Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Newbury Today Forum _ Newbury News _ What does litter on the A339 say about Newbury?
Posted by: Sherlock Apr 10 2013, 05:19 PM
As the drifts of litter on both sides of the dual carriageway in town get deeper by the day I wonder what message West Berkshire Council is trying to send to those arriving in our fair town.
Could it be that they want them to be impressed by the fact that they aren't spending taxpayer's money on trivial matters like clearing up litter?
Perhaps they're being brutally honest 'This is a pretty sh*t town, get used to it'
Or maybe the thinking is that any publicity is good publicity?
Is it a tourist attraction, arranged by our very own tourism officer? (Who knew we had one of those?! Great that we can afford one and a much better use of council tax payer money than cleaning our streets.)
The A339 isn't the only area of impressive litter build up but most of those visiting or passing through Newbury must drive along it and have a chance to marvel at the council's wisdom and foresight. Well done!
Posted by: John C Apr 10 2013, 05:57 PM
QUOTE (Sherlock @ Apr 10 2013, 06:19 PM) 
As the drifts of litter on both sides of the dual carriageway in town get deeper by the day I wonder what message West Berkshire Council is trying to send to those arriving in our fair town.
Could it be that they want them to be impressed by the fact that they aren't spending taxpayer's money on trivial matters like clearing up litter?
Perhaps they're being brutally honest 'This is a pretty sh*t town, get used to it'
Or maybe the thinking is that any publicity is good publicity?
Is it a tourist attraction, arranged by our very own tourism officer? (Who knew we had one of those?! Great that we can afford one and a much better use of council tax payer money than cleaning our streets.)
The A339 isn't the only area of impressive litter build up but most of those visiting or passing through Newbury must drive along it and have a chance to marvel at the council's wisdom and foresight. Well done!
Could it be that they want them to be impressed by the fact that they aren't spending taxpayer's money on trivial matters like clearing up litter?
Perhaps they're being brutally honest 'This is a pretty sh*t town, get used to it'
Or maybe the thinking is that any publicity is good publicity?
Is it a tourist attraction, arranged by our very own tourism officer? (Who knew we had one of those?! Great that we can afford one and a much better use of council tax payer money than cleaning our streets.)
The A339 isn't the only area of impressive litter build up but most of those visiting or passing through Newbury must drive along it and have a chance to marvel at the council's wisdom and foresight. Well done!
They are paying for a service that they are not getting or it got cut in the budget cuts.
Posted by: Gazzadp Apr 10 2013, 06:30 PM
"Welcome to the home of West Berkshire Council"
Posted by: GMR Apr 10 2013, 06:54 PM
We are now officially poor.... Welcome to WBC's Newbury. Well, we have to be after paying top council employers £1.8 million and giving away land free.
Posted by: user23 Apr 10 2013, 07:00 PM
QUOTE (Sherlock @ Apr 10 2013, 06:19 PM)
As the drifts of litter on both sides of the dual carriageway in town get deeper by the day I wonder what message West Berkshire Council is trying to send to those arriving in our fair town.
Could it be that they want them to be impressed by the fact that they aren't spending taxpayer's money on trivial matters like clearing up litter?
Perhaps they're being brutally honest 'This is a pretty sh*t town, get used to it'
Or maybe the thinking is that any publicity is good publicity?
Is it a tourist attraction, arranged by our very own tourism officer? (Who knew we had one of those?! Great that we can afford one and a much better use of council tax payer money than cleaning our streets.)
The A339 isn't the only area of impressive litter build up but most of those visiting or passing through Newbury must drive along it and have a chance to marvel at the council's wisdom and foresight. Well done!
It think it says some people who live in, or travel through Newbury drop litter.Could it be that they want them to be impressed by the fact that they aren't spending taxpayer's money on trivial matters like clearing up litter?
Perhaps they're being brutally honest 'This is a pretty sh*t town, get used to it'
Or maybe the thinking is that any publicity is good publicity?
Is it a tourist attraction, arranged by our very own tourism officer? (Who knew we had one of those?! Great that we can afford one and a much better use of council tax payer money than cleaning our streets.)
The A339 isn't the only area of impressive litter build up but most of those visiting or passing through Newbury must drive along it and have a chance to marvel at the council's wisdom and foresight. Well done!
How about helping to organise a litter pick if you think it's a big issue?
Posted by: Berkshirelad Apr 10 2013, 07:24 PM
QUOTE (Sherlock @ Apr 10 2013, 05:19 PM)
As the drifts of litter on both sides of the dual carriageway in town get deeper by the day I wonder what message West Berkshire Council is trying to send to those arriving in our fair town.
Could it be that they want them to be impressed by the fact that they aren't spending taxpayer's money on trivial matters like clearing up litter?
Perhaps they're being brutally honest 'This is a pretty sh*t town, get used to it'
Or maybe the thinking is that any publicity is good publicity?
Is it a tourist attraction, arranged by our very own tourism officer? (Who knew we had one of those?! Great that we can afford one and a much better use of council tax payer money than cleaning our streets.)
The A339 isn't the only area of impressive litter build up but most of those visiting or passing through Newbury must drive along it and have a chance to marvel at the council's wisdom and foresight. Well done!
Could it be that they want them to be impressed by the fact that they aren't spending taxpayer's money on trivial matters like clearing up litter?
Perhaps they're being brutally honest 'This is a pretty sh*t town, get used to it'
Or maybe the thinking is that any publicity is good publicity?
Is it a tourist attraction, arranged by our very own tourism officer? (Who knew we had one of those?! Great that we can afford one and a much better use of council tax payer money than cleaning our streets.)
The A339 isn't the only area of impressive litter build up but most of those visiting or passing through Newbury must drive along it and have a chance to marvel at the council's wisdom and foresight. Well done!
Maybe it is intended to encourage the to use the bypass next time they are 'passing through'.
I would have thought that there were enough 'clients' eligible for community service to do the litter picking required.
Posted by: On the edge Apr 10 2013, 07:41 PM
QUOTE (user23 @ Apr 10 2013, 08:00 PM)
It think it says some people who live in, or travel through Newbury drop litter.
How about helping to organise a litter pick if you think it's a big issue?
How about helping to organise a litter pick if you think it's a big issue?
OK, am happy to do that. Andy C expressed an interest in another similar thread. Quite happy to organise one if you both confirm you'd take part. That.s a serious offer by the way.
Posted by: On the edge Apr 10 2013, 07:44 PM
QUOTE (Berkshirelad @ Apr 10 2013, 08:24 PM)
......
I would have thought that there were enough 'clients' eligible for community service to do the litter picking required.
I would have thought that there were enough 'clients' eligible for community service to do the litter picking required.
That's an extremely good point. I wonder if anyone knows what really does get done on 'community service'? A quick tot up of the hours doshed out every month suggests we ought to be living in a well manicured paradise. Perhaps an enquiry of our councillors would be in order?
