Dogkennelhillbilly

Okay, so not a life sentence but 3 years, not a Labour law but a Tory one, not a manifesto pledge, not for theft generally but just got burglary...and a "cursory Google" would have told you what's happened to this policy. It's, err, being applied, burglars are being sentenced to 3 year minimums, and - - burglaries are still happening. Guess it must not be a magic bullet after all. If you look at repeat burglars, they tend to be either organised pros or addicts and fuckups trying to grab something to sell for their next bottle or wrap. Still harsher sentences might dissuade some of the first category - but there aren't many of them. The second category won't be dissuaded by harsher sentences as long as the addiction and mental illness is overwhelming their common sense. Look at this lot: https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/burglars-intruders-homes-businesses-misery-22421909.amp You asked what is going to reduce the level of burglary - the answer isn't something short, sexy and butch. It's boring, slow and unglamorous. You could spend a lifetime trying to work out what's effective - and thankfully some people do - but have a look at the diagrams at the bottom of the first page for a snapshot: https://www.gov.scot/publications/works-reduce-crime-summary-evidence/pages/2/

Brideshead Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > You might have done a cursory google before you > declared it false I did. Couldn't find any sight of it. > the issue was very a much a manifesto > policy, Which year?

300 Liberian dollars? That's only ?1.53, what a bargain!

Sephiroth Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > (can you not find anything good to say about > climate deniers or anti-vaxxers?) No. That's why I don't bother pretending that I'm waiting to be convinced by their arguments or debating the merits of vaccinations online.

Brideshead Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Remember that early Tony Blair policy? > ?Three strikes you?re out?.3 x theft/ burglary > convictions they get automatic life sentence? No. I don't think it ever existed (possibly because it's quite a stupid and expensive idea).

Is there anything that would convince you Brexit was a good idea?

No chance (unfortunately). Adverse possession is very difficult - and you need 10 years possession to begin with. These days, you might get a couple of feet of garden off your neighbour where the fence was built in the wrong place, but getting something like the Harvester car park just won't happen. Adverse possession was a common law check on landowners leaving land sitting doing around nothing when others could make better use of it. Now it's toothless. Land isn't like other forms of wealth that can be stacked or saved infinitely - there is only a limited amount of it. It's an outrage that the building and land is left to rot as an eyesore, and that thousands of homes in London are left empty by people who have no intention of having anyone live in them...

tasha1 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I also understand the > ridiculous pressure the drivers are under. They're > not treated great by their employers either Unfortunately most of these drivers don't have employers, as they're supposedly self-employed contractors. This means no sick pay, no paid leave, no H&S care, no pensions -- and no guarantee they will ever make more than minimum wage. Amazon etc can only offer cheap or free fast delivery (and we can only benefit from it) if the drivers are squeezed to nothing. This is how we have the current crazy system where 20 vans from 20 different companies drive down every street every day.

Skating isn't my thing(!) but I admire how you've transformed a piece of land that's being criminally wasted, and put it to good use for kids and the community.

I don't know if there's anyone less qualified to give advice on being a good Christian during COVID than Boris Johnson, but here we are: https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/dec/24/covid-booster-jab-boris-johnson-christmas-message

Brideshead Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Just trying > to illustrate by real world example what works & > what does NOT work. FACT. Quite true. You only have to read a history book to know there was practically no crime in England when theft was punishable by death or exile. Wait, hold on...

"Complainant states that...the use of the word "nimbyism" was offensive". He was obviously being provocative and rude, but it's stretching it to claim that being called a NIMBY is offensive. It's hardly an epithet or swearword.

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > if you beleive things like the long term OBR projections for economic impact, then they say a 4% negative impact to GDP long term (10 years) ...even if you take it as read, then that's what I would consider to be wtithin the margin for error on a long term forecast - so lets call it wash overall from an economic standpoint. That's a very breezy approach!

redpost Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Why don't you do something positive and submit an > FOI request instead of endlessly complaining on > this forum? There is no need to do that - the raw data and detail on the methodology and analysis is all freely available on the council website already! This whole "we need more data" talking point is a load of old tut. https://www.southwark.gov.uk/transport-and-roads/improving-our-streets/live-projects/dulwich-review?chapter=4

diable rouge Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Re. Liz Truss, it's all about positioning herself > for a leadership challenge, and that will include > pandering to the ERG nutters. Maybe she's been handed a poisoned chalice to stop her becoming a viable challenger...?

