WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 54274
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by Stanley » 01 Jan 2019, 09:26

:good:
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!

User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 54274
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by Stanley » 02 Jan 2019, 04:41

Margaret posted as well from Oz.....
I was talking to my friend and her new dog Zack when we were verbally attacked by a deranged person with a dog who seemed to object to us enjoying a chat. He got quite abusive and got his phone out and posted us as 'bad dog walkers' on Facebook. So if you find a reference to us give us the benefit of the doubt, he definitely had a problem!
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!

User avatar
Tripps
Senior Member
Posts: 3868
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 14:56

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by Tripps » 02 Jan 2019, 09:10

The person who stabbed several people at Manchester Victoria Station has been detained under the Mental Health Act. This whole process seems to have taken less than 24 hours, and was conducted at a Police Station on a public holiday. Who diagnosed this mental health condition - and was the possibility that he was feigning the condition considered? Would it not have been better to charge him with attempted murder, and do the assessments in public, with named experts, as part of the trial process?
Born to be mild. . .

User avatar
Marilyn
VIP Member
Posts: 5431
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 20:29
Location: South Australia

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by Marilyn » 02 Jan 2019, 09:27

I understand what you are saying, Tripps, and likely you are 100% right, but folk with true mental health problem do need every consideration. If they are feigning, they need a harsher sentence. May seem a bit harsh, but I think think their consideration needs repayment in some way.

User avatar
Tizer
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 11683
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 19:46
Location: Somerset, UK

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by Tizer » 02 Jan 2019, 09:57

This is what the NHS web site says:
In emergencies
An emergency is when someone seems to be at serious risk of harming themselves or others. This can occur:
1. in private premises – police have powers to enter your home, if need be by force, under a Section 135 warrant. You may then be taken to a place of safety for an assessment by an approved mental health professional and a doctor. You can be kept there until the assessment is completed, up to a maximum of 72 hours.
2. in a public place – if the police find you in a public place and you appear to have a mental disorder and are in need of immediate care or control, they can take you to a place of safety (usually a hospital or sometimes the police station) and detain you there under Section 136. You will then be assessed by an approved mental health professional and a doctor. You can be kept there until the assessment is completed, up to a maximum of 72 hours

If you are already in hospital, certain nurses can stop you leaving under Section 5(4) until the doctor in charge of your care or treatment, or their nominated deputy, can make a decision about whether to detain you there under Section 5(2).

Section 5(4) gives nurses the ability to detain someone in hospital for up to six hours. Section 5(2) gives doctors the ability to detain someone in hospital for up to 72 hours, during which time you should receive an assessment that decides if further detention under the Mental Health Act is necessary. LINK

User avatar
Marilyn
VIP Member
Posts: 5431
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 20:29
Location: South Australia

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by Marilyn » 02 Jan 2019, 10:12

What really needs to be done, is seek the opinions of family/loved ones/ relatives/neighbours of folk taken into such time precious custody. It is those closest to a person that can relate decline or change of behaviour/mental problems.

User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 54274
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by Stanley » 03 Jan 2019, 04:27

I think in this case the officers must have got a local assessment immediately and on the strength of that he was transferred to a secure institution where no doubt he will be further assessed. If he is genuinely deranged he deserves sympathy, it could happen to anyone. If not he should have the book thrown at him.
I don't see how the police could win here, a cell in a police station is no place for a genuinely disturbed person and what they have done has avoided that. It all makes sense to me.
I was watching a discussion on the US Second Amendment last night on Youtube, the right to bear arms. One of the points raised was that part of the licensing procedure before purchase should be the appointment of a person responsible for monitoring the applicant who had the power to force them to relinquish the weapon if circumstances suggested this was the correct course. It struck me that this was like the Attorney under a Lasting Power Of Attorney (LPA) and this might be a good safeguard if properly managed. We live in a complicated world and perhaps at times we need to be protected from ourselves.
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!

User avatar
Tripps
Senior Member
Posts: 3868
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 14:56

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by Tripps » 03 Jan 2019, 13:18

The Governments digital services haven't always been successful so credit where it is due - I was pleased that my new passport arrived today, just 13 days after applying for it on the website, then posting the old one, and that period included two bank holidays.

The East European van driver smiled as he handed it over, and with a grin said 'you'll need a new one in March'. I don't think so - I don't care what colour it is. :smile:
Born to be mild. . .

User avatar
PanBiker
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 9602
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 13:07
Location: Barnoldswick - In the West Riding of Yorkshire, always was, always will be.

