The blind obedience of fools……

#62
Bazzinho1977 said:
BlueDanubeWalt said:
So at what point does she catch up and become the same age..??
After an infinite amount of time OR before either of us were born, as at both instances our ages are the same.
yeah its become 'more obvious... :? '....working it out (two pages of calcs)it seems that 'time slows down'...any way end of topic for me... :roll:
 
#63
JoseyWales said:
TopBadger said:
Airport security is another one... why stop people taking bottled water though security when leaving the EU, when you can fly back into the EU from outside (e.g. Turkey) with a full litre of pretty much whatever you like?

If you can blow up a plane with a bottle of water then fair play i reckon - should get a nobel prize for discovering new science.
Poke your little badger nose in here;

http://www.examiner.com/x-3201-Orla...rrorism-trial-sheds-light-on-TSA-restrictions
Yeah right...
Heather Mark is a flight attendant and freelance writer in Central Florida. She has been published in The Orlando Sentinel, International Travel News and is an enthusiastic writer. Heather can be reached at stewardes101(at)gmail.com.
If she has a degree in Chemistry i might take notice. But i reckon she's talking shit.
 
#65
Magdovus said:
Markintime said:
Magdovus said:
Bigbird- our kid did that when he was 18 (He's only 6ft). Because TS paid £5 towards whatever he got in addition to pay he ensured that I never ran out of booze! The only problem was he never got as many visits allocated as we'd have liked... but he was popular at parties when he turned up with shedloads of booze :)
Spot the flaw in that story folks!
And then let me know WTF you're talking about?
At 18 he is legally entitled to purchase alcohol and fags and shops are quite entitled to sell it to him so no offence was committed and Trading Standards would not be able to bring about a prosecution for selling licensed goods to someone under age.
The 21 rule is just to sweeten the public: If you appear to be under 21 you will have to prove you are 18 but the law just requires that they aren't allowed to serve anyone with alcohol or tobacco under 18.
 
#66
Idrach said:
Grownup_Rafbrat said:
Wrong nail, though. He can buy the alcohol. He'll just have to produce ID if he looks under 21.
Err, no. You are being far too sensible (as usual).

There is an unfortunate difference between "it is legal to sell him alcohol" and "the store will allow him to buy alcohol". A lot of stores now have an over-21 policy and my local Sainsbury seems to have an over-25 one. Add the Tesco's "not if accompanied by a minor" stupidity and you can understand why people are getting fed up with things.
Sainsburys and other supermarkets will sell alcohol to you if you are 18 or over and can prove it.

If, as they say in their blurb, you are 'lucky enough to look younger than 25, we will ask you to prove that you are over 18'.

My lad works there, and even has a badge explaining this.

They have to protect themselves and their staff, because if they're caught selling drink to those under age, both the shop and the staff member can incur massive fines. As my lad is an impoverished student doing this work as his summer holiday job, I'm quite pleased about it!

Haven't come across the 'not if accompanied by a minor' thing myself, but wonder how I'd have managed when a young mother buying wine with the toddler offspring sitting in the trolley!
 
#68
Eye_Of_Newt said:
The ice cream van on Weston Shore in Southampton is no longer allowed to leave the tea bag in for customers in case one of the chokes on it.

They make tea flavoured icecream now?
 
#69
HSE... good eggs, top bananas, splendid fellows etc., etc.

If only they had as many inspectors as they do ill informed and crudely generalising critics. There are legal professionals who don't need to have a handle on as much legislation as your average construction site supervisor but then again, they are less likely to kill some poor sod by ignoring what ought to amount to common sense and moral obligation.

Still, as long as there's bell-ends ready to misinterpret what are, unfortunately, entirely necessary laws, regulations and codes of practice for their own gain they'll be as many equally shallow thinkers whining about it.
 
#70
Desertbootz said:
HSE... good eggs, top bananas, splendid fellows etc., etc.

If only they had as many inspectors as they do ill informed and crudely generalising critics. There are legal professionals who don't need to have a handle on as much legislation as your average construction site supervisor but then again, they are less likely to kill some poor sod by ignoring what ought to amount to common sense and moral obligation.

Still, as long as there's bell-ends ready to misinterpret what are, unfortunately, entirely necessary laws, regulations and codes of practice for their own gain they'll be as many equally shallow thinkers whining about it.
I think that half the problem is that company rules on health and saftey border on the ridiculous, for example I was was working at a company where the loudest noise we could hear was radio 2 (not my choice) and where told we had to wear hearing protection, as one of us was using a power tool. I never realised that a cordless drill could be so dangerous to hearing.

the reason given for these stuipid rules (including some stuff that no-one can see how health and saftey comes into it) is allways "health and saftey". but the rules are not in place due to the health and saftey executive, or the health and saftey legislation, but due to companies fear of being sued.

but people hear the words "health and saftey" and assume that the health and saftey executive are the ones to blame for the idotic rules.
 
