In the case of the advert, I think some writers have a sense of humour.
Like the packs of peanuts which state "contains nuts" - or even better "may contain nuts".
I also read about the epileptic child - good story for the newspapers, but I'm sure it will get resolved.
One example of PC that did cause me to smile: the date era (or epoch) codes AD and BC have been replaced with CE and BCE (Common Era and Before Common Era).
|
I think the well-known case of a bit of historic PC concerning London Taxis takes some beating. Even up to the time when the FX4 was designed, I believe, the regulations stipulated that the boot at the back had to big enough to accommodate a bale of straw for the horse!
Is that an urban myth or is it actually true?
|
|
|
In the case of the advert I think some writers have a sense of humour. Like the packs of peanuts which state "contains nuts" - or even better "may contain nuts".
Sadly nothing to do with a sense of humour, though I do like the peanuts packets in US planes with the statement "Manufactured in a facility that processes nuts". It's to prevent people with nut allergies (or, more specifically, product liability lawyers) suing the manufacturers. This applies to many of these "PC gone mad" examples.
|
We have the country we deserve, probably not the majority here, but as a nation.
A populace that soaks up TV drivel and media hype and sensation like a sponge and believes it too.
Interesting article from Esther Rantsen the other day where her original child protection ideas have been taken over and exaggerated out of all proportion by the pc police.
Thousands of pc officials, campaigners and jobsworths jumped on the bandwagon since, sure beats the hell out of a days work, goodness knows just how much this whole industry and H&S costs us.
I wonder if any govt dare try to put the mess right, how many millions would be unemployed if these petty officials and self appointed zealots had to get a proper job.
Self perpetuating too as they wouldn't vote themselves off the gravy train, but i wonder just how much our taxes could be reduced without all the pc rubbish.
For donkeys now i've been saying to meself it can't get any worse, but never fear the pc loonies can come up with some more idiocy to dispel that thought.
|
|
Well made point GB. I wonder why we just accept some of these things ? Apathy maybe, a feeling of powerlessness ? I really don't know. I am just as guilty. I have never stood outside parliament waving a protest banner or whatever. Why don't we just collectively say "no, don't be silly ! " to some of these things. I travel extensively abroad and while many of the same regulations have been put in place due to European rulings they are rather more universally ignored in some of these countries when the populace decides that they are being treated like errant children.
|
I have never stood outside parliament waving a protest banner or whatever. Why don'twe just collectively say "no don't be silly ! " to some of these things.
I've only been on one protest in my life SS and that was the huge march against the coal mine closures in the 80's. Amazing cross section of people there too.
We've seen what happens recently to those who don't read the correct current page of the hymnsheet, when the countryside alliance were beaten up by the state police for disagreeing with the hunting ban.
IMO we say nothing because we are terrified of being accused of something, which these days could lead anywhere.
Small example, my BIL, a more down to earth proper bloke you will never meet was in the supermarket when a child dropped something out of the pushchair, he being a thoroughly decent gentleman of the old school, picked it up and handed it back, silly man. The young mother (i presume) snatched it away muttering 'you pervert'.
I only wish SWMBO had been there, not a woman to take fools gladly.
Trouble is, what do you say and do at such a time.
|
when the countryside alliance were beaten up by the state police for disagreeingwith the hunting ban.
>>
I simply have to take issue with that line gb. The CA were mostly peaceful. Some hot heads tried to storm parliament. They were repelled by riot police. There was a fair degree of violence which was lawfully matched by police who were most robust in defending parliament.
Several PCs were investigated and one in fact charged with using unnecessary force. The court found him not guilty.
Many police officers have a fair degree of sympathy with the CA, but that matters not. No one, whoever they are and whoever they support is going to be allowed to violate parliament and if anyone thinks they can throw bottles and suchlike at police lines and get away with it, then they're very much mistaken. There may well have been innocent people caught up in it all, but in reality if you're at a demonstration and some fool starts chucking things at the police, it's time to leave, urgently.
|
There's another case reported in today's Telegraph, an appeal by some animal rights toerag whose self-righteous espousal of our furry cousins' cause led him to commit various heinous offences. The appeal is based on the fact that the judge who sentenced him shoots a few pheasants as a hobby.
This makes no sense to a rational person of course, but the hope must be that those opposed to blood sports will see it as evidence of bias. Of course judges are paid to be biased in cases involving things like arson, criminal damage and threatening behaviour, but the hope must be that people will be too half-witted to understand that (or indeed approve of it).
Edited by Lud on 11/07/2008 at 18:42
|
|
|
There may well havebeen innocent people caught up in it all but in reality if you're at a demonstration and some fool starts chucking things at the police it's time to leave urgently.
Thats the whole problem though WP, the innocent are often trapped when something like this goes down, and find themselves being battened by the police whom they would be supporters of.
The countryside alliance protesters were generally not the rentacrowd who might well be enemies of our country and way of life, and certainly of law and order, and are usually hard working country loving people.
In the melee that followed though many innocent people were hurt.
Agreed police officers were cleared of all charges, but it still doesn't make it right for innocent peaceful protesters caught up in something beyond their control to be truncheoned, by the very people they would see eye to eye with on most issues.
To be fair, i don't suppose the ordinary officer wants what happened any more than the ordinary CA memeber either.
|
|
|
if you're at a demonstration and some fool starts chucking things at the police it's time to leave urgently.
That's certainly true. If you're anywhere near police lines in a riot you are in danger of injury from missiles of the brick and bottle class. I did a Brixton riot as a hack for a French paper in the early 80s and was impressed by the urban-guerilla tactics of some of the rioters, but their showers of missiles were pretty scary, and one felt lucky not to have been brained by one (lacking as we hacks do the protective gear the police wear on these occasions). Tactically effective though they were, though, the rioters had no strategy that I could see and the whole thing petered out into looting in side streets. The local residents were appalled, old couples of all races walking about hand in hand in the thick of things shaking their heads sadly...
In my youngest daughter's political youth, when she was an ardent peace campaigner, I used to worry terribly about some of the demos she went to because one knew that there would be demonstrators of another sort there. Never got hurt thank goodness although she often got into trouble for refusing on principle to pay fines, that sort of thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
many many people are jumping on the band wagon for CRB checks..but....they are putting their heads in the sand on the issues.
The CRB checks were introduced after the Soham murders and criticism that Ian Huntley slipped through the net, being allowed to work near children...(as he'd had allegations made about him of rape..never put before a court.. and changed his name by adopting his mother's maiden name).
The daft thing is, if you are well dodgy and then change your name by deed poll, which would be perfectly legal, unless you commit an offence in the new name (in which case you could change your name again by deed poll) then YOU WILL NOT SHOW UP on a CRB check. There is not one 'catch all' computer. Different public depts don't necessarily disclose information to each other. There are systems in place to monitor/deal with the worst offenders, but they're not perfect.
The blind following or acceptance of CRB checks is most foolish and a typical example of a little knowledge being a bad thing.
|
|
|
|