Posted by: user23 Apr 10 2013, 08:19 PM
QUOTE (On the edge @ Apr 10 2013, 08:41 PM)
OK, am happy to do that. Andy C expressed an interest in another similar thread. Quite happy to organise one if you both confirm you'd take part. That.s a serious offer by the way.
To be honest I've not really noticed it as I don't use the A339 that often and it's not a huge issue for me, but it clearly is for you so good on you for doing something about it and organising a litter pick.
Posted by: Exhausted Apr 10 2013, 09:18 PM
QUOTE (On the edge @ Apr 10 2013, 08:41 PM)
OK, am happy to do that. Andy C expressed an interest in another similar thread. Quite happy to organise one if you both confirm you'd take part. That.s a serious offer by the way.
QUOTE (user23 @ Apr 10 2013, 09:19 PM)
To be honest I've not really noticed it as I don't use the A339 that often and it's not a huge issue for me, but it clearly is for you so good on you for doing something about it and organising a litter pick.
Not a volunteer then.
Posted by: dannyboy Apr 10 2013, 09:21 PM
If enough people go on about it, it will encourage RG to get a letter in next weeks NWN. Then when it is cleared thanks to the Highways chaps litter picking schedule along that route, RG will be able to claim it was all thanks to his campaign.
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 10 2013, 10:02 PM
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Apr 10 2013, 10:21 PM)
If enough people go on about it, it will encourage RG to get a letter in next weeks NWN. Then when it is cleared thanks to the Highways chaps litter picking schedule along that route, RG will be able to claim it was all thanks to his campaign.
Perhaps some other politico could beat him to it? Or make a statement that it is about to be cleared; if what you say is true.
Posted by: Simon Kirby Apr 11 2013, 08:40 AM
QUOTE (Exhausted @ Apr 10 2013, 10:18 PM)
Not a volunteer then.
I'll do it if User does - he's dished out enough rubbish on here, it'll be nice to see him picking up a bit.
Posted by: dannyboy Apr 11 2013, 09:13 AM
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Apr 10 2013, 11:02 PM)
Perhaps some other politico could beat him to it? Or make a statement that it is about to be cleared; if what you say is true.
who knows? should we place bets?
Posted by: Strafin Apr 11 2013, 10:47 AM
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Apr 10 2013, 11:02 PM)
Perhaps some other politico could beat him to it? Or make a statement that it is about to be cleared; if what you say is true.
They won't though will they, and to be fair to RG, he does get up and do things for the good of the district. Fine he takes credit, but why not?
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 11 2013, 10:50 AM
QUOTE (Strafin @ Apr 11 2013, 11:47 AM)
They won't though will they, and to be fair to RG, he does get up and do things for the good of the district. Fine he takes credit, but why not?
That's my point, although I am not completely sure it is for the good of the district. But even if my cynicism is correct, he's no worse than any other politico
Posted by: dannyboy Apr 11 2013, 10:54 AM
QUOTE (Strafin @ Apr 11 2013, 11:47 AM)
They won't though will they, and to be fair to RG, he does get up and do things for the good of the district. Fine he takes credit, but why not?
That's a generous viewpoint....
he certainly like to take credit, and ensures everyone knows about it. I wonder how many others actually do make a difference locally but who don't feel the need to broadcast the fact.
Posted by: On the edge Apr 11 2013, 11:30 AM
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Apr 11 2013, 11:54 AM)
That's a generous viewpoint....
he certainly like to take credit, and ensures everyone knows about it. I wonder how many others actually do make a difference locally but who don't feel the need to broadcast the fact.
he certainly like to take credit, and ensures everyone knows about it. I wonder how many others actually do make a difference locally but who don't feel the need to broadcast the fact.
Ahh, you've spotted what the previous CEO at WBC noticed on his departure - lack of leadership from the present incumbents. Not helped by our present CEO 'silent Nick' - who'd make Calvin Coolage look garrilous!
Posted by: dannyboy Apr 11 2013, 11:32 AM
QUOTE (On the edge @ Apr 11 2013, 12:30 PM)
Ahh, you've spotted what the previous CEO at WBC noticed on his departure - lack of leadership from the present incumbents. Not helped by our present CEO 'silent Nick' - who'd make Calvin Coolage look garrilous!
you equate self promotion to a job well done.......
Posted by: On the edge Apr 11 2013, 11:37 AM
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Apr 11 2013, 12:32 PM)
you equate self promotion to a job well done.......
No, don't you understand the difference between management and leadership. I'll not explain, but any good commercial course has a module.
Posted by: dannyboy Apr 11 2013, 11:39 AM
QUOTE (On the edge @ Apr 11 2013, 12:37 PM)
No, don't you understand the difference between management and leadership. I'll not explain, but any good commercial course has a module.
leadership is getting things done management is getting some one else to do it.
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 11 2013, 12:00 PM
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Apr 11 2013, 12:39 PM)
leadership is getting things done management is getting some one else to do it.
They both involve the same disciplines, surely?
Posted by: dannyboy Apr 11 2013, 12:11 PM
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Apr 11 2013, 01:00 PM)
They both involve the same disciplines, surely?
No,
management is the endless layering of useless tiers of bureaucracy to give pen pushers an empire they can lord it over whilst leadership is having the bollocks to grab a problem by the scruff of the neck & knock it into shape.
you don't need the former to become the latter.
popular culture is filled with examples of endfless conflict between the two. We always root for the leader, not the manager.
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 11 2013, 12:18 PM
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Apr 11 2013, 01:11 PM)
No,
management is the endless layering of useless tiers of bureaucracy to give pen pushers an empire they can lord it over whilst leadership is having the bollocks to grab a problem by the scruff of the neck & knock it into shape.
you don't need the former to become the latter.
popular culture is filled with examples of endfless conflict between the two. We always root for the leader, not the manager.
management is the endless layering of useless tiers of bureaucracy to give pen pushers an empire they can lord it over whilst leadership is having the bollocks to grab a problem by the scruff of the neck & knock it into shape.
you don't need the former to become the latter.
popular culture is filled with examples of endfless conflict between the two. We always root for the leader, not the manager.
The world according to dannyboy.
A leader is a special type of manager: Thatcher didn't go and win a war, she arranged people to do it for her. The principle role of a manager is not to push a pen, but to arrange people so that things happen. A good manger will have good leadership qualities. If you don't have good leadership qualities, it is likely you are a manager only in title.
Both terms are interlinked, but like with most things, there no absolutes.
Posted by: dannyboy Apr 11 2013, 12:23 PM
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Apr 11 2013, 01:18 PM)
If you don't have good leadership qualities, it is likely you are a manager only in title.
Both terms are interlinked
Both terms are interlinked
so the one usurps & take precedence over the other. just what I said.
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 11 2013, 12:25 PM
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Apr 11 2013, 01:23 PM)
so the one usurps & take precedence over the other. just what I said.