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by PanBiker » 03 Jan 2019, 13:39

Indeed, we renewed ours a couple of years ago and now have nice E Passports which ease you through the gates. I'll be beggared if I'm paying again to change them, at least for the next eight years. :smile:

On the .gov sites in general, online chat facilities with folk to sort NI and Tax stuff is a lot easier than by letter. When I was working part time they managed to wrongly code me and I was being taxed when I shouldn't have been. Only took 5 minutes with an online tax officer and it was sorted. :good: I wish the DVLA was included in that but it ain't. They are still operating on one form fits all and six weeks to get a reply. :sad:
Ian

User avatar
chinatyke
Donor
Posts: 2633
Joined: 21 Apr 2012, 13:14
Location: Pingguo, Guangxi, China

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by chinatyke » 04 Jan 2019, 02:11

Tripps wrote:
03 Jan 2019, 13:18
The Governments digital services haven't always been successful so credit where it is due - I was pleased that my new passport arrived today, just 13 days after applying for it on the website, then posting the old one, and that period included two bank holidays.

The East European van driver smiled as he handed it over, and with a grin said 'you'll need a new one in March'. I don't think so - I don't care what colour it is. :smile:
I thought they had gone back to the blue passports, are they still issuing the red ones? I collect mine from Guangzhou next Tuesday. With having to make 2 trips to Guangzhou, hotels, travel and fees it will have cost over 250 quid.

User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 54274
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by Stanley » 04 Jan 2019, 03:06

The fact that Jack managed to lose his ball in the front room. I know roughly where it is but it means lifting the sideboard with the lathe on so I just gave him a new one!
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!

User avatar
Cathy
Senior Member
Posts: 2722
Joined: 24 Jan 2012, 02:24

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by Cathy » 04 Jan 2019, 04:52

I have a length of thin wood that I keep just for that purpose Stanley. When my cat loses a toy , she lets me know where and problem solved.
The hardest bit is getting up again. :laugh5:
I know I'm in my own little world, but it's OK... they know me here. :)

User avatar
LizG
Avid User
Posts: 998
Joined: 22 Mar 2012, 05:36
Location: Melbourne Australia

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by LizG » 04 Jan 2019, 05:41

42 degrees in Melbourne today. Way too hot.
Liz

User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 54274
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by Stanley » 04 Jan 2019, 07:18

I know exactly what you mean Cathy! When I have to get down on the floor I always think to myself "Is there anything else I ought to be doing while I am down here?". Unfortunately the place where jack has lost his ball is not accessible to the long stick solution. That reminds me, I know there is a ball behind the fridge. Must get round to moving it out and vacuuming behind it!
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!

User avatar
Tizer
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 11683
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 19:46
Location: Somerset, UK

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by Tizer » 04 Jan 2019, 10:36

A BBC web page has the main rules for flying recreational drones in the UK:
1. The drone must be in line of sight at all times.
2. It must not be within 50 metres of people, vehicles or buildings.
3. No higher than 122 metres (400 feet).
It's worth knowing these rules in case anyone pesters you with a drone!
BBC

Presumably an Amazon delivery drone won't class as recreational so we are still faced with the possibility of those whizzing about our streets!

User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 54274
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by Stanley » 05 Jan 2019, 04:06

Is it my imagination or is D Trump looking and sounding a tiny bit stressed?
The quiet spell of weather is sending 2019 on nicely. How long can our luck hold out?
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!

User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 54274
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by Stanley » 07 Jan 2019, 05:06

How mild the weather continues to be. Long may it continue!
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!

User avatar
Tizer
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 11683
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 19:46
Location: Somerset, UK

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by Tizer » 07 Jan 2019, 10:12

Now the local councillor for the harbour area at Ramsgate says there's no way it can be ready for the Brexit no-deal ferries. LINK

This will cause a stir. (If they held a referendum on it I wonder what age limit they would set for voting?) We should concentrate on making people better equipped from early in life for making important decisions before further lowering the age for voting.
`Should the UK be raising rather than lowering the voting age?' LINK

User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 54274
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by Stanley » 08 Jan 2019, 04:31

I share your scepticism about the 'arrangements' being made at places like Ramsgate and the lorry parks. It signals panic to me and I fear it may be all part of May's Cunning Wheeze to get us into a position where there is no option but to take her at her word, "My deal or no deal". This approach is totally unacceptable and we are powerless to stop her if the opposition parties stay quiet. We need a Parliamentary revolt immediately!
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!

