Re: UK RICS report says solar takes 208 years to repay...nonsense! Help needed!

[John Rumm]

Absolutely. I doubt you know or care how many are maimed by this barbaric
'sport'. The only object of which is to do so. Totally different from
others where accidental injuries occur.

Men like fighting, get over it. Ban boxing and they will still do it,
except without gloves. Failing that chose any of the other multitude of
contact fighting "sports".

--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\=================================================================/

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

A good proportion of it will still be. I believe with oil that old you're actually likely to
get 'sludge' issues. Not much sense doing it if it's going to render the car worthless.

It does;t render it worthless.

That's the point. You can fake the service records, or simply sell it to
an unscrupulous dealer. (are there any others?) the car goes, and if
regularly serviced thereafter will in fact do a reasonable life. It will
however have accelerated wear in the engine.

Modern oils and high usage means that actually it is not that bad a
scenerio. What degrades oil as much as anything is standing aroud cold
getting condensation in the engine: A car that does 500 miles a day or
so, doesn't get that. If its filld ever 10k miles or so with a pint of
new, it will in fact do the miles from NEW.

60K mils is a good point to trade it. It will need its third/fourth set
of tyres, new brakes, new discs, and a new cam belt.

Your ideas sound like a silly troll to me.

I can assure you some people do it that way.

 

[Steve Firth]

Why the fascination with *why* something was invented?

Because someone thinks it's a shortcut to declaring that "guns are
inherently evil". Sloppy, lazy thinking IMO. And as demonstrated with
the "debate" about the Olympics holding mutually irreconcilable beliefs
that guns are primarily weapons, but swords, bows, javelins and missiles
are not is possible for some people.

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

Where do you live ? Deer are rare in most parts of the country and it's nice to watch
them rather than shoot them !

West Suffolk, I used to think like you when there were just a half a
dozen. Now the most we have seen in a single herd is 60. Right past the
window. Our terrier's life's delight is to chase them up and down the
woods till he is utterly exhausted.

They have no natural predators, and they do immense damage to woodlands.

There are also substantial herds in the home counties - certainly the
north downs and weald.

It will in fact get to a stage where organised culling will have to be
undertaken, pretty soon.

Over-rated imho.

You might say so. I disagree. Halfway between beef and lamb.

 

[John Rumm]

There's a FORTY TO ONE difference in gun deaths !

*woosh*

and the ratio of deaths cause by *all* violent attacks is?

My point is that people will kill people. If you give them guns then
that is what they will use. Deny them guns and they will use something
else. Guns are just a better tool for the job in many cases, but the job
still gets done without them.

We have vastly more police officers injured by knife attack than in the
US for example. (and perversely a bullet proof vest is far simpler to
implement than a knife proof one)

I can't recall hearing of anyone being bludgeoned to death with a cricket bat
but I dare say it must have happened sometime. We have a less violent society
here in the UK than you do.

Who is "you"? Get with the program old chap, I live in the UK.

--
Cheers,

John.

/=================================================================\
| Internode Ltd - http://www.internode.co.uk |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|
| John Rumm - john(at)internode(dot)co(dot)uk |
\=================================================================/

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

I so agree. I've met only two people in my life who have owned guns and both of
them struck me as precisely the kind of people you wouldn't want to have owning
guns. Both like to bully people or push them around. One ended up in prison a
couple of years back for threatening builders who were making a noise with an
air rifle. The other one also spent some time in prison (on fraud charges).

Sorry, I met a third chap who once owned a shotgun for vermin control. He's
totally fine.

Round here most people I know have shotguns.

A few I know have rifles.

They are all the best of people. They use them mostly responsibly: I
can't answer for the presumed gamekeeper who shot the the inlaws dogs.
He has to work for a fairly cheerless landowner who throws so many
pheasants on his land you can't move without tripping over one. He was
probably acting under orders. Nothing can be proven.

Rabbit drives and pigeon drives are common. To control numbers on the
new crops.

Sadly fox control and deer control are almost nonexistent: inlaws have
lost so many chickens to foxes that it doesn't bear thinking about.

We have a couple of friends who are fanatical skeet/clay shooters. They
are extremely nice people. It's just a sport to them.

Its like dog ownership: for every sad git n a council estate with a
couple of lethal rottweilers in a cage there are a million black
labradors providing company for people who like that.

I am not in favour of banning weapons per se, but I utterly respect the
laws of licensing and the hoops people must jump through to obtain one.

And no one I know has a handgun, or would want one.

