Great start to the year
Discussion
Los Angeles said:
apache said:
And another toddler gets mauled to death by a pitbull. I hope the bastards get locked up this time
You've got a whole thread on that topic, Apache. What is it with folk whose personality is compelled to keep fighting dogs as a "pet"?Dog breeders and enthusiasts do it for the love of the breed but then they would take proper steps to care for and manage the animal appropriately.
Los Angeles said:
apache said:
And another toddler gets mauled to death by a pitbull. I hope the bastards get locked up this time
You've got a whole thread on that topic, Apache. What is it with folk whose personality is compelled to keep fighting dogs as a "pet"?done
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&f=141&t=340334
nicecupoftea said:
Mike, a big thanks to you and the other BiBs out there trying to keep the streets safe for the rest of us 
Thanks, it is appreciated, but after years and years of doing this job, it never ceases to amaze me just how brutal some people can be to each other.
Plus the reaction of the junior pc on my group when faced with the fatal wasn't a very nice start to the new year, that image will stay with him for a very long time, I suppose the longer you do the job you become accustomed to nasty sights, doesn't make it any easier but I suppose you can deal with it.
Still, lots of good out there too, such as the drunken ladies wanting to snog a copper for the new year.
hooorah for drunken ladies. Have a good one folks.
silverback mike said:
it never ceases to amaze me just how brutal some people can be to each other.
neighbour of mine and his pal were attcked by some
s with baseball bats right outside the local, both were hospitalised. They aren't going to make any statements for fear of reprisal and, for once, I don't blame em. These little darlings have brutally attcked people before and are known to the BiB. One of em got the sister of my daughters friend pregnant and threatened to kick her in the stomach. Another one of em beat the shit out of someone and then paid his friend a visit to deter him from going to the police, he wasn't in so he beat his father to a pulp with a baseball bat. I live in a quiet little village just outside Cambridge btw
apache said:
They aren't going to make any statements for fear of reprisal and, for once, I don't blame em.
I live in a quiet little village just outside Cambridge btw
I live in a quiet little village just outside Cambridge btw
So in other words these scum rule the village through fear, as the police can't do anything without evidence. Strikes me you/the rest of the village have four options:-
1) Go round en masse and give them a taste of their own medicine
2) Report to the police, demand prosecution, and stand behind/alongside each other
3) Curl up in your beds like sheep and pray you're not the next one attacked
4) Move out of the area.
Currently you're advocating 3. Does that SOUND reasonable? Surely the more they do it and get away with it the more they're GOING to do it - simple Pavlovian psychology.
havoc said:
apache said:
They aren't going to make any statements for fear of reprisal and, for once, I don't blame em.
I live in a quiet little village just outside Cambridge btw
I live in a quiet little village just outside Cambridge btw
So in other words these scum rule the village through fear, as the police can't do anything without evidence. Strikes me you/the rest of the village have four options:-
1) Go round en masse and give them a taste of their own medicine
2) Report to the police, demand prosecution, and stand behind/alongside each other
3) Curl up in your beds like sheep and pray you're not the next one attacked
4) Move out of the area.
Currently you're advocating 3. Does that SOUND reasonable? Surely the more they do it and get away with it the more they're GOING to do it - simple Pavlovian psychology.
I said I don't blame him, I don't know what I'd do in his shoes. Maybe we need a hero like you
turbobloke said:
Sorry to hear about your start to 2007 
But don't worry, that competent in touch straight kinda guy mister twister BLiar will be along soon with another armful of laws to sort everything out
But don't worry, that competent in touch straight kinda guy mister twister BLiar will be along soon with another armful of laws to sort everything out
Right on cue: www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2525876,00.html. "Under-18s banned in crackdown on smokers".
I was horrified to read the following:
Times article said:
According to the Department of Health, raising the age will reduce the number of cigarettes smoked by under 16s from 600 million to 515 million. It predicts that large numbers of young people will turn to friends and family to supply them with cigarettes, and in the long term there will be a reduction in adults smoking of just 0.5 per cent, or one in 200.
“There is little conclusive evidence that a higher minimum age alone has an impact on reducing smoking prevalence among young people,” the Department of Health consultation document admitted.
A report by the World Bank echoed this conclusion. It said: “There have been a number of attempts to impose restrictions on the sale of cigarettes to teenagers in high-income countries. In their existing form such restrictions have not been shown to be successful.
“In general, youth restrictions are difficult to enforce, especially given that young teenagers often obtain cigarettes from their older peers and, sometimes, from their parents.”