User avatar
Bodger
Senior Member
Posts: 1164
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:30
Location: Ireland

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by Bodger » 08 Jan 2019, 07:23

An opinion from "Down Under"
Best view on Brexit I've heard to date..
Aussie (ex PM) Tony Abbott sums it up beautifully!-----
[Reference added by Tizer: This is the text of Abbott's article titled `Tony Abbott: How to save Brexit' published in The Spectator on 27th October 2018. LINK ]
(If it resonates and you feel others may like to contemplate its sentiment, copy and paste far and wide)
It’s pretty hard for Britain’s friends, here in Australia, to make sense of the mess that’s being made of Brexit. The referendum result was perhaps the biggest-ever vote of confidence in the United Kingdom, its past and its future. But the British establishment doesn’t seem to share that confidence and instead looks desperate to cut a deal, even if that means staying under the rule of Brussels. Looking at this from abroad, it’s baffling: the country that did the most to bring democracy into the modern world might yet throw away the chance to take charge of its own destiny.
Let’s get one thing straight: a negotiation that you’re not prepared to walk away from is not a negotiation — it’s surrender. It’s all give and no get. When David Cameron tried to renegotiate Britain’s EU membership, he was sent packing because Brussels judged (rightly) that he’d never actually back leaving. And since then, Brussels has made no real concessions to Theresa May because it judges (rightly, it seems) that she’s desperate for whatever deal she can get.
The EU’s palpable desire to punish Britain for leaving vindicates the Brexit project. Its position, now, is that there’s only one ‘deal’ on offer, whereby the UK retains all of the burdens of EU membership but with no say in setting the rules. The EU seems to think that Britain will go along with this because it’s terrified of no deal. Or, to put it another way, terrified of the prospect of its own independence.
But even after two years of fearmongering and vacillation, it’s not too late for robust leadership to deliver the Brexit that people voted for. It’s time for Britain to announce what it will do if the EU can’t make an acceptable offer by March 29 next year — and how it would handle no deal. Freed from EU rules, Britain would automatically revert to world trade, using rules agreed by the World Trade Organization. It works pretty well for Australia. So why on earth would it not work just as well for the world’s fifth-largest economy?
A world trade Brexit lets Britain set its own rules. It can say, right now, that it will not impose any tariff or quota on European produce and would recognise all EU product standards. That means no border controls for goods coming from Europe to Britain. You don’t need to negotiate this: just do it. If Europe knows what’s in its own best interests, it would fully reciprocate in order to maintain entirely free trade and full mutual recognition of standards right across Europe.
Next, the UK should declare that Europeans already living here should have the right to remain permanently — and, of course, become British citizens if they wish. This should be a unilateral offer. Again, you don’t need a deal. You don’t need Michel Barnier’s permission. If Europe knows what’s best for itself, it would likewise allow Britons to stay where they are.
Third, there should continue to be free movement of people from Europe into Britain — but with a few conditions. Only for work, not welfare. And with a foreign worker’s tax on the employer, to make sure anyone coming in would not be displacing British workers.
Fourth, no ‘divorce bill’ whatsoever should be paid to Brussels. The UK government would assume the EU’s property and liabilities in Britain, and the EU would assume Britain’s share of these in Europe. If Britain was getting its fair share, these would balance out; and if Britain wasn’t getting its fair share, it’s the EU that should be paying Britain.
Finally, there’s no need on Britain’s part for a hard border with Ireland. Britain wouldn’t be imposing tariffs on European goods, so there’s no money to collect. The UK has exactly the same product standards as the Republic, so let’s not pretend you need to check for problems we all know don’t exist. Some changes may be needed but technology allows for smart borders: there was never any need for a Cold War-style Checkpoint Charlie. Irish citizens, of course, have the right to live and work in the UK in an agreement that long predates EU membership.
Of course, the EU might not like this British leap for independence. It might hit out with tariffs and impose burdens on Britain as it does on the US — but WTO rules put a cap on any retaliatory action. The worst it can get? We’re talking levies of an average 4 or 5 per cent. Which would be more than offset by a post-Brexit devaluation of the pound (which would have the added bonus of making British goods more competitive everywhere).
UK officialdom assumes that a deal is vital, which is why so little thought has been put into how Britain might just walk away. Instead, officials have concocted lurid scenarios featuring runs on the pound, gridlock at ports, grounded aircraft, hoarding of medicines and flights of investment. It’s been the pre-referendum Project Fear campaign on steroids. And let’s not forget how employment, investment and economic growth ticked up after the referendum.
As a former prime minister of Australia and a lifelong friend of your country, I would say this: Britain has nothing to lose except the shackles that the EU imposes on it. After the courage shown by its citizens in the referendum, it would be a tragedy if political leaders go wobbly now. Britain’s future has always been global, rather than just with Europe. Like so many of Britain’s admirers, I want to see this great country seize this chance and make the most of it.
Tony Abbott served as Prime Minister of Australia from 2013 to 2015
Last edited by Tizer on 08 Jan 2019, 12:29, edited 1 time in total.
Reason: Tizer added a reference to the original published article.

