Blah Blah

As I understand it, they are not legally required to refund or exchange if the item is not faulty, but I would argue that as the order did not specific exactly what model had been ordered, that they did not take your order properly. How can a manufacturer, range and size, equal a specific model? Maybe try getting some advice from a consumer advice line like, https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/get-more-help/if-you-need-more-help-about-a-consumer-issue/

I can see Bournemouth Road being used to keep buses running either North or South of the lane as the works move about. They might have to temporarily adapt the junction and use lights but it is definitely doable. And there are plenty of alternatives for cyclists to avoid the section of roadworks and stay mostly on the lane, particularly at the South end. The real problem might be for deliveries and rubbish collection along the stretches of the actual works, but I am sure there are plans for dealing with this too. And it is not a through road for cars anyway.

Good to see the nonsensical policy of before being abandoned. And a 44% decrease in crimes speaks for itself. These kids care nothing of their victims so good to see the kid gloves treatment being withdrawn by Police.

Yes I noticed that dark stretch on the path too, dangerous for cyclists because you can not see the path at all. What happened to the lighting that was there before?

So people should not voice concern for these terrapins because fishmongers sell crab? That is some warped logic.

The RSPCA are very clear about what is required to look after a terrapin properly and keep it healthy. https://www.rspca.org.uk/adviceandwelfare/pets/other/terrapin If the terrapins are not enjoying the care described on that page, then it sounds as though the RSPCA would act on a report.

Yes, tightening rules on fuel seems most likely. Basically, wet wood is the most polluting and the driest least. It's a problem in a densely populated city though and a lot of people installing wood burners probably didn't know at the time of the pollution risks.

Quite Nxjen. Uncleglen might want to look at what any treatment or operation costs for the NHS and see how much more it costs in the private sector. He then might also want to ask why cuts have led to more NHS patients being outsourced to private companies at that increased cost to the NHS. And then come back and have a conversation about the Tory cuts that have exacerbated that situation.

I find it incredulous that anyone could even begin to think that Tory policy has not led to the crisis in the NHS and specifically adult social care. Uncleglen, go and talk to any local authority and ask them how central government funding cuts, almost 60% worth have impacted on adult social care since 2010. Because it is actually worse than whatever fantasy you have going on in your head. Osborne deliberately sought to shrink the state to levels not seen since 1930 - a totally unsustainable level of cuts vs genuine need. And that is before we get onto other health impacts, like mental health.

So let me get this right. Steve32 follows and harasses a woman (to which she has a witness) after her dog barks at him (probably sensing his odd behaviour to be honest - dogs do that). She, feeling frightened (understandable) calls her partner to come and deal with him. The Police say there is no case for this woman or her husband to answer, and Steve32 instead, results to obsessive online harassment. Or did I miss something there?

The Fair is setup in the center of the park and the circus is to the side of that instead of being in the center when it comes alone. So I think some thought has gone into where the fair should go. But for Dan, who lives next to the park, the noise of the fair is going to be more noise.

I can provide a list of around 15 EDL members who were convicted of child rape and peadophile related crimes. But people like Uncleglen are living in a parallel universe of denial. Even on the point of journalism, and Yaxley Lennon (with all his fake names) is no journalist, Andrew Norfolk of the Times is the proper investigative journalist who pursued the Rochdale crimes and eventually persuaded his editor to go with it. You see, Lennon is just a pretender. A fraud, a fake. He is a single issue obsessive, obsessed with hatred for Islam. He cares nothing about child rape at all. If he did, he would be highlighting all cases of such and lobbying parliament for change in the same way that genuine campaigners (many of them themselves victims) already do. He is a narcissistic rabble rouser. And he belongs to a group who think it is ok to threaten Police, the law, elected officials and just about anyone that stands in their way. He is enjoying attention simply because of the rise of an alt right movement, a movement that does not actually believe in free speech for anyone outside of its own echo chamber, a movement that believes in totalitarianism over liberty. And many of those being sucked into this narrative, ordinary people on the whole, would not like the world these people are driving to create either. Lennon ultimately is becoming a puppet, for people far more clever than he can ever hope to be. That is the dangerous part of this.

rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Most people, in my experience. It's a natural > linguistic trait to add an adjective to the noun > to add more information for the reader/listener - > "this tall woman got on the train", "A bald guy > came over", "A black guy helped me push the car". > Listen to people talking, it's a part of speech. It is, but as my previous post points out, there is a difference between a clear unmistakable physical descriptor and one that is assumed, and may or may not be correct. 'Obviously gay' could just as easily mean obviously many things other than being gay.

