Blah Blah

LOL true Seabag and Jenny1. Anyone watch Question Time then?

Sue Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Blah Blah Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > All I have pointed to is that people exaggerate > > when they feel disproportionately outraged. > > > You think he "exaggerated" when he said he saw > somebody encouraging two children to ride through > a red light? > > And you think his outrage at that was > "disproportionate"? > > ETA: What would your response have been if one or > both of the children had been hit by a car? See, you are making the same mistake as everyone else of actually believing at face value that anyones life was in danger. This is not about what ifs. The OP does not say at any point that anyone was nearly hit by a car or that a car was forced to emergency stop. The whole account is outrage at someone jumping a red light and having their children do it too. This is further shown by his admission of trying to pull up another cyclist for doing the same thing. So this to me is an obsession with reprimanding cyclists who go through red lights irregardless of whether there is any danger in doing so. Does the OP reprimand drivers on their phones? Or pedestrians that cross anywhere but at designated crossings (because that surely is wreckless too)? And I still maintain that no five year old is capable of speed, wreckless or otherwise.

All I have pointed to is that people exaggerate when they feel disproportionately outraged. Anyone who feels the need to pull up every cyclist they see doing sometihng wrong is not looking at things with sensible persepctive imo. That they then feel the need to post on a forum about it is also something most people would not do either (and I would say the same about the other threads that fullfil this criteria as well). It is just my opinion though.

She had to go. She is one of the most right wing thinkers in the government and fiercely ambitious. She won't be a silent backbencher.

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Why are you posting here? Yes sadly some cyclists > jump red lights. This is a societal thing unless > we want to live in a police state. Write to your > MP, the Met Police, your Borough, the Times, > rather than on this site. Then when you've got a > response you can discuss that. > > Today I saw a motorist forward of an advanced stop > line, a pedestrian cross the road whilst looking > at their smart phone, and a car across the > pedestrian crossings whilst the lights were red. > Just a normal day, nothing to see here people, > move on. Because their outrage isn't satisfied unless they have pages of agreement from people who accept everything at face value. It reminds of that 5 year old cycling on the pavemnt thread.

jimlad48 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Having literally just been repeatedly called a > '@#$%& four eyed c*nt' by a cyclist for asking > politely why they were going through a red light > right towards me,as i was crossing my goodwill to > them is reduced right now. No excuse for that kind > of behaviour. So you have an obsesion with this and again you are asking people to believe your account at face value.

jimlad48 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Blah Blah Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > How can a five year old 'shoot' anywhere? They > > just do not cycle that fast. > > Even more reason not to cycle through red lights > on a junction into the flow of traffic then? > Please tell me you are not seriously trying to > justify this? To be fair, neither you or I were there. I am questioning the detail of what is an anecdotal account. Nowhere have I written anything that suggests condoning anything, I just find a paradox in a suggestion that a five year old 'shot' accross a junction. What is more likely to have happened is that the father saw a clear junction and ignored the lights. Whilst I do not condone that, that is very different to 'shooting' accross a junction with oncoming traffic in sight and making two five year olds do the same. One is relatively risk free, the other is not. There is an embellishment to this account, that is suggested by that contradiction, in my opinion.

How can a five year old 'shoot' anywhere? They just do not cycle that fast.

How pathetic that we are now in a society where bureacracy gets in the way of humanity Burbage. Helping anyone is always a risk, even helping family members, but what a poorer society we would be if everyone used bureaucracy as an excuse for not helping someone if they could. It is an utter disgrace that anyone should be without shelter in this country. I regularly volunteer for crisis Pugwash. You would be surprised at the numbers of older women who are homeless in their 50's too. But yes, breakdown of relationships, usually following job losses, are a common story of homeless men. And single men with no dependents are always bottom of social housing waiting lists in terms of priority too. What we are desperately lacking in, is sheltered housing. Helping the homeless is not just about finding them shelter. It is also about reintegrating them into society.

'do you think Harman's previous 'issues' with the Paedophile Information Exchange in the 70's means her views on sexual misconduct are dismissable as well?' Yes I do. We expect those we elect to have moral standards, and be that extra marital affairs or failure to deal with paedophile's, MPs should be taking a stand on these things - not excusing them.