Raising the age limit would also deprive the Exchequer of up to £45 million a year, health officials have calculated. However, in the same consultation document the Government predicts that the move will save 1,700 lives eventually, saving the NHS £6 million and the wider economy £226 million a year. But it adds that “the full effect of prevalence would take a lifetime to come through”.
Vivienne Nathanson, head of science and ethics at the British Medical Association (BMA), said: “The new limit is only going to be effective if it is properly enforced and part of a broad set of actions designed to discourage young people from starting to smoke.”
“There is little conclusive evidence that a higher minimum age alone has an impact on reducing smoking prevalence among young people,” the Department of Health consultation document admitted.
A report by the World Bank echoed this conclusion. It said: “There have been a number of attempts to impose restrictions on the sale of cigarettes to teenagers in high-income countries. In their existing form such restrictions have not been shown to be successful.
“In general, youth restrictions are difficult to enforce, especially given that young teenagers often obtain cigarettes from their older peers and, sometimes, from their parents.”
Raising the age limit would also deprive the Exchequer of up to £45 million a year, health officials have calculated. However, in the same consultation document the Government predicts that the move will save 1,700 lives eventually, saving the NHS £6 million and the wider economy £226 million a year. But it adds that “the full effect of prevalence would take a lifetime to come through”.
Vivienne Nathanson, head of science and ethics at the British Medical Association (BMA), said: “The new limit is only going to be effective if it is properly enforced and part of a broad set of actions designed to discourage young people from starting to smoke.”
Note the comment on the reduction in smoking by under-16s (not under-18s). A possible reduction of about 14%, with an overall reduction in the whole population of 0.5%.
So you can't really say that this new law is going to have a big impact on the number of people smoking. 0.5% is noise. So why is this government doing it?
Times article said:
Caroline Flint, the Public Health Minister, who pushed through the ban on smoking in public places, said that the move — to be introduced in England and Wales on October 1 — was necessary to protect young people. “Buying cigarettes has been too easy for under 16s and this is partly due to retailers selling tobacco to those under the legal age,” she said. “The law change demonstrates our determination to stop this.”
Therefore it's not focused on 16-17 year olds, but on under-16s. Is it just me who thinks it's odd to raise the legal age to 18 so that fewer under-16s will smoke? And note the classic Labour "sending a message" intention: "...demonstrates our determination...".
Not that I think smoking is good for you, but I do believe in choice. This is removing choice from 16-17 year olds when the target is under-16s. How is this fair? Why, it's like reducing speed limits from 60 to 50 in order to prevent accidents occurring at above 60. And nobody would think that was sensible.....
apache said:
I said I don't blame him, I don't know what I'd do in his shoes. Maybe we need a hero like you
Hardly fair. I was advocating the community (if this is a small village then it SHOULD still exist) actually working together (like a community) to support each other, not just hiding behind the curtains hoping they're not next. Because otherwise it's the lack of community that is as much to blame for these people existing and their actions as the individuals themselves and the police's inaction.
A large part of the reason there are more people like this today is that communities have disintegrated - and I don't count my local area as immune from that.
Would I make a statement in their position? Yes, damn straight.
Would I stick up for / keep an eye out for my neighbour if my neighbour was in that position and wanted to make a statement? Again, damn straight.
Would I end up in hospital? Possibly...I'm not a fighter by any means.
Does that make me a hero? No. Just someone who believes principles are more than words on an internet forum...
havoc said:
apache said:
I said I don't blame him, I don't know what I'd do in his shoes. Maybe we need a hero like you
Hardly fair.
Very fair, if your suggesting that I "3) Curl up in my bed like a sheep and pray I'm not the next one attacked"
These are thugs and he has a young family, the S Cambs police track record so far is abysmal, there are more ways to skin a cat. I can understand his reticence.
As it happens he can't make a statement because he has no memory of the incident, his friend had to be resuscitated and a third person (6'6) was glassed. The story goes that 3 kids burst in to the pub asking for help because they were being chased, the landlord (fat fcukwit) threw them out, the thugs set about them so these 3 went out to help, out came the weapons and so endeth the tale. The big feller is pressing charges. Oh and the landlord closed and locked the doors on them, we won't be drinking there again.
Edited by apache on Monday 1st January 19:25
Just been round to see him and apparently the police have 3 of em in custody, they were waiting for em to do another stunt like this. There were a gang of em all tooled up looking for it, males and females. The ring leaders were 3 brothers led by their dad (a black belt in karate)The other 2 are pressing charges
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff