JohnL

Not the mental health issues for me, just caution. I don't like getting involved on a personal level (especially when I don't know who I'm dealing with) - a crime should be dealt with by the Police IMHO - at least until it gets to court. KidKruger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Now people will start posting that you should not > identify the person's car details publicly because > that person may have mental health issues so its > unfair. We have to account for the smallest > possibility that that person didn't know they were > doing wrong...

What about GPS 'tags' for stuff ? - just checked and they do exist !!

If 90% of the people, men or women you meet are scumbags. I'd say perhaps you hang around in the wrong places.

Delegates versus representatives Takes me back 30 years to student debates :) david_carnell Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Because we elect people to let them make decisions > on our behalf, not expect them to consult us on > EVERY issue. > > It's called representative democracy. > > James, in his capacity as a councillor, is > absolutely entitled to register his discontent at > this idea without having to conduct some sort of > survey of the electorate. And he's still entitled > to vote whatever way he wants regardless. > > You are entitled to out an x in a box once every > four years. Get used to it.

Low for violence/general crime High for property perhaps ? Are there more things worth stealing ? Pastaman Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > James Barber Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > > > > But as Prunella_Gatsby says. we are a low crime > > area for London but that is zero consolation to > > those who have the misfortune to become victims > of > > crime. > > hmm...SE22 is 9th in the country for burglary > insurance claims in fact, according to > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howabou > tthat/9826026/Leeds-tops-list-of-burglary-hotspots > .html and > http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/mortgageshome/a > rticle-2267769/Burglary-hotspots-London-Leeds-list > -locations-home-insurance-claims-theft.html

Moos Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Salsaboy Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Tell you what Pinky, marry me. I'm a multi > multi > > millionaire and I've got a yacht and my own > train > > and an airplane and I own Tesco's and I've got > 29 > > houses on Lordship Lane. > > Liar. No-one can afford 29 houses on Lordship > Lane. Multiple entries in Monopoly - South London version maybe ?

Looks like Cardiff might be playing under the name 'Cardiff Dragons' if they make the Premier League (and they should). Don't know how well that will go down.

It won't be cool if he doesn't work out how to reconstitute himself. not cool at all. Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > mashcov Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > If they do not make themselves known to me with > an > > explanation I will have to investigate further. > > > I'm very keen to know how you plan to investigate > further though. > > Are you going to use a laser beam to turn yourself > in to particles, then travel the world wide web > seeking answers? > > Cool.

the-e-dealer Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yeah Westfield at Stratford is amazing The other Westfield is easier now for me, but I keep bumping into QPR fans :).

I'd say they work in teams (more than 2). Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If the scam was carried out as described by > Jimmyv, presumably there would need to be at least > two people involved - one to distract and one to > take the card (and to advise you to re-enter your > pin). > > Because I can't see how the distracter (word?!) > could lean across and take the card at the same > time as distracting you, unless he was David > Blaine :))

Don't underestimate the deviousness of these thieves. I had a card/pin stolen years ago and the bank couldn't believe that I hadn't written it down. Years later I saw the scam on TV and realised how they did it - they will have a method that they practice, to get both pin and card. Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I don't understand this, surely you only put your > pin in once the card is actually in the machine, > so at what point did this guy steal the card? > > He must have seen the pin being entered otherwise > he wouldn't have been able to use the card down > the road?

It was a bit like a wild west town there yesterday. Lots of people all going in different directions. I took some money out - but did make sure no-one was too close.

Unfortunately the highway code says any pedestrian on the road for any reason has right of way. That means direct action takers too - so cars are just meant to stop and wait for it to finish, I think, if they perceive any danger. I saw a huge direct action demo by cyclists at Oxford Circus the other day - caused chaos and as soon as the police got near they were gone - the traffic jam wan't though. But as soon as the demo starts the traffic stops. edhistory Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > How would you calculate "most"? > > What do you think about the road safety? > > John K

This is what I saw.... Heading southwards a car entering the box to turn right is allowed to (I think) even if the exit is blocked - however in this case, the exit remains blocked and the car is stuck in the middle of the junction whilst the traffic lights go through a whole sequence (result - no-one can move and cars begin to try to steer past). Huggers Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > today I saw all the traffic coming from Nunhead > lane with a green light completely stuck at the > next red light on 'kings on the rye' crossroads. > Can these lights not be coordinated so that when > they let cars through they don't immediately stop > them so there is a blockage ?