Ther fact is that if someone turns up with a rifle bullet in the, the
police simply go and check the few that exist. Very few rifles are usd
for efarious purpuses..ts an unweldy thng in a non-rural environment.
Sawnoffs ae alwys an issue, but again, the mere fact of pssession is a
very serious crime, likley to net more years in nick than the crime it
might be used to support, and if someone does get killed, its godnight
vienna fo the pretrator. WITH the cultre here as opposed to the states,
its no good saying 'I wos scared, I pulled out my sawnoff thinking he
was going to shoot me'. Its a self perpetuating myth in the USA the
more THEY have guns the more YOU need one to protect yourself from THEM.
Pure marketing BS. Keeps gun sales at huge levels.

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

There's a FORTY TO ONE difference in gun deaths !



I can't recall hearing of anyone being bludgeoned to death with a cricket bat
but I dare say it must have happened sometime. We have a less violent society
here in the UK than you do.

Cricket bat is not an ideal weapon for bludgeoning. Wrong shape
entirely. A baseball bat is far better.

 

[Morris Dovey]

Erdemal wrote:

| You both - we all- are filled with the 'culture' of your
| country, this is always amusing to see it.

Agreed. One of my most delightful discoveries as a young person was
that observers from different cultures could all view the same object
or event and each produce a different "flavor" of understanding.

Later, I discovered that by learning new languages I could share in
those different kinds of understanding.

Later still, working with a fairly large assortment of people from
different parts of the world, I found it breathtaking to see how
effectively the group could analyze and produce solutions to complex
technical problems - because each language/culture seemed to provide a
different perspective.

| Did you choose it ? Or was it 'written' on your mind by some
| "Moby-Dick' or 'David Copperfield' ?

I think 'written' by parents, family, teachers, and respected elders
when young, then 'edited' and extended with experience and
observation.

| America built itself as an antithesis of England/Europe ...

I don't think so - rather there was an attempt to keep what was
thought to be good and worthwhile and to discard the harmful, the
worthless, and the unproductive. What survived that sorting process
became the philosophical foundation, and the remainder was invented
(not always in America) as needed.

| America is huge and diverse : Boston, Little Rock,
| Salt Lake City and San Francisco are rather different.

Above the surface, they're like different worlds - but if you look
closely under the surface, they're all built on the same foundation.
At the very core they're probably more alike than the inhabitants are
willing to admit.

| About gun ! If my home was built in the middle of a 9 acres
| land in Texas -as that uncle in another topic here - I'd have
| lot of weappons, dogs, guards, alarms, ... and even wouldn't
| sleep well.

The firearms would lose importance rapidly, and you'd probably wonder
why on earth you bought more than one. After you got to know your
neighbors, you'd probably begin to forget to lock the doors and to
turn on the alarm - and if you didn't sleep, it'd be because you were
too busy talking.

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

Oh, the irony ! More ridiculous insanity caused by alleged 'do-gooders'.

Of course.

This government is characterized by knee jerk responses, ideological
legislation and the law of unintended consequences.


But then not one of them has run anything much larger than a nursery
school before becoming politicians, and many of them =- that Benn twit
is a prime example - have been politicians all their lives.

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

Did I say that ?

Nope.

You do realise how awkward and unwieldy a Morini .22 free pistol is ?
Hardly the sort of thing you can conceal, or rapidly reload.

Indeed. Which is why I personally feel they should have been exempted.

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

You clearly don't understand UK firearms law, do you ?

Pump-action shot guns are not banned in the UK, nor are semi-automatic
ones. I possess one, with a 10-shot capacity, held on a section 1
firearms certificate.

You surprise me. I have never applied for a license, so I don't know the
details, but I had been informed that pump action weapons and automatic
weapons were unlicensable except to the armed forces and the police.

Care to educate us as to he levels of licensing? Or do you just want to
appear superior
?

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

These are all sports dating from the year dot where soldiers needed
something to amuse themselves when not fighting.

TRAIN themselves.
What better way to encourage power and accuracy of e.g. archery than by
making a competition up and giving away przes. For the cost of the prize
everybody practices like mad without being ordered or coerced.


And none of these are

commonly used on the streets for crime.


Absolutely. I doubt you know or care how many are maimed by this barbaric
'sport'. The only object of which is to do so. Totally different from
others where accidental injuries occur.

Indeeed. I have very mixed feelings about boxing. I admire those who do
it, and despise those who watch it. Even myself on occasion.I have
decided that its possibly the lesser of two evils. It does indeed give a
few people without many other options in life, a few more options, but
the price they pay is very high.

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

ROTFLMAO !

The 'recommended' device for eradication of vermin is most certainly
NOT a shotgun. The government publishes a list of different 'vermin'
and lists the approved calibres for their humane dispatch. You won't
see 'shotgun' on many at all.

Typically .22 for small vermin such as rabbits, .22-250 / .223 for fox
and generally .243 upwards for deer.

Thank you. I couldn't remember what the calibers were.