No you didn't, you designed an argument to support your view. I'm saying that a leader is effectively the primary manager. We are all to a lesser or greater degree, a manager.
Posted by: dannyboy Apr 11 2013, 12:28 PM
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Apr 11 2013, 01:25 PM)
No you didn't, you designed an argument to support your view. I'm saying that a leader is effectively the primary manager. We are all to a lesser or greater degree, a manager.
so if everyone is to some degree a manager......
Posted by: motormad Apr 11 2013, 12:46 PM
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Apr 11 2013, 01:25 PM)
No you didn't, you designed an argument to support your view. I'm saying that a leader is effectively the primary manager. We are all to a lesser or greater degree, a manager.
What are you on about?
I agree with some layers of management being pointless and providing nothing. It depends on the situation, the business, etc.
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 11 2013, 12:51 PM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 11 2013, 01:46 PM)
What are you on about?
You wouldn't understand.
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 11 2013, 01:46 PM)
I agree with some layers of management being pointless and providing nothing. It depends on the situation, the business, etc.
Of course.
Posted by: Berkshirelad Apr 11 2013, 01:03 PM
Managers tell people to do; true leaders inspire people to do.
Posted by: GMR Apr 11 2013, 04:54 PM
QUOTE (Berkshirelad @ Apr 10 2013, 08:24 PM)
Maybe it is intended to encourage the to use the bypass next time they are 'passing through'.
I would have thought that there were enough 'clients' eligible for community service to do the litter picking required.
I would have thought that there were enough 'clients' eligible for community service to do the litter picking required.
If those two take party I am also happy to join in.... but some how I doubt it
Posted by: Sherlock Apr 11 2013, 10:06 PM
One positive thing about the A339 litter - there isn't as much of it as there is on the A34. Driving south today it occurred to me that the appalling state of its verges do for our formerly green and pleasant land what our local litter drifts do for Newbury, welcoming foreign visitors arriving at the southern ports by throwing a resounding 'Look at how sh*t we are!' right in their faces.
If only we had someone local with influence at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs who could do something about this. Perhaps the fact that they don't seem to be taking any interest tells us all we need to know about what they really think about the environment.
Posted by: blackdog Apr 11 2013, 11:25 PM
I'm all for getting WBC doing a bit more litter picking (saw a couple of gangs clearing up the A339 and A340 in Hampshire this week). However, what about doing something about the selfish prats who chuck the litter out as they drive by.
£60 fine and 3 points for instance.
Posted by: On the edge Apr 12 2013, 07:12 AM
QUOTE (blackdog @ Apr 12 2013, 12:25 AM)
I'm all for getting WBC doing a bit more litter picking (saw a couple of gangs clearing up the A339 and A340 in Hampshire this week). However, what about doing something about the selfish prats who chuck the litter out as they drive by.
£60 fine and 3 points for instance.
£60 fine and 3 points for instance.
Yes please and also those who walk by, litter also includes fag ends and chewing gum! But we mustn't upset the voters must we.
Posted by: motormad Apr 12 2013, 08:04 AM
QUOTE (blackdog @ Apr 12 2013, 12:25 AM)
I'm all for getting WBC doing a bit more litter picking (saw a couple of gangs clearing up the A339 and A340 in Hampshire this week). However, what about doing something about the selfish prats who chuck the litter out as they drive by.
£60 fine and 3 points for instance.
£60 fine and 3 points for instance.
Uh, no, how many stupid ideas are you going to have?
A fine, fair enough, but an endorsable penalty?
What happens if a passenger throws something out of the window? Are they given points? What about if someone is walking? Are they given points?
Points is not practical to enforce and as littering is nothing to do with driving, to give penalty points on one license for the offense is incredibly dim-whitted.
Posted by: blackdog Apr 12 2013, 08:51 AM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 09:04 AM)
Uh, no, how many stupid ideas are you going to have?
A fine, fair enough, but an endorsable penalty?
What happens if a passenger throws something out of the window? Are they given points? What about if someone is walking? Are they given points?
Points is not practical to enforce and as littering is nothing to do with driving, to give penalty points on one license for the offense is incredibly dim-whitted.
A fine, fair enough, but an endorsable penalty?
What happens if a passenger throws something out of the window? Are they given points? What about if someone is walking? Are they given points?
Points is not practical to enforce and as littering is nothing to do with driving, to give penalty points on one license for the offense is incredibly dim-whitted.
Your reaction shows just why points are a far more effective penalty than cash.
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 12 2013, 09:16 AM
QUOTE (blackdog @ Apr 12 2013, 09:51 AM)
Your reaction shows just why points are a far more effective penalty than cash.
Agreed. If a car driver cannot stop things 'falling out' of the car, then one has to wonder if they should be driving.
Posted by: motormad Apr 12 2013, 09:26 AM
QUOTE (blackdog @ Apr 12 2013, 09:51 AM)
Your reaction shows just why points are a far more effective penalty than cash.
Not at all, my reaction is that of a logical, unbiased person giving his thought on an opinion.
Points on your DRIVING LICENSE should be related to DRIVING RELATED offences. Speeding, no insurance, ignoring red lights, etc. Perhaps throwing litter as a DRIVER but as a passenger throwing litter out you cannot be given points YOU AREN'T DRIVING.
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Apr 12 2013, 10:16 AM)
Agreed. If a car driver cannot stop things 'falling out' of the car, then one has to wonder if they should be driving.
Yes, because as a driver I am able to reach into the back of the car, while drifting skillfully across 3 lanes of moving traffic to make sure my dicky mate in the back doesn't through something out.
So clueless.
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 12 2013, 09:41 AM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 10:26 AM)
Yes, because as a driver I am able to reach into the back of the car, while drifting skillfully across 3 lanes of moving traffic to make sure my dicky mate in the back doesn't through something out.So clueless.
Then you can give your 'dicky mate' a good kick in the billhooks when you get the points. So clueless.
Posted by: motormad Apr 12 2013, 10:16 AM
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Apr 12 2013, 10:41 AM)
Then you can give your 'dicky mate' a good kick in the billhooks when you get the points. So clueless.
Just like driving without a seatbelt, over 16s are then subject to their own fine but they do not get penalty points.
It's not going to happen. So I'm not going to bother arguing with you, as we all known you like to be pedantic. You are clueless in this topic at least, this is evident already. Andy Capp by name and nature.
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 12 2013, 10:48 AM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 11:16 AM)
Just like driving without a seatbelt, over 16s are then subject to their own fine but they do not get penalty points.
It's not going to happen. So I'm not going to bother arguing with you, as we all known you like to be pedantic. You are clueless in this topic at least, this is evident already. Andy Capp by name and nature.
It's not going to happen. So I'm not going to bother arguing with you, as we all known you like to be pedantic. You are clueless in this topic at least, this is evident already. Andy Capp by name and nature.