j.a. Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > ETA - I will admit, however, to a certain amount > of cautious optimism at the appointment of Truss > to run EU negotiations. Truss is both bonkers AND thick. She is the bottom of the barrel.

ed_pete Wrote: ----------------------------------------------> I'm > not convinced that you will ever have an official, > i.e. council-approved, response or engagement via > a thread on the EDF. This is correct. The EDF "voice" belongs to whichever "enthusiast" has most time to bash away at the keyboard. It is not representative of anyone in particular. Although the forum is remarkably popular (for which the admins should be commended), the vast majority of East Dulwich residents don't post on this forum or thread, and most aren't even aware of the forum's existence. The council engagement is not a referendum. Neither is it restricted to Dulwich residents. In addition to some pissed off locals, who certainly exist in significant numbers, there are also plenty of people who live outside Dulwich who resent not being able to drive through Dulwich on the way to work or to drop their kids off in Dulwich.

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sounds like you've got a problem with a > government not good at completing all those sort > of things....;) Agreed. Successful Brexit would have been difficult and time-consuming, and required diplomacy and sophistication that was far beyond the array of wide boys, fantasists, sociopaths and bullshitters that constituted the Brexit bunch. Of course, slightly less than half of us could see that ahead of time. I wonder how Mystic Meg voted?

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Dogkennelhillbilly Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > TheCat Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > > > ----- > > > brexit is 'done'. That's it. > > > > Was it any good, then? > > I had a great time. Woke up on 1 Jan, and glad it > was in the past. You? Bit crap tbh. Turns out no-one had done any preparation so there were no trade deals, no regulatory opportunities seized, no useful bits of legislation passed that were previously impossible under the EU...

Nigello Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > i think it is mischief making and really > not the smoking gun that people say/want it to be. It's not "mischief making". It was against the rules which the person in the photo himself made. It was also - in retrospect we now know - probably not that risky considering it was outside. But in any case it's never going to be a smoking gun: anyone who cares already knows Johnson is a liar and a lawbreaker. Anyone who doesn't care won't have their opinion changed by any stupid photo.

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > brexit is 'done'. That's it. Was it any good, then?

exdulwicher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It's classic distraction and confusion tactics. > Muddle it all up, spread misinformation, make a > few allegations (it's massaged, it's biased) > without ever really backing them up. Before you > know it, no-one has a clue what's going on! > Especially if someone has managed to add > percentages up incorrectly... This is exactly right. OneDulwich posts a lot of bobbins at great length with a whole bunch of logical and statistical fallacies within it. The point is not to identify accurate data - it's to create confusion, cynicism and apathy. It's Trumpism on a tiny scale. The purpose of its campaign (and its shadowy funders) isn't actually to reduce pollution or congestion, or "all roads matter" or to protect BAME people, or whatever other concern trolling talking point is pushed this week - it's to deny there is a problem amd to do nothing. That's why it has objected to every traffic reduction measure and wants to roll back whatever was in place before. back in the real world and away from the "usual suspects" bickering on here, actual real people on the street are losing patience with OneDulwich's unreasonable attitude.

> > TheCat Wrote: > > > -------------------------------------------------- > The comparisons with socialism are a false > equivalence in my mind. Socialism has been > tried...numerous times, and has failed. Brexit has > never been tried...so if there's no commensurate > commitment and delivery to at least the theory > that people like Frost espouse...then we genuinely > have no evidence that it wouldn't work do we...? Not only has Brexit been tried, it's been done. The UK has left the EU. You can't say "Brexit isn't Brexit unless it's done in the way I want with the results I hoped for". That really is "no true Scotsman" logic. Not loving how Brexit is being done just leaves you as the Trotsky to Johnson's Stalin, complaining about the direction in which the Russian revolution has been taken.

TheCat Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > There's a difference between trying and failing, > and not even trying at all though isnt there...? Not in practical terms, no: they both end up in failure. Brexit is a project, not a religion.

Last night some thick bastard was driving along the road without any lights on and almost caused an accident. I noticed and yelled about the lights, and then I switched on them and everything was fine. It wasn't on Crystal Palace Rd tho, sorry.