Deer, you may not realise, can be classes as 'vermin'. Anyone trying to
dispatch a deer with a shotgun needs their head examing and certificate
removing from them. The only way to kill a deer with a shotgun, apart
from at point-blank range which is simply not viable, is using solid-
slugs - which are not available to section-2 certificate holders.

Indeed. Round here shotguns are strictly for the birds. Occasionally
rabbis and rats, but a 22 is the preferred weapon for bunnies.

Due to teh fact taht the hunting is banned* and very few people own
larger caliber weapons, the deer and the foxes get off scot free.

*although ther are still large hound packs and regular hunting meets. I
guess they must be 'drag' hunting and if they happen to find a live
fox..well. <shrug> Dogs will do what dogs will do eh? ;-)

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

I keep on asking people like you what it was invented for if not killing
man? But they are all strangely quiet on this one while prattling on
about sports etc.

I totally agree. The handgun was primarily a weapon of interpersonal
combat to replace the sword, or a big stick.

with the development of the rifle, its military use is almost nil.

I have to think long and hard for any way in which one can be used other
than to threaten the life of a human being. Game won't let you get close
enough for it to be a reliable hunting weapon, and if you CAN get close
eonugh to use one, chances are there is a better weapon to use. e.g.
captive bolt pistol.

 

[Eeyore]

Eeyore said:


Except that the NHS is nothing to be proud of either

I wouldn't be that unkind to it.

Remove the influence politicians have on it with their constant meddling and I dare
say it would be fine. Let the nurses run it in fact ! That might at least ensure the
hospitals are kept properly clean.

Graham

 

[Eeyore]

A javelin is simply a development of a spear - and throwing spears at prey
is just about as old as man himself. A sword is also a development of a
basic knife which would have started life as a tool rather than weapon.
You seem to have the idea man has always spent his time solely thinking of
ways to kill other men.

It does look rather like that, doesn't it ?

Graham

 

[Neil Barker]

Indeed. Which is why I personally feel they should have been exempted.

They have been - you can legally own such a single-shot .22 target
pistol on a FAC.

 

[Neil Barker]

And I asked you for your explanation why. But of course got no answer.

The reason that handgun crime has more than trebled is hardly taxing.

Removing legally held handguns did sod-all.

 

[The Natural Philosopher]

True. But what use are they to society?

Immense use.
I think this is where you take too narrow a view society.

Like royalty for the middle clases, they provide aspirational targets
for he less well heeled: What Posh and Becks do, is live the lifestyle
that a large section of Britain would, if they too 'won the pools'. In
so dong they provide immense entertainment and object lessons for those
who cannot afford to live like that.

I am slightly socialist by leaning, but a pragmatist when it comes to
society. I do not believe that a society without differences in
lifestyles and incomes is a healthy one.

If 20 men want to get over a 20ft high wall, the sensible approach is
not to all stand at the bottom and whine that 'its too high' and the
'government should do something' You get yur thickest and burliest to
stand at the bottom, your less thick and less burly to stand on their
shoulders, and your lightest and most albe person to climb up and jump
over trailing a rope..

The MISTAKE is to think that any of these could have done it without ALL
of the others.

And that the one guy who didn't partake because he was a nerdy weak
geek, was in fact the one who suggested the method in the first place.

Society needs aspirations, and targets, and if it takes a little
inequality to get it, I am all for it.

MOST of 19th century science, literature, an indeed waht we would class
as advances to civilisation was done by people who had private incomes.

You might try to replacee that with state funded research, but that then
begs the question of what research to fund.

OTOH you might approach the Beckahms for a cheque, and if it strikes
their fancy, get one.

A lot less bureaucratic and more efficient approach.

All those that have aspirations
for "professional football" should be sent out in Douglas Adams' first
spaceship!

Why? its a skill. Possibly a more relevant one than telephone sanitising.

What good is it to them to have ridiculous wages which heightens their
expectation in life?

It is to answer that question, that largely I feel they should be
allowed to have them.

"Professional" football, rugby and cricket should be banned! Discuss?

Why? they harm almost no ne, and provide something of interest to
discuss ad wtch:In a life dominated by bland fiction, at least what
happens on the pitch is (mostly) real.

 

[Eeyore]

[email protected] says...

As Steve says, you do like shifting the goalposts, don't you ?

I simply asked you why handgun crime has more than tripled in the years
since handguns were banned in the UK. Your answer to that is ?

I've yet to see those numbers but I wouldn't be surprised if it virtually all
related to 'yardy' drug crime and related activity. Certainly it seems to
involve a lot of blacks. It's likely the ban has had no effect on that. And yes,
that where the law falls down.

Introduce some SERIOUS mandatory penalties (long automatic jail sentences) for
simple possession of an illegal gun and damn well enforce it is what I'd like to
see.

Graham