There's nothing to be pedantic about, indeed, it is you that is being pedantic, but despising litter-bugs is something to promote. Especially all that which comes from lowered Saxos, Pugs et al. (that's me trolling BTW).
Posted by: motormad Apr 12 2013, 11:21 AM
Despising litter bugs is fine, punishing DRIVERS for it is not the right thing.
I'm above your trolling, I'm sure you've seen my car about, none of my mates have Saxos Although I once went in one and came out smelling like Lynx.
Posted by: dannyboy Apr 12 2013, 11:23 AM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 12:21 PM)
Despising litter bugs is fine, punishing DRIVERS for it is not the right thing.
I'm above your trolling, I'm sure you've seen my car about, none of my mates have Saxos Although I once went in one and came out smelling like Lynx.
I'm above your trolling, I'm sure you've seen my car about, none of my mates have Saxos
Although I once went in one and came out smelling like Lynx.When you are driving you are responsible for that vehicle. And anything that falls from it.
Get over it. Or just lock the pasenger windows.
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 12 2013, 11:51 AM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 12:21 PM)
Despising litter bugs is fine, punishing DRIVERS for it is not the right thing.
Technically it might be, but I hate the way people think it is appropriate to litter the roads with their junk food leftovers because it might make their car untidy. Alternately, close the stinking restaurants down, or compel them by law to go and tidy up after their inbreed customers have made the mess.
This issue brings the bigot out of me.
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 12:21 PM)
I'm above your trolling, I'm sure you've seen my car about, none of my mates have Saxos Although I once went in one and came out smelling like Lynx.
Although I once went in one and came out smelling like Lynx.I haven't seen you car TBH.
Posted by: blackdog Apr 12 2013, 12:47 PM
The idea of any penalty is to deter the behaviour that is to be penalised.
To work a penalty must i) be enforced and ii) be of a nature that would deter.
Fines and community service don't seem to be effective enough - whereas a driving bann, or points towards one, would seem to be something that many do see as a more serious punishment.
I see no reason why they should be limited to driving offences - if possible loss of a licence would do more to deter a shop-lifter, litterer, etc than a fine or community service, then it seems a sensible idea to consider it as a penalty.
Posted by: dannyboy Apr 12 2013, 12:52 PM
QUOTE (blackdog @ Apr 12 2013, 01:47 PM)
The idea of any penalty is to deter the behaviour that is to be penalised.
To work a penalty must i) be enforced and ii) be of a nature that would deter.
Fines and community service don't seem to be effective enough - whereas a driving bann, or points towards one, would seem to be something that many do see as a more serious punishment.
I see no reason why they should be limited to driving offences - if possible loss of a licence would do more to deter a shop-lifter, litterer, etc than a fine or community service, then it seems a sensible idea to consider it as a penalty.
To work a penalty must i) be enforced and ii) be of a nature that would deter.
Fines and community service don't seem to be effective enough - whereas a driving bann, or points towards one, would seem to be something that many do see as a more serious punishment.
I see no reason why they should be limited to driving offences - if possible loss of a licence would do more to deter a shop-lifter, litterer, etc than a fine or community service, then it seems a sensible idea to consider it as a penalty.
Looks like they would work - the idea certainly seems to have put the wind up motoxjaymad.
Posted by: motormad Apr 12 2013, 01:15 PM
Everyone knows who I am, and I even show my face at the Newt Of Orme meets, what do you do? Steviegirl.
QUOTE (blackdog @ Apr 12 2013, 01:47 PM)
The idea of any penalty is to deter the behaviour that is to be penalised.
To work a penalty must i) be enforced and ii) be of a nature that would deter.
Fines and community service don't seem to be effective enough - whereas a driving bann, or points towards one, would seem to be something that many do see as a more serious punishment.
I see no reason why they should be limited to driving offences - if possible loss of a licence would do more to deter a shop-lifter, litterer, etc than a fine or community service, then it seems a sensible idea to consider it as a penalty.
To work a penalty must i) be enforced and ii) be of a nature that would deter.
Fines and community service don't seem to be effective enough - whereas a driving bann, or points towards one, would seem to be something that many do see as a more serious punishment.
I see no reason why they should be limited to driving offences - if possible loss of a licence would do more to deter a shop-lifter, litterer, etc than a fine or community service, then it seems a sensible idea to consider it as a penalty.
Right.................
Because what do you do for people who don't have a driving license?
Straight away that is proven it's not a good way of doing it.
Locking the windows, what a silly thing to say.
Posted by: dannyboy Apr 12 2013, 01:18 PM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 02:15 PM)
Locking the windows, what a silly thing to say.
or, don't let trash be thrown from your car.
If I was driving & one of my passengers checked anything from the window, they'd soon not be a passenger.
Posted by: Turin Machine Apr 12 2013, 01:20 PM
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Apr 12 2013, 11:48 AM)
There's nothing to be pedantic about, indeed, it is you that is being pedantic, but despising litter-bugs is something to promote. Especially all that which comes from lowered Saxos, Pugs et al. (that's me trolling BTW).
Harsh, tres harsh.
Posted by: Turin Machine Apr 12 2013, 01:23 PM
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Apr 12 2013, 02:18 PM)
or, don't let trash be thrown from your car.
If I was driving & one of my passengers checked anything from the window, they'd soon not be a passenger.
If I was driving & one of my passengers checked anything from the window, they'd soon not be a passenger.
Quite right, its called exercising responsability.
Posted by: motormad Apr 12 2013, 02:01 PM
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Apr 12 2013, 02:18 PM)
or, don't let trash be thrown from your car.
If I was driving & one of my passengers checked anything from the window, they'd soon not be a passenger.
If I was driving & one of my passengers checked anything from the window, they'd soon not be a passenger.
but you'd still get 3 points for it...!!!
Posted by: dannyboy Apr 12 2013, 02:16 PM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 03:01 PM)
but you'd still get 3 points for it...!!!
If it was the law that drivers of vehicles could be endorssed should passengers throw litter from the window, I'd never have let the situation arise.
Currently, if a passenger in my car chiucked something from the window - they'd soon by walking.
Posted by: motormad Apr 12 2013, 02:19 PM
But while driving you can't always be paying complete attention to what your PASSENGERS are doing.
It can be argued that infact they would be a distraction if you were.
Ergo regardless of your actions after the fact, you could not get away from the fact you'd still have points on your license.
The law has to be equal and fair to everyone. You cannot get a £60 fine and 3 points if you happen to own a driving license, but if you don't have a driving license then you get no points.. that is idiotic, just like the suggestion to punish non-motoring related offenses with motoring related points.
Posted by: dannyboy Apr 12 2013, 02:26 PM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 03:19 PM)
But while driving you can't always be paying complete attention to what your PASSENGERS are doing.
It can be argued that infact they would be a distraction if you were.
Ergo regardless of your actions after the fact, you could not get away from the fact you'd still have points on your license.