User avatar
Tizer
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 11683
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 19:46
Location: Somerset, UK

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by Tizer » 08 Jan 2019, 16:42

Bodger, the Spectator article by Tony Abbott is a favourite of the hard Brexiteers and much circulated by them. Unfortunately Abbott knows next to nowt about how the relationship between the EU and the UK works or about trade treaties in general. He is derided widely for writing an article full of misleading and incorrect claims and comments. Mind you he does a good job of showing off his lack of knowledge! I'd advise to you to look back at the articles written on this forum by Bruff (Richard Broughton) who knows more about the subject than Abbott does. Here is an example of a response to Abbott's article:

He doesn't understand that the UK's deep integration into the much larger EU economy will make the slow, ordered separation painful, and would make a crash one extremely painful.

He doesn't understand that the border checks required to enforce customs and/or standards are a much bigger barrier to trade than the customs charges themselves.

He doesn't understand that simply claiming products in your country meet your neighbour's standards doesn't get around the need to verify at the border.

He doesn’t understand the purpose of WTO rules - they're a baseline for trade deals and no country (including Australia) uses them instead of trade deals.

He doesn't understand that under WTO rules, the EU and the UK are obliged to do customs and standards checks on each others imports in the event of No Deal

He doesn't understand that the UK is obliged under international law to pay its share of expenditure commitments made by the EU while it was a member.

He doesn't understand the negative consequences of a sharp devaluation of the Pound.

Since he doesn't understand Britain's weak position in the Brexit negotiations, it's understandable that he also doesn't understand why the threat to walk away doesn't strengthen that position.

He doesn’t understand the EU's objectives for Brexit; its primary objective is to get a deal that makes the UK go away without undermining the EU itself, not to punish the UK.

He doesn't understand that the Withdrawal Agreement does contain substantial EU concessions to the UK on things like the all-UK Customs Union (the hard-line Brexiters’ rejection of it has obscured how much the EU dislike it) and the limited jurisdiction of the ECJ.

His answer for Northern Ireland displays almost complete ignorance of the question and the Police Service of Northern Ireland's concerns about defending any border infrastructure with their lives.

Posted by Paul Dillon on Quora.com, 28th Nov 2018 LINK

User avatar
Tripps
Senior Member
Posts: 3868
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 14:56

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by Tripps » 08 Jan 2019, 18:46

I spent two awful years working for the Revenue at Dover Eastern Docks, and feel I should know a lot about the current situation.

I don't. :smile:

Lots of memories of very intense paper shuffling and stamping mainly in the middle of the night, and for very low pay. My stamp number was 12. Had I not escaped - I'd be dead by now - no doubt about it. I had just emerged from the Army. and found my work 'colleagues' seemed to be from a different planet. Eventually realised that was in fact me. Still is really. :smile:

I did 'pre entries' in which the paperwork was submitted before the arrival of the goods, so that when they came, all had been done, and clearance authorised, so they could proceed quickly. It was a bit of a trial process at the time - I think it might come in handy on March 29th.
Born to be mild. . .

User avatar
Stanley
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 54274
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 12:01
Location: Barnoldswick. Nearer to Heaven than Gloria.

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by Stanley » 09 Jan 2019, 04:03

Tiz, that's the reply I should have given to the Abbott article but to tell the truth I couldn't be bothered.There are so many people out there like Abbott who are certain they have the answers and are right..... Give me Richard any day!
What grabbed and saddened me was Margaret Hodge attacking Corbyn again over anti-Semitism. I don't know enough about it to have an opinion so I won't comment but it's a distraction we don't need at the moment no matter where the truth lies. To be perfectly honest it started my crap detector whining. There's something strange about the timing. But that is probably my suspicious nature.....
Stanley Challenger Graham
Stanley's View
scg1936 at talktalk.net

"Beware of certitude" (Jimmy Reid)
The floggings will continue until morale improves!

User avatar
plaques
Donor
Posts: 3900
Joined: 23 May 2013, 22:09

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by plaques » 09 Jan 2019, 08:55

I predicted that as Mrs May got deeper in the mire then antisemitism and the Russian nerve agent Novichok would make their way back into the news. Sure enough Mrs Hodge is at again and the military are taking the roof off the house that Skripal was poisoned by contact with the door handles. When we first read about this nerve agent it was supposed to degrade when exposed to the atmosphere after about a week. Something is going on that we are not being told about. Did Skripal have a quantity of this stuff that he had hidden away somewhere? Were the Russians involved or was it an own goal by Skripal himself?

User avatar
PanBiker
Site Administrator
Site Administrator
Posts: 9602
Joined: 23 Jan 2012, 13:07
Location: Barnoldswick - In the West Riding of Yorkshire, always was, always will be.

Re: WHAT ATTRACTED YOUR ATTENTION TODAY?

Post by PanBiker » 09 Jan 2019, 10:34

I can't understand how at lest four people exposed to apparently one of the most dangerous substances on the planet all managed to survive! One unfortunate death of course but there were underlying medical conditions there and if you can believe what we were told the victim sprayed the stuff over herself. Something is not quite right and we will probably never know.
Ian

Post Reply

Return to “What, Where, When, We, Who, Look & How”