Loz Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > That is an entire non-sequitur, BB. A consensual > relationship (even if one or both are married) is > not sexual misconduct or harassment. That may be but it is not a good benchmark from which to have any moral compass on sexual misconduct imo.

I wouldn't put anything past any of them with the mess the Tory Party is in right now. I had to baulk at Edwina Currie going at Harriet Harman on This Week and claming there was very little sexual misconduct or harassment in Westminster. Yes that would the same Edwina Currie that had an affair with the married John Major of course.

Without knowing his story, there is no automatic right to housing for the homeless. And Southwark council have been busy selling off council homes and council property to corporate developers over replacing lost council homes. I would try putting him in contact with one of the various homeless outreach programmes. Someone will then go and speak with him.

He clearly has something in his past he wants to stay in his past.

Complain formerly to the school. This is not appropriate at any age really, but certainly not at 15, and if it happened to either of my children I would be demanding an explanation and taking it further to shame the school if not satisfied with the response. Most schools have spare kit.

Those being arrested do. Those reporting for bail and probation services do. Those giving witness statements do. On the two occasions I have had to go to Peckham Police station, there has always been a long queue.

Parliament will have something to say about deliberately leaving an approval vote beyond the exit date. I really do think this will bring the government down some time next year. The committee stages of the repeal bill are about to begin. That one alone has 300 tabled ammendments. Government has ceased to exist. Parliament has become a processing centre for Brexit.

Agreed RDevil. May a mouthpiece for whoever is pulling her strings - but she brought that on herself having lost the majority in the snap GE. The problem for us is that a Tory civil war is determining what kind of Brexit we get. The outcome won't be good and I agree that the NI border issue is most likely to be the biggest challenge. These are complexities that should have been considered before triggering Article 50. And all of this is matched by public division that could last for decades, especially if things don't go well.

I agree John. 50B would be my guess at the settlement, in return for 2-4 years access to the single market. May had no choice but to cave in on that standoff - she does not want 'no deal' (I think that is very obvious now) whihc should give us some relief. Of course the hard brexit vultures are already piping up and that is the problem. Damned if she does, damned if she doesn't. She should just focus on doing what is best for the economy now, and stay at the helm long enough to make it impossible for a hard brexit sucessor to mess it up.

It is the right decision from the council. The Aylesham Centre has proposals for redevelopment into more intensive retail space with housing attached. Planning is about balance. And the cinema and other cultural uses of the car park, maintain that balance between retail, housing and the arts that have come to define Rye Lane in recent years.

I think it is impossible to erally know what kind of PM Corbyn would be. I do think he would rely heavily on those around him to do all the work. So for me it is about looking at the people around him. I do think McDonnell would make a decent chancellor and the reason I say that is because he was in charge of finances at the GLA and stayed within budget until he made a stand against a further round of government cuts and was fired by Livingstone. So he has a track record of fiscal responsibility in that sense. And I broadly agree with his outlook of where the problems lie within our economy and with his outlook. He may give the impression of a revolutionaty bulldog, and that is very offputting for a lot of people, but in reality, he is no more radical than any radical chancellor before him.

Imagine if we banned people from places because of the bad behaviour of a few! Actually that might not be a bad idea.

They are truly screwed on this though Loz. They have to get some of those younger voters. It can't be underestimated how much shock the Tories are in now that young people have started voting. But that bribe of a triple lock, is coming back to haunt them now. And there there is the missing half a trillion. 'The Office for National Statistics (ONS) told The Telegraph its Blue Book revisions came after it was discovered Britons own fewer overseas shares than previously thought, and foreigners own more British assets.' That for me typifies what is wrong with the UK economy. We have sold off too much and we have sold it to foreign investors. And that means much of the wealth creation goes offshore instead of staying in the economy. McDonell might scare the life out of a lot of people, but he is right on a few things around asset ownership and economic benefit.

What do people expect after year on year cuts to police budgets? They have choice but to focus on serious crime and crimes where the offender is known.