The law has to be equal and fair to everyone. You cannot get a £60 fine and 3 points if you happen to own a driving license, but if you don't have a driving license then you get no points.. that is idiotic, just like the suggestion to punish non-motoring related offenses with motoring related points.
It can be argued that infact they would be a distraction if you were.
Ergo regardless of your actions after the fact, you could not get away from the fact you'd still have points on your license.
The law has to be equal and fair to everyone. You cannot get a £60 fine and 3 points if you happen to own a driving license, but if you don't have a driving license then you get no points.. that is idiotic, just like the suggestion to punish non-motoring related offenses with motoring related points.
**** right they would be.
when driving you have to give the car, your passengers, the road & other road users your full attention.
If you feel that your passengers could endanger you ( such as by being a distraction ) , your license or other road users you should not be driving them around.
it may seem idiotic, it may seem like a kill joy attitude - but driving is a privilege, not a right.
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 12 2013, 02:27 PM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 03:19 PM)
But while driving you can't always be paying complete attention to what your PASSENGERS are doing.
It can be argued that infact they would be a distraction if you were.
Ergo regardless of your actions after the fact, you could not get away from the fact you'd still have points on your license.
The law has to be equal and fair to everyone. You cannot get a £60 fine and 3 points if you happen to own a driving license, but if you don't have a driving license then you get no points.. that is idiotic, just like the suggestion to punish non-motoring related offenses with motoring related points.
It can be argued that infact they would be a distraction if you were.
Ergo regardless of your actions after the fact, you could not get away from the fact you'd still have points on your license.
The law has to be equal and fair to everyone. You cannot get a £60 fine and 3 points if you happen to own a driving license, but if you don't have a driving license then you get no points.. that is idiotic, just like the suggestion to punish non-motoring related offenses with motoring related points.
Litter falling from a car, for me, is a motoring offence, whether it comes from the driver or not. If you cannot stop litter falling from your car, stay off the road.
Posted by: motormad Apr 12 2013, 02:55 PM
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Apr 12 2013, 03:27 PM)
Litter falling from a car, for me, is a motoring offence, whether it comes from the driver or not. If you cannot stop litter falling from your car, stay off the road.
Lol okay.
Posted by: motormad Apr 12 2013, 02:58 PM
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Apr 12 2013, 03:26 PM)
**** right they would be.
when driving you have to give the car, your passengers, the road & other road users your full attention.
If you feel that your passengers could endanger you ( such as by being a distraction ) , your license or other road users you should not be driving them around.
it may seem idiotic, it may seem like a kill joy attitude - but driving is a privilege, not a right.
when driving you have to give the car, your passengers, the road & other road users your full attention.
If you feel that your passengers could endanger you ( such as by being a distraction ) , your license or other road users you should not be driving them around.
it may seem idiotic, it may seem like a kill joy attitude - but driving is a privilege, not a right.
They don't cause ME a distraction, but some people are so overwhelmed by the art of moving a big circular thing and pressing a few pedals they need complete concentration on the road ahead at all times.
It's nothing to do with driving being a priveledge, it's to do with the fact that law can not punish a non-motoring related crime in a motoring related way. Because for those who do NOT drive, who commit the same crime, would get a completely different punishment.
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 12 2013, 03:07 PM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 03:58 PM)
They don't cause ME a distraction, but some people are so overwhelmed by the art of moving a big circular thing and pressing a few pedals they need complete concentration on the road ahead at all times.
It's nothing to do with driving being a priveledge, it's to do with the fact that law can not punish a non-motoring related crime in a motoring related way. Because for those who do NOT drive, who commit the same crime, would get a completely different punishment.
It's nothing to do with driving being a priveledge, it's to do with the fact that law can not punish a non-motoring related crime in a motoring related way. Because for those who do NOT drive, who commit the same crime, would get a completely different punishment.
Just create a law that says litter must not fall from your car. Discretions could be had for people who stop and recover the litter.
Posted by: motormad Apr 12 2013, 03:10 PM
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Apr 12 2013, 04:07 PM)
Just create a law that says litter must not fall from your car. Discretions could be had for people who stop and recover the litter.
Yes, let's stop on a 50-60 mile an hour road with no laybys.
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 12 2013, 03:13 PM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 04:10 PM)
Yes, let's stop on a 50-60 mile an hour road with no laybys.
Then no discretions. Just trying to be nice.
Posted by: dannyboy Apr 12 2013, 03:16 PM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 03:58 PM)
They don't cause ME a distraction, but some people are so overwhelmed by the art of moving a big circular thing and pressing a few pedals they need complete concentration on the road ahead at all times.
It's nothing to do with driving being a priveledge, it's to do with the fact that law can not punish a non-motoring related crime in a motoring related way. Because for those who do NOT drive, who commit the same crime, would get a completely different punishment.
It's nothing to do with driving being a priveledge, it's to do with the fact that law can not punish a non-motoring related crime in a motoring related way. Because for those who do NOT drive, who commit the same crime, would get a completely different punishment.
if a non driver allowed litter to be thrown from their vehicle by a passenger, that would be the least of their worries.
Letting stuff fall from your car is a motoring offence. The clue is that you let it fall from a motor vehicle. Curently it does not apply to litter, But the police could use the littering as a reason to stop a vehicle & then that could lead the driver into all manner of trouble.....
Say a driver lets a mate ( ignoring the fact that you would not actually let this happen for hear of damaging the paintwork ) attach his bike rack to your car & it fell off causing damage to another road users vehicle. Who gets the blame - the driver or the mate?
Posted by: dannyboy Apr 12 2013, 03:17 PM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 04:10 PM)
Yes, let's stop on a 50-60 mile an hour road with no laybys.
Doh - speed limit is 50mph on the road in question........
Posted by: motormad Apr 12 2013, 03:28 PM
I know that........ There are also other roads which have 20, 30, 40 and 70 mph limits to which my statement is true.
Posted by: dannyboy Apr 12 2013, 03:35 PM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 04:28 PM)
I know that........ There are also other roads which have 20, 30, 40 and 70 mph limits to which my statement is true.
and if stopping on these roads is dangerous for you - it will also be dangerous for those employed to clear up.
basically litter on the verge is a problem.
three answers -
a). find a way of making it socailly unacceptable to drop litter. other countries have managed, but this is a long term fix, and would take a generation or two.
b ). find a punishment so onerous people think twice - points on a driving license is one such idea as folk seem to like to be able to drive
c). Increase the number of litter patrols and see littering as a job creation scheme.