#71
The fact is that in our, increasingly, litigious society it is now considered a good earner to sue for damages over every little mishap in our lives and people will ignore sensible rules or even their own common sense and then seek to gain pecuniary advantage.
We all know that coffee and tea are made with extremely hot water (for the pedants Water = boiling, coffee off the boil) but there are still people who have sued and won because they scalded themselves on their coffee/tea saying they didn't know the drink would be that hot.
I know of a hotel that was sued by one of it's chefs because the chef (fully trained sous chef) cut himself badly. He took them to court saying they had never trained him on how to use a knife safely. Because the hotel couldn't produce a training record to say he had been trained he received £3,500 out of court. The hotel had basically assumed what you, I or anyone else but an ambulance-chasing shyster would think, how can you be a qualified chef and not know how to use a knife? It's a bit like a plumber not knowing how to use a wrench or a blowtorch or a soldier his personal weapon. Nevertheless he won and now the hotel organises training days to teach their chefs how to use knives and various other bits of equipment and machinery. This cost money and undercuts the food profitability of the operation which has resulted in a junior chef and a kitchen porter being phased out through natural wastage and not replaced.
So, HSE legislation might be a total pain in the backside but it is 'we' who have made it necessary.
 
#72
TopBadger said:
Airport security is another one... why stop people taking bottled water though security when leaving the EU, when you can fly back into the EU from outside (e.g. Turkey) with a full litre of pretty much whatever you like?

If you can blow up a plane with a bottle of water then fair play i reckon - should get a nobel prize for discovering new science.
DFT/TranSec have no power over airports outside of the EU - If they did, you wouldn't be allowed to take your water through.

As to no being allowed to take water on board in the first place, Airport Security could test every liquid that comes through, but do you really fancy adding another 45 minutes to your journey because there's a school party going through ahead of you and they don't want to throw away their cans of fanta?
 
#73
I blame the unelected, unaccountable, inauditable, faceless, anonymous 'expenses troughing' twerps in the European Soviet Union and the pusillanimous failures who have masqueraded as our governments since the perverted traitor Heath deceived us into joining, for all the stupidity inflicted upon us!
 
#74
hogspawn said:
taking your crash helmet off in petrol stations to buy fuel, tosssssers!

it's the overly litigious 'sue every f*****' culture that's got us these poxy rules
Once was a time this would have been considered to be polite and courtious.... a bit like removing your hat prior to going indoors perhaps.

Now it is just a ball ache, preventing you from leering from the dark recess of your brain case, shouting untillegibaly through your helmet.

:roll:

Take your helmet and gloves off.
 
#75
Airport security grips my shit, mainly because it is being applied by ******* who don't, in many cases, know why they are applying the measures they do.

Case 1. I was coming back from somewhere warm and unpleasant last year and on arrival at LHR I waited and waited by the baggage carousel for my mine detector to appear. After 40 minutes it hadn't put in an appearance, so I went to the baggage office. There was a typical jobsworth there who was obviously a reincarnated parking warden. What does it look like sir, he asked, thoroughly enjoying himself.

A green painted metal container with: Schiebel AN19 ATMDS Mine Detector, stenciled on it. The container also had special security seals on it showing that it had been specially checked for explosives etc before leaving Taipei. I said.

Aha the cu nt said triumphantly, I took it into our store as it could have been a bomb. I asked him if he had received any training in bomb handling and he bristled with indignation saying, don't blame me sir its security innit. Tosser.

Case 2. I arrived at LHR with a load of baggage en-route to Oman. There wasn't a problem until a jobsworth spotted the words: Magnex 120 LW Fluxgate Magnetometer Bomb Locator Schiebel Austria, stencilled on two of the transit cases. Whats in the box sir, asked a security bod. A magnetometer, I replied. It says bomb on the box he said.

Bomb Locator, I corrected him. Well, lets have a look at it then open the box please sir. I complied. He poked the magnetometer. Yep, OK he said. Any idea what it is, I asked. Nope he said losing interest and looking over my shoulder to find someone else to harass. He fuc ked off and I was closing the box again when another security bod turned up. This one was wearing a badge with the word Supervisor on it. You cant check that in, he said. I asked why not. You aren't allowed to take magnets on an aircraft, he said. It isn't a magnet I replied. It says magnet on the box, sir. The charade went on and on and eventually I asked to see the duty security manager, who was a bit more sensible. He and the supervisor both poked my magnetometers and said it was ok to take them on board. An hour wasted and they allowed me to take something on board that they had not a ******* clue what it was, but on the basis of a quick poke, decided it was safe.

