to prison there is theoretically a chance improving their lot before it's too late. Once they're in, that's never going to happen for a huge percentage of them.

bigbadwolf Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Whats your evidence for this change *Bob*? I've > worked with plenty of surveyors, engineers etc who > still take part in football motivated violence and > have all of what you listed to loose. They just > don't shout about it. Yeah, I'm sure. There will always be a hardcore element but it's not on the scale of what it used to be. ie All but the most hardcore have been deterred.

On the football hooligan issue, which is interesting.. I can believe ???? / Tony's points about deterrent in this case, but surely the point is that with Mr Hooligan, you're talking about people who had plenty going for them (Jobs / Careers / Wives / Family / Children / Car / house) but for some reason enjoyed the 'thrill' of administering a kicking on a Saturday - for a bit of fun. In other words, people with much to lose if the thrill came at any real price. But the people you're talking about today - who you suggest would similarly give-up if there was a sufficient deterrent - often have none of the above. They have nothing to lose, so they don't really care.

If Tony had written this (see below) - then you'd be right. Surely you can see the difference? > Some F**CKING believe that rehabilitation and compassion > for people with broken lives are the way F**CKING forward > and others, like myself, believe that certain > crimes should be punishable by amputation of the > F**CKING right hand, administered, naturally, under > F**CKING anesthetic. Indeed, If the thief repents and makes > restitution before the case is brought before a > F**CKING judge, the punishment can be reduced. Aggravated > theft can be punished by cross-amputation of a > hand and a F**CKING foot. C**NTS.