Posted by: motormad Apr 12 2013, 03:49 PM
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Apr 12 2013, 04:35 PM)
and if stopping on these roads is dangerous for you - it will also be dangerous for those employed to clear up.
basically litter on the verge is a problem.
three answers -
a). find a way of making it socailly unacceptable to drop litter. other countries have managed, but this is a long term fix, and would take a generation or two.
b ). find a punishment so onerous people think twice - points on a driving license is one such idea as folk seem to like to be able to drive
c). Increase the number of litter patrols and see littering as a job creation scheme.
basically litter on the verge is a problem.
three answers -
a). find a way of making it socailly unacceptable to drop litter. other countries have managed, but this is a long term fix, and would take a generation or two.
b ). find a punishment so onerous people think twice - points on a driving license is one such idea as folk seem to like to be able to drive
c). Increase the number of litter patrols and see littering as a job creation scheme.
I have never said it's not a problem or that it's not dangerous for a group of people to clear up, I'm just saying that the answer for non motoring related crimes to carry punishment for your motoring life is not fair, practical and I suspect, illlegal.
As I have said, people who do not drive who drop litter (in any situation) - What is their punishment? A 15 year old who is walking a dog, which does a crap, and is not picked up - We going to give him points too? What about Auntie Mabel who does the same thing?
Playing music loud and a neighbors complained? That's it, your driving license is revoked!
Stole a designer handbag? Yup, your car is being crushed.
No, it's not a good punishment nor can it be applied to the entire population. I am simply pointing out to those too dense to understand it that non-motoring issues should stay non-motoring issues.
Posted by: dannyboy Apr 12 2013, 03:58 PM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 04:49 PM)
I have never said it's not a problem or that it's not dangerous for a group of people to clear up, I'm just saying that the answer for non motoring related crimes to carry punishment for your motoring life is not fair, practical and I suspect, illlegal.
As I have said, people who do not drive who drop litter (in any situation) - What is their punishment? A 15 year old who is walking a dog, which does a crap, and is not picked up - We going to give him points too? What about Auntie Mabel who does the same thing?
Playing music loud and a neighbors complained? That's it, your driving license is revoked!
Stole a designer handbag? Yup, your car is being crushed.
No, it's not a good punishment nor can it be applied to the entire population. I am simply pointing out to those too dense to understand it that non-motoring issues should stay non-motoring issues.
As I have said, people who do not drive who drop litter (in any situation) - What is their punishment? A 15 year old who is walking a dog, which does a crap, and is not picked up - We going to give him points too? What about Auntie Mabel who does the same thing?
Playing music loud and a neighbors complained? That's it, your driving license is revoked!
Stole a designer handbag? Yup, your car is being crushed.
No, it's not a good punishment nor can it be applied to the entire population. I am simply pointing out to those too dense to understand it that non-motoring issues should stay non-motoring issues.
It would require a change in the law to start handing out penatly points on a driving license for non motoring related crimes. I happen to think it is an interesting idea.
it already happens with some non motoring related offences - smuggling for instance.
but, this is a separate thread really from the main jist of the argument - which is littering from a car. IMHO the car driver - ie the person responsible for that vehicle on the road, should be penalised.
Posted by: motormad Apr 12 2013, 04:03 PM
You can not blame the driver if a passenger in the rear of the car winds the window down and throws something out of the window. Which is my point.
Smuggling involves a car or lorry hence why points may be applied - I have not looked into that so do not know exactly how it works.
You think that penalizing driving for completely unrelated acts should be punished and I do not. Just like seatbelts, under a certain age it's the drivers fault, over a certain age it's the persons fault....
Posted by: dannyboy Apr 12 2013, 04:08 PM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 05:03 PM)
You can not blame the driver if a passenger in the rear of the car winds the window down and throws something out of the window. Which is my point.
Smuggling involves a car or lorry hence why points may be applied - I have not looked into that so do not know exactly how it works.
You think that penalizing driving for completely unrelated acts should be punished and I do not. Just like seatbelts, under a certain age it's the drivers fault, over a certain age it's the persons fault....
Smuggling involves a car or lorry hence why points may be applied - I have not looked into that so do not know exactly how it works.
You think that penalizing driving for completely unrelated acts should be punished and I do not. Just like seatbelts, under a certain age it's the drivers fault, over a certain age it's the persons fault....
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2175218/Car-owners-Will-held-liable-litter-thrown-vehicle-new-plans.html
Posted by: motormad Apr 12 2013, 04:13 PM
A fine is, errr... fine. Points are not fair.
Posted by: dannyboy Apr 12 2013, 04:18 PM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 05:13 PM)
A fine is, errr... fine. Points are not fair.
yeah, slippery end of the slope......
A fine now, but give it a year or so....
You don't even have to be the driver at the time of the littering either...
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 12 2013, 04:21 PM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 05:13 PM)
A fine is, errr... fine. Points are not fair.
Perfectly fair. It is only potentially unfair if the driver doesn't have a licence to endorse, but I don't care. Endorse the sheet out of them I say.
Posted by: blackdog Apr 12 2013, 04:50 PM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 04:49 PM)
I have never said it's not a problem or that it's not dangerous for a group of people to clear up, I'm just saying that the answer for non motoring related crimes to carry punishment for your motoring life is not fair, practical and I suspect, illlegal.
There is no law on the matter, it is not illegal because it doesn't exist. If the government decided to pass a law making penalty points a penalty for littering it would be the law - and not in the slightest bit illegal.
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 04:49 PM)
As I have said, people who do not drive who drop litter (in any situation) - What is their punishment? A 15 year old who is walking a dog, which does a crap, and is not picked up - We going to give him points too? What about Auntie Mabel who does the same thing?
Playing music loud and a neighbors complained? That's it, your driving license is revoked!
Stole a designer handbag? Yup, your car is being crushed.
No, it's not a good punishment nor can it be applied to the entire population. I am simply pointing out to those too dense to understand it that non-motoring issues should stay non-motoring issues.
Playing music loud and a neighbors complained? That's it, your driving license is revoked!
Stole a designer handbag? Yup, your car is being crushed.
No, it's not a good punishment nor can it be applied to the entire population. I am simply pointing out to those too dense to understand it that non-motoring issues should stay non-motoring issues.
If the offender is too young to have a licence they can still collect points - and delay the day they do get a licence.
As for the dog walkers, loud neighbours etc - why not? The idea is to deter anti-social behaviour.
Or the courts could hand down a more traditional penalty - at their discretion - if they think that the offender isn't going to be deterred by potential loss of their licence. Points are about deterring future offending - obviously this won't work is someone has no interest in driving. Perhaps curfew points or somesuch could be used instead - collect 12 points and you're not allowed out after 9pm for a year.
Posted by: Exhausted Apr 12 2013, 05:24 PM
QUOTE (blackdog @ Apr 12 2013, 05:50 PM)
Or the courts could hand down a more traditional penalty - at their discretion - if they think that the offender isn't going to be deterred by potential loss of their licence. Points are about deterring future offending - obviously this won't work is someone has no interest in driving. Perhaps curfew points or somesuch could be used instead - collect 12 points and you're not allowed out after 9pm for a year.