Case 3. Dubai. Checked in said magnetometers and mine detectors as well as other bits of eod kit and went for a drink. Turned up at the departure gate and was arrested by two plain clothes policemen. Come with us, they said. They took me by car about ten miles away to a huge but deserted hanger. In the middle of it was my baggage. All of it. More police cars arrived and soon there were about 8 policemen standing around my baggage.

Please open your baggage said an obviously senior copper.

I refused.

They were bemused.

Why not? he asked.

Because you are all standing around the baggage and if I really was a terrorist you would all be at risk. I said.

A quick training period then ensued, after which all but two trooped off to behind cover, one stayed with me and one covered us from a safe distance as I opened the crates and boxes. The guy with me nodded sagely but he had no idea what all the gear was. It could have been nukes for all he knew.

After the charade was over I asked for a lift back to the plane which was now over an hour late (assuming it had waited for me).

It had waited and I arrived back with blue lights flashing and sirens screaming.

What was all that about? asked one of the stewardesses As I climbed back aboard the plane. I was arrested as a suspect terrorist, I told her.

You shouldn't make jokes about terrorism, its not funny, she said.

You couldn't make it up.
 
#76
Incidentaly, I cover the stenciling up with black harry maskers these days, but I still get pulled after the gear goes through x-ray.
 
#77
eodmatt said:
Incidentaly, I cover the stenciling up with black harry maskers these days, but I still get pulled after the gear goes through x-ray.
You should just tell them they are a bunch of untrained w@nkers who wouldn't recognise a bomb if it was ticking underneath their noses :D

And get rid of the mask, Zorro hat and black cloak - it gives the game away and makes them think you are suspicious!
 
#78
Do you think so? I thought the hat, mask and black cloak made me look distinguished. As for telling them what I really think about them, not bloody likely, they have the power to fu ck you around mindlessly for hours if not days.
 
#79
I was under the impression that the 'no fluid on board' issue dated back to 2006 and the alleged plot to bring down aircraft using liquid explosives which, it was alleged, would be taken on board in constituent parts and manaufactured during the flights?

So, heightened security is far from being an issue brought about by the airports, airlines, or that European Soviet thingy someone keeps banging on about, it comes direct from our unelected and some might argue overly oppresive Security Services and the "one-eye on the ill informed electorates habits come polling day" Political cack-wizards.

Lt. Col. Nigel Wylde, himself no stranger to the heavy handed attentions of self same Security Services and with some considerable experience of explosives and terrorism quickly, and IMO correctly, labelled the 'plot' as a 'fantasy' which was of course shown during the trial and failure to convict anyone of trying to bring down an aircraft.

As for whether or not yr average security knobber at the airport should be able to recognise any given piece of kit and/or make a call on it's lethality is missing the point entirely. The Security Servcies aren't interested in your water or your Carlos Fandango Bomb-Be-Gone Bleep Machine but their ability to stop anyone at any time for anything so that if they feel there is a 'real' threat they can go rifling through everyones dirty kecks with the precedent having been set and whilst the average bod will keep it's nose firmly up it's own ill informed jacksy.

This entry may or may not be coherent due to the anger of the author.
 
#80
eodmatt said:
Airport security grips my s***, mainly because it is being applied by ******* who don't, in many cases, know why they are applying the measures they do.
Thats exactly the point... take my irk about water which other posters have taken issue with for example. My issue with it is that the approach isn't self consistant and is beatable.

Lets say, you do have a novel form of water which explodes... you can beat the system by flying into the EU from outside.

Anyone know of a suitibly explosive liquid, strong enough such that say a whole litre could cause a plane crash? I and my Chemistry educated friends don't. The most explosive liquid is Nitroglycerin... but even in its liquid viscous form it is highly unstable (i.e you couldn't carry it without it exploding) so Nobel had to mix it with stuff to make it safe, even Gels aren't stable and they don't flow like water. Which is all in addition to the fact that you wouldn't drink them if asked to...

If it looks like water and the punter will drink it, it ain't dangerous.

However, a group of Jihaddists could all take on a pouch each filled with several 100ml quantities of Gels to be mixed together onboard...

What, they haven't done this yet? Anyone guess why? Yep, its easier to just hijack the plane...

Rules for rules sake, or more sinisterly to convince the proles their being looked after...
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
C The Intelligence Cell 13
HighPriestess Films, Music and All Things Artsy 1
woopert Lonely Hearts 32

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top