Wednesday, 10 February 2010

Justice for Wilbur? Nope, justice for the snake. Good.

You may remember a story I commented on last year about two arrogant cat owners who believed their feral creature had a god-given right to shit where it pleased, and the misplaced indigation they had when it was gobbled by a snake which was in another garden.

Well, it seems that this is one of the few occasions where the government has got it right.

"Once grown the threat is almost entirely confined to the owner's home, as large snakes rapidly become torpid outdoors in the UK climate," he added.

"On balance, the listing of constricting snakes on the Schedule to the DWAA was therefore considered unlikely to achieve the aims of the Act and so they were not added to the Schedule.

"The Government has no plans to add them to the Schedule in the near future."


Good. Maybe now the arrogant owners can realise that they were in the wrong. The "rant" posted on the Justice for Wilbur site is just ridiculous:

So, by leaving his snake unattended and allowing it to kill Wilbur, my neighbour has done nothing wrong in the eyes of the law. Maybe so, but not in the eyes of everyone else that knows about this, who, as one, are horrified.


Nope. I'm not. I know most people that commented on local news sites about this weren't horrified. Maybe horrified at your arrogance, that you let a cat roam wherever it pleased, but then got angry when something happened to it.

As if losing Wilbur in these circumstances wasn’t bad enough, what has made all this even harder to bear is the knowledge - gathered from the RSPCA and the Police - that legally no crime has been committed, so that in effect, nothing can be done, no-one is responsible, no-one can be held to account, and so he's died in vain.


No - you are responsible, and you can be held to account. You let the cat roam wherever it wanted!

The modicum of justice we have achieved is for the snakes owner to be issued with a ‘verbal warning’ from the RSPCA (who’s hands were tied), so that if anything like this happens again, he will be prosecuted.


Why? It was in the confines of the owner's garden.

Well sorry, NO, that’s not good enough, not by a long chalk.....


No it's not good enough. For a start, YOU should have accepted some fucking responsibility for this.

I was warned not to do a leaflet drop naming the snakes owner or his address to people who live in the vicinity or indeed to warn them of any potential threat to themselves, their children or pets; as we might be sued!


Cat-owner vigilantism? The mind boggles.

The ‘what if a child is next.....’ scenario cuts no ice.


Because it's bollocks.

I tell you, the World’s gone bloody mad.


Because everyone thinks differently to you, they're the mad ones? I expect the deranged bag lady pushing a Tesco trolley full of rubbish around Broadmead thinks that the world is mad.

Tuesday, 9 February 2010

Evening Post fighting Kerry McCarthy's election campaign

With this article, which unless I'm very much mistaken has the acrid stench of a Labour election campaign about it.

Total ban on smoking around the corner?

Possibly, if this Al JaBeeba report is anything to go by...

SouthwestOne Update

Turns out, unsurprisingly, the Police don't like it.

Frustrated officers have told the Evening Post they are wasting hours every day battling with the IBM system, implemented in November, when they should be out catching criminals.

It was introduced as part of the Southwest One, which has seen information technology, finance and much of the administration of the police force, Somerset County and Taunton Deane Borough council streamlined and centralised in Taunton.


Bet nobody saw this coming! Although Chief Constable Colin Port was quick to jump to its defence:

Chief Constable Colin Port said: "Of course I'm concerned that our workforce are not doing what I want them to do, and that's being out on the streets protecting the public. Yes, this is a new system. Yes, there have been problems. But we're sorting those problems.


Is he working for the police or for IBM, for fuck's sake? This sounds like a press release from SAP's sales team. But as a commenter on the story points out, it's perhaps more to do with the fact his wife was one of the main implementers of the project.

Friday, 5 February 2010

People starting to think rationally for themselves

It took long enough.

The findings, based on interviews carried out on 3-4 February, show that only 26% of people think "climate change is happening and is now established as largely man-made".

In November 2009, a similar poll by Populus - commissioned by the Times newspaper - showed that 41% agreed that climate change was happening and it was largely the result of human activities.

In the latest poll, 38% feel that "climate change is happening, but not yet proven to be largely man-made", while 8% support the statement: "climate change is happening, but it is environmentalist propaganda that it is man-made."


Clearly the most reasonable viewpoint, and the one I share. It isn't yet proven to be largely man-made. I'm not sure where those who purport this to be the case get this from, other than Ed Milliband. People are finally realising it's far more rational and scientific to question what we're told. It took long enough.

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs' (Defra) chief scientific adviser, Professor Bob Watson, called the findings "very disappointing".


Well they would be for you, wouldn't they. Doubtless DEFRA had all sorts of money-making schemes cooked up based on the fact that people will pay limitless amounts of money in taxes to "avoid climate change". If people start to question your propoganda a bit, they're less likely to want to hand over their cash so easily for something that may not stop it anyway, and we couldn't have that, could we?

"The fact that there has been a very significant drop in the number of people that believe that we humans are changing the Earth's climate is serious," he told BBC News.

"Action is urgently needed," Professor Watson warned.


Yeah, I'm sure it is. How about we start with you shutting the fuck up?

"We need the public to understand that climate change is serious so they will change their habits and help us move towards a low carbon economy."


This can be translated as: "We will be releasing more "Act On CO2" propoganda shortly to justify outrageous taxes on people who can't or won't change their habits"

Of the 75% of respondents who agreed that climate change was happening, one-in-three people felt that the potential consequences of living in a warming world had been exaggerated, up from one-in-five people in November.


Nooooo. Really? Could that be because the consequences (drowning polar bears etc) have been exaggerated? Not to mention ridiculous advice such as unplugging mobile phone chargers, which are now pretty much all switched-mode power supplies that don't take any power when they're not charging a phone.

However, 73% of the people who said that they were aware of the "science flaws" stories stated that the media coverage had not changed their views about the risks of climate change.

"People tend to make judgements over time based on a whole range of different sources," Mr Simmonds explained.


Good. Nothing will annoy the warmists more. If for no other reason that they've wasted time, money (our money!), and energy peddling their propoganda and it's pointless if people are prepared to look at the wider picture.

Wednesday, 3 February 2010

Richard Madeley tonguing Blair's ringpiece

God, I feel sick.

Tuesday, 2 February 2010

And people say it's NOT a medieval religion?

People getting a bollocking for Sitting to close to eachother?

Fucking hell, come on. And people are happy to welcome this draconian shit over here?