I thought Racist crimes jumped to the top of the list and HAD to be investigated. or was that in Mr Blairs day LuceB Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi Meadow > > It does but because TFL ignored my complaint for 4 > days it will now have been deleted. The police > have submitted a request for the second incident > to help identify him but the request will, > rightly, sit below other more serious crimes so > may not be agreed to by TFL. If anyone else has > problems, please do report it to the police. The > man I encountered always seems to have a can of > Tenants Super and is very tall - his head nearly > touches the ceiling of the bus.

The rule used to be if you park bumper to bumper expect a nudge. That's how the French have always parked (back and fore until it bumps) - or was that just a rumour of my youth :) If its so close its not a nudge but a bang that's needed, I'd be wondering.

'police' once told me they used undercover operators - and this was one reason I shouldn't get involved/chase etc. That was after a theft in the West End. The guys who told me this claiming to be police were not in uniform and did not show ID - so they themselves could have been anyone - hence the quotes. Nicholas Spears Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I always thought prurience referred to any > unhealthy interest in sexual matters - not concern > about potential burglars. And I don't know when > the public started thinking that only the police > had the right to any information about potential > dangers.

But a real paedophile got attacked by a mob in Portsmouth http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/865633.stm Notice the last but one paragraph too - if that was true it wasn't nice. Nicholas Spears Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > the-e-dealer Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > The Sun Readers who attacked a paediatrician in > > his home cannot in any circumstances be > described > > as Have A Go Heros > > > There has never been an occasion when a > paediatrician was attacked by Sun readers. > > As I said earlier it's an urban myth. Here's what > actually happened: > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4719364.stm

Wikipedia said it would be privately funded but the below document seems to imply borrowing and repaying the borrowing from business rates and developers. Can't really follow how this works http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/downloads/corporate/Our_response_to_common_questions_raised_at_the_consultation_events_for_the_Northern_line_extension.pdf Huguenot Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Isn't the extension privately funded? If it is > then all of your wild speculation is neither here > nor there. > > This seems a complaint based mostly on spite - but > can you imagine the hoohaa if a developer had > redeveloped Battersea Power Station and NOT > contributed to public transport enhancements? > > I'm impressed with the bizarre conclusion that > rail investments are a subsidy of the rich by the > poor. Do you actually believe this, or is it a > religious act of faith as part of a class war > dogma?

This happened to me in Canary Wharf and to the amusement of my co-workers I shouted at the bird. katesonic Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > bird shit landed on you > Merry Christmas x

I'm sure I've read of people being hurt by this. But obviously not often if it happens three times a day :o

Be lovely to find a way to really scare these lads whilst they were doing this. Ghost/Alien/Zombie/Lion. fernado Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Attach a guillotine to your front door maybe

But how do you know it's true? The poster may have joined the site that day to cause trouble. Even a regular poster can't be trusted 100% (how do you know the account hasn't been hacked). To allow the photo you would need to establish it's true, surely, not take it on trust. The person in the photo could be a neighbor the poster doesn't like. Growlybear Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm an administrator on another forum, and whilst > I would probably remove a post with a photo which > said, for example, 'This is the man who was trying > to find out if I was home so that he could burgle > our house' I would have no problems with someone > saying 'This stranger was on my private property, > peering through my window last night'. If it is a > truthful factual statement, it isn't libellous. > People can then draw their own conclusions about > his motives.

I don't think going down that route would be good for this site though - the following questions would be asked as a precedent might be set .. Should we proceed and allow anyone to post photos of intruders/drunkards/anti-social types in the chip shop etc. Should we limit who is trusted to do this (one year as a poster ?) or Do we allow this one as a one off and never again. It's a can of worms. KidKruger Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Posting a photo saying 'this man has been peeping > through windows of local house(s)' is not > libellous - unless that's not how you took the > photo.

Don't post. It will be the forum admin who pays the penalty if a mistake is made Usually admins are very sensitive on these matters - who wants to risk being sued. Fabricio the Guido Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Rights are no good unless everyone has them and we > protect them for everyone. To publish the picture > of a 'potential' criminal, who actually has not > committed any offence or has not even been charged > with anything, on the spurious basis that it might > protect others sounds like the plot for Minority > Report, which as you may recall was actually a > science fiction movie. Your community rights > argument sounds like a leaflet for the Pitchfork > Brigade. Put it down. We pay taxes so that a > police force will detect and prevent and collect > evidence to prosecute crime. You are not a genius > for circumventing established civilised community > standards but a numpty.