Jump to content

Recommended Posts

cle Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I think there is certainly a hint of

> blame/backhandedness in:

>

> "hopefully will be a bit more aware of her

> surroundings now when she's walking down the

> street reading her phone. "



Well if you think it, then it must be right. I'm sure you know what I'm thinking a lot better than I do.

I think you're wrong cle. We live in a big city, crime happens... it's sensible to take basic precautions. If the woman in question (and maybe people reading this thread) can learn a little something from it, then at least there's a hint of a silver lining to this whole thing.

No matter what precautions you take to protect your phone, the majority of people will always get their phone out, wherever they are to read a txt message/reply.


I'm guilty of getting mine out at every bus stop to see when the bus is due.


You know it's risky but reading your txt, knowing the bus times is more important.

So we saying our society is so bad that you can't risk using a phone in a public place for fear of it being forcibly taken from you and that this is such a common occurrence that you can't reasonably expect to be protected by the law?


And then we wonder why people get vexed hearing about a mugger who nearly gets caught and our reaction is, but it?s only a phone and you didn?t get hurt so it?s not so bad! Ho hum?.

SJ:

1. Do I think I can walk around London with impunity - (I think thats what you mean right?)


Impunity: exemption from punishment or freedom from the injurious consequences of an action


Yes I do. I'm not in a hurry to walk down Rye Lane at midnight on a Saturday night but generally, yes, I expect to go about my normal business with impunity.


2. "Jesus. Look who in arguing with".


I dont know what you mean SJ, elaborate please? you dont know me, I'm curious????

Of course you can walk down the road using your phone, I do it all the time. And despite what cle thinks I think, I don't think that you're asking for it.


But you do need to be very aware of what's going on around you for various reasons.

Something I'd recommend to everyone is a self-protection course. They don't just teach you how to defend yourself, but also how to be aware of possible danger and avoid having to actually defend yourself in the first place.


Daniel, from www.walterstaekwondo.com does regular self-protection courses taught by a visiting instructor who has years of experience in different martial arts, teaches the police and works as a guard in a scary Manchester prison. He is good at showing you how to take easy precautions and to think on your feet.


I've been on a couple and found them really useful.

But I still will get my mobile out when I choose.


Mind you I know my body language says Keep Off - which is how London has made me.



Alan Medic Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Theft is a fact of life these days. Mobile phone

> theft is very common. It has happened around here

> many times. The girl hasn't been blamed but if you

> have something worth stealing you need to have a

> bit of awareness about you. I don't have a top of

> the range phone but I find that if people are

> moving to get off the train for example and I'm

> using it, I hold onto it just a little bit

> tighter, in case.

Rye Lane is pretty safe - it's the quiet lanes I'd think would leave people vulnerable.


Sophron Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> SJ:

> 1. Do I think I can walk around London with

> impunity - (I think thats what you mean right?)

>

> Impunity: exemption from punishment or freedom

> from the injurious consequences of an action

>

> Yes I do. I'm not in a hurry to walk down Rye Lane

> at midnight on a Saturday night but generally,

> yes, I expect to go about my normal business with

> impunity.

>

> 2. "Jesus. Look who in arguing with".

>

> I dont know what you mean SJ, elaborate please?

> you dont know me, I'm curious????

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Some suggestions for mandatory action might include:- 1. Permit retailers to display facial images on the premises  of previous offenders at their local store. 2. Sound an alert and display images on screens inside the store when the FR flags up a person entering who is on the national database of shoplifters. 3. Physically bar recognised shoplifters from the premises. Should they attempt to force entry then charges should be pressed under aggravated trespass, which  a criminal offence under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. 4. Change the law to allow retailers to have enhanced powers of citizens arrest. What would you suggest? The UK seems to have the most lenient policy towards shoplifting , probably because of other demands on the police force. On the plus side, they may have more time for it now that non-crime hate incidents will no longer be investigated. Other countries, such as the USA have much more sever punishment as does Singapore where repeat offenders or aggravated cases can be sentenced to up to 3 years in prison, a fine, or both.
    • No, we'd have to be in a police state.  You'd have to get this made law.  Unless it is in Reform's policies.  I'll check. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/live-facial-recognition-technology-to-catch-high-harm-offenders Not government policy
    • There is a sign outside what was Megan's saying that whatever is replacing it will have an "all day concept." What the (expletive deleted) is an "all day concept", and how does it differ from being open all day? For (expletive deleted)'s sake 🙄
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...