That'll make a difference. Remember the kid from Hungerford who wouldn't do community service unless he had his mobile with him. I think they gave up in the end.
Posted by: user23 Apr 12 2013, 06:02 PM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 05:03 PM)
You can not blame the driver if a passenger in the rear of the car winds the window down and throws something out of the window. Which is my point.
Of course you can and this already happens.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-18294193
I agree penalty points would be a better incentive for drivers to keep passengers under control.
Posted by: blackdog Apr 12 2013, 06:40 PM
QUOTE (Exhausted @ Apr 12 2013, 06:24 PM)
That'll make a difference. Remember the kid from Hungerford who wouldn't do community service unless he had his mobile with him. I think they gave up in the end.
He ended up doing his hours - or is still doing them.
Posted by: Exhausted Apr 12 2013, 07:11 PM
QUOTE (blackdog @ Apr 12 2013, 07:40 PM)
He ended up doing his hours - or is still doing them.
Under his terms I would bet.
Posted by: On the edge Apr 12 2013, 07:32 PM
QUOTE (Exhausted @ Apr 12 2013, 08:11 PM)
Under his terms I would bet.
That sums up what I think is wrong with our justice system. It should NOT have been for the Probation Service to decide. If he would not submit to the work, then he's failed to pay the penalty so his next journey is HMP. What's so difficult about that?
Posted by: blackdog Apr 12 2013, 10:27 PM
QUOTE (Exhausted @ Apr 12 2013, 08:11 PM)
Under his terms I would bet.
Don't think so - IIRC he went back up in front of the magistrates and said he was sorry and would be a good boy. I think he ended up with the original sentence (no idea why they didn't add a few hours for his stupidity).
Posted by: motormad Apr 12 2013, 10:28 PM
No real point me taking part in this discussion.
Some disillusioned people think they should be making the law; penalising person a who has a license by giving them 3 points for dropping litter, but only giving a fine to person b who doesn't have a license, is dumb...the single point that some people don't have licenses and thus fines would be not consistent is enough to put a nail in this stupid idea. Giving a 14 year old "points on his license" for not picking up dog crap? Are you serious? What would you tell your insurance company? Yeah I got 3 points... Speeding sir? No... my dog took a dump in a field.
A select few seem to think it would work, well, they are wrong for the reasons stated above. Sorry you are too caught up to see it.
To penalise Adult A who is driving for the actions of Adult C is stupid - When presuming a police offer WITNESSED the event, they could see which side of the car the litter came out of, and thus fine the RELEVANT person if he deemed it necessary.
If this did come into plan I sincerely hope you all get stung by your own stupid ideas.
I know I come up with some **** in my time but this is above and beyond most of what I've ever come up with.
I'll leave you to making up rules for yourselves in you "little club".
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yUpbOliTHJY
Posted by: Sherlock Apr 12 2013, 10:33 PM
Heard some hilarious news earlier. Apparently our local MP is as disgusted as everyone else by the huge volumes of litter on the highways and byways of his constituency and - wait for it - attempted to organise a clean up! Predictably it was just as unsuccessful as his campaign for lower petrol prices! LOL!
Posted by: Sherlock Apr 12 2013, 10:42 PM
Just noticed this item, linked to from 'the other forum'
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2013/apr/04/right-rivers-richard-benyon-interests
I sincerely hope this is wrong. It would be awful to think that a minister responsible for the environment - and our very own MP - is behaving like this.
Posted by: dannyboy Apr 12 2013, 10:44 PM
If this did come into plan I sincerely hope you all get stung by your own stupid ideas.
unlikely - we'd all have to break the law first.
Posted by: motormad Apr 12 2013, 11:23 PM
Yeah, that would never happen!
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 13 2013, 12:00 AM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 11:28 PM)
No real point me taking part in this discussion.
Some disillusioned people think they should be making the law; penalising person a who has a license by giving them 3 points for dropping litter, but only giving a fine to person b who doesn't have a license, is dumb...the single point that some people don't have licenses and thus fines would be not consistent is enough to put a nail in this stupid idea. Giving a 14 year old "points on his license" for not picking up dog crap? Are you serious? What would you tell your insurance company? Yeah I got 3 points... Speeding sir? No... my dog took a dump in a field.
A select few seem to think it would work, well, they are wrong for the reasons stated above. Sorry you are too caught up to see it.
To penalise Adult A who is driving for the actions of Adult C is stupid - When presuming a police offer WITNESSED the event, they could see which side of the car the litter came out of, and thus fine the RELEVANT person if he deemed it necessary.
If this did come into plan I sincerely hope you all get stung by your own stupid ideas.
I know I come up with some **** in my time but this is above and beyond most of what I've ever come up with.
I'll leave you to making up rules for yourselves in you "little club".
Some disillusioned people think they should be making the law; penalising person a who has a license by giving them 3 points for dropping litter, but only giving a fine to person b who doesn't have a license, is dumb...the single point that some people don't have licenses and thus fines would be not consistent is enough to put a nail in this stupid idea. Giving a 14 year old "points on his license" for not picking up dog crap? Are you serious? What would you tell your insurance company? Yeah I got 3 points... Speeding sir? No... my dog took a dump in a field.
A select few seem to think it would work, well, they are wrong for the reasons stated above. Sorry you are too caught up to see it.
To penalise Adult A who is driving for the actions of Adult C is stupid - When presuming a police offer WITNESSED the event, they could see which side of the car the litter came out of, and thus fine the RELEVANT person if he deemed it necessary.
If this did come into plan I sincerely hope you all get stung by your own stupid ideas.
I know I come up with some **** in my time but this is above and beyond most of what I've ever come up with.
I'll leave you to making up rules for yourselves in you "little club".
All we ask is that your 'dicky mates' respect the place they live and take their litter home and dispose of it responsibly. Too hard?
Posted by: motormad Apr 13 2013, 12:27 AM
At least I have mates. And one active forum identity.
I was in my mates car and I threw a bottle of Coke out of the window today while doing handbrake turns in the local Tesco Carpark, and a Hedgehog got stuck in it, and a small hedgehog rescue party comprising of Mummy Hedgehog, Daddy Hedgehog and Billy-Ray-Hedgehog came out in an attempt to free the stranded and distressed animal..
Unfortunately while the three rescue hedgehogs were trying to pull the stuck hedgehog out of the bottle, they were hit by a passing bus, which was not doing handbrake turns at the time.
They all died sadly.
On the positive side the bottle from where the bus had hit it, as if by magic went into the bin.
Posted by: Andy Capp Apr 13 2013, 12:49 AM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 13 2013, 01:27 AM)
At least I have mates. And one active forum identity.
Join the club.
Posted by: dannyboy Apr 13 2013, 02:38 AM
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Apr 13 2013, 01:49 AM)
Join the club.
LOL, good one.
Posted by: On the edge Apr 13 2013, 06:36 AM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 13 2013, 01:27 AM)
At least I have mates. And one active forum identity.