The problem is, that being gay is not a physical trait, like ethnicity or height etc. I've know people assume someone to be gay, and been wrong. The OP is drawing a conclusion, which may well be based on certain stereotypical assumptions, which may give the right conclusion, but equally may not. It's an unreliable descriptor really, without knowing for sure.

Yes definitely a young rat.

What if SpringTime had written he or she liked to use the word (insert any word used to describe black people which is derogatory in its use), but that he or she didn't care because he or she was not a big fan of black people? It's one thing to use language without an awareness of how it it might be offensive to do so. It is another to use it irregardless of a full awareness of that. So no, not each to his own. SpringTime clearly thinks it is ok to to see gay people as inferior or 'lame' and then draw comparisons when describing what he thinks is a 'lame' act (that is where the use of gay in that context stems from). There are words used to describe people with mental and physical disabilities in the past that have also been used in this way. No-one would let that pass now. So let's not excuse use of any language in any context that deliberately shows disregard for a group of people.

Useful link. Thank you for that Jules.

Depends on the use. Mental illness is something tangeable and cleary defined. Use of he word 'mental' as a adjective for being out of control, is a common form of slang. To be offensive, it has to be an inappropriate use that directly compares to a person or group in a derogatory way. You could just as easily use 'deranged' instead of 'mental' in this context. That would be a more correct description of what the user is trying to describe. I think there are other words that people use (around the lanugage of mental illness) when people are trying to be deliberately offensive though.

Tariffs won't affect labour, but may affect materials costs if amything used is being imported. An end to freedom of movement is the thing that is most likely to affect labour costs.

Or the Police as he is clearly conning people.

Even a dog on a a lead can jump. This idea that dogs MUST but under perfect control is bonkers. It is quite clear the dog was playing with another dog and accidentally ran into the child on a bicyle. The dog can't have been very big or it would have knocked the child over, so we are probably talking about a smallish dog, and it was not in a dogs on leads area anyway! Be sensible about this.

But I think if a child did accidentally knock over a pensioner Rendel, it would be seen for the unintentional accident that it was. I get the issue around the park rules, and that's fair enough, but there are other areas where dogs are allowed off the leash, other parks with no rules and even common off road routes where pedestrians, dogs and cyclists mix. I cycle along several paths like this (the old canal route being one) and I just slow right down. Because if I see a dog, even one on a lead walking near me, I know it can suddenly move towards me in an instant (just like a small child). Dogs on leads don't walk in straight lines either.

rendelharris Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Blah Blah Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Just sounds like an unavoidable accident in a > > shared space to me. > > As the dog was off the lead and not under control > in an area where it should have been both, > "entirely avoidable" would seem a more apposite > expression. I was in a supermarket today and a small child ran into me. Do I ask the parent keep it on a lead? No, I use common sense and accept that children aren't always aware of who is around them. As for dogs, toddlers get knocked over by the family pet on regular occasions. Clumsy accidents are always avoidable, but they are also part of life. I agree with the person above who pointed out that f you are going fast enough to crush a dog that strays into your path, then you might be going fast enough to crush a child as well. Worth thinking about. I see the OP as a reasonable expression of annoyance over unresonable outrage though. People will always ignore the rules (or may not even be aware of them). It's better to be civil about these things in the long run.

Just sounds like an unavoidable accident in a shared space to me. And yes, the responsibility is always with the cyclist to anticipate sudden obstacles, which is why, when I cycle through a park, I slow down to walking pace when passing or near to dogs and small children, and just any person in fact.