I was in my mates car and I threw a bottle of Coke out of the window today while doing handbrake turns in the local Tesco Carpark, and a Hedgehog got stuck in it, and a small hedgehog rescue party comprising of Mummy Hedgehog, Daddy Hedgehog and Billy-Ray-Hedgehog came out in an attempt to free the stranded and distressed animal..
Unfortunately while the three rescue hedgehogs were trying to pull the stuck hedgehog out of the bottle, they were hit by a passing bus, which was not doing handbrake turns at the time.
They all died sadly.
On the positive side the bottle from where the bus had hit it, as if by magic went into the bin.
I was in my mates car and I threw a bottle of Coke out of the window today while doing handbrake turns in the local Tesco Carpark, and a Hedgehog got stuck in it, and a small hedgehog rescue party comprising of Mummy Hedgehog, Daddy Hedgehog and Billy-Ray-Hedgehog came out in an attempt to free the stranded and distressed animal..
Unfortunately while the three rescue hedgehogs were trying to pull the stuck hedgehog out of the bottle, they were hit by a passing bus, which was not doing handbrake turns at the time.
They all died sadly.
On the positive side the bottle from where the bus had hit it, as if by magic went into the bin.
Now come on, this can't have been Newbury. Where did the bus come from?
Posted by: Cognosco Apr 13 2013, 09:49 AM
QUOTE (Sherlock @ Apr 12 2013, 11:33 PM)
Heard some hilarious news earlier. Apparently our local MP is as disgusted as everyone else by the huge volumes of litter on the highways and byways of his constituency and - wait for it - attempted to organise a clean up! Predictably it was just as unsuccessful as his campaign for lower petrol prices! LOL!
Must have had some comments from visitors to the stately pile and it just might have some effect on the income from the Plebs? It seems he only gets involved if anything effects him! Normal politician!
Posted by: Strafin Apr 13 2013, 12:39 PM
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2013/apr/04/right-rivers-richard-benyon-interests
He really cares!
Posted by: On the edge Apr 14 2013, 05:58 PM
QUOTE (Cognosco @ Apr 13 2013, 10:49 AM)
Must have had some comments from visitors to the stately pile and it just might have some effect on the income from the Plebs? It seems he only gets involved if anything effects him! Normal politician!
Well it's 50% better than his predecessor MP who didn't want to get involved in anything!
Posted by: On the edge Apr 14 2013, 06:00 PM
QUOTE (Strafin @ Apr 13 2013, 01:39 PM)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2013/apr/04/right-rivers-richard-benyon-interests
He really cares!
He really cares!
Aaah, the Guardian - the Daily Mail for people who think they are clever!
Posted by: NWNREADER Apr 14 2013, 06:54 PM
QUOTE (Strafin @ Apr 13 2013, 01:39 PM)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2013/apr/04/right-rivers-richard-benyon-interests
He really cares!
He really cares!
The author can always be relied upon for balanced reporting....
Posted by: MontyPython Apr 15 2013, 06:10 PM
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 02:15 PM)
Everyone knows who I am, ................
.
.
Not a clue who you are! and I don't care!
QUOTE (motormad @ Apr 12 2013, 10:26 AM)
Yes, because as a driver I am able to reach into the back of the car, while drifting skillfully across 3 lanes of moving traffic to make sure my dicky mate in the back doesn't through something out. So clueless.
They probably are!
Posted by: Sherlock May 8 2013, 10:24 AM
Now that summer is here (ie it's raining), the mountains of litter by the A339 dual carriageway in town are nearly obscured from view by vegetation. At this time of the year it's mostly appreciated by the hordes of rats which make a good living from discarded McDonalds takeaways and Tesco sandwiches.
Posted by: motormad May 10 2013, 01:42 PM
QUOTE (MontyPython @ Apr 15 2013, 07:10 PM)
Not a clue who you are! and I don't care!
Good.
You miss the context of the discussion. Dannyboy was making a hark back to a username I used to have, as if I was pretending not to be that person, when I've never denied it.
Do carry on.
Posted by: Sherlock May 20 2013, 01:14 PM
Meanwhile, it's not just the heaps of litter alongside our roads that delight fans of litter. For those willing to stray a few yards from our main thoroughfares there's plenty of litter to be found, often on land which isn't the responsibility of our dear friends from WBC and Veolia.
Take this non-WBC car park. Its owner has, very wisely in these hard times, decided to economise by the simple measure of never cleaning it. It must delight those working in the office building it partly serves and the users of Ace Space to be able park their vehicles next to mounds of fresh litter.
The photo doesn't really give a good impression of how much litter there is here - a personal visit is highly recommended. The rats must love it!
|
Posted by: On the edge May 20 2013, 01:30 PM
QUOTE (Sherlock @ May 20 2013, 02:14 PM)
Meanwhile, it's not just the heaps of litter alongside our roads that delight fans of litter. For those willing to stray a few yards from our main thoroughfares there's plenty of litter to be found, often on land which isn't the responsibility of our dear friends from WBC and Veolia.
Take this non-WBC car park. Its owner has, very wisely in these hard times, decided to economise by the simple measure of never cleaning it. It must delight those working in the office building it partly serves and the users of Ace Space to be able park their vehicles next to mounds of fresh litter.
The photo doesn't really give a good impression of how much litter there is here - a personal visit is highly recommended. The rats must love it!
Take this non-WBC car park. Its owner has, very wisely in these hard times, decided to economise by the simple measure of never cleaning it. It must delight those working in the office building it partly serves and the users of Ace Space to be able park their vehicles next to mounds of fresh litter.
The photo doesn't really give a good impression of how much litter there is here - a personal visit is highly recommended. The rats must love it!
Says an awful lot about us though. A landlord just getting away with it. What next? Shove up an extension with no planning permission, who checks? Who cares? We still have the occasional neighbourhood meetings, last one extolling the virtues of 'wardens' - who apparently also try and sort 'non council' owned areas. Really?
Posted by: Claude May 20 2013, 03:12 PM
Sherlock, have you thought about organising a group to tackle the litter problem on a voluntary basis?
Posted by: On the edge May 20 2013, 04:50 PM
QUOTE (Claude @ May 20 2013, 04:12 PM)
Sherlock, have you thought about organising a group to tackle the litter problem on a voluntary basis?
Good idea! A bit like Neighbourhood Watch, a couple walking about in 'dirty' areas confronting those spotted littering. Get some names and some photos; who knows a few salutary prosecutions would work wonder, particularly if well advertised.
Posted by: dannyboy May 20 2013, 05:13 PM
QUOTE (On the edge @ May 20 2013, 05:50 PM)
Good idea! A bit like Neighbourhood Watch, a couple walking about in 'dirty' areas confronting those spotted littering. Get some names and some photos; who knows a few salutary prosecutions would work wonder, particularly if well advertised.
sounds like GMR's ideal job.
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)