Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
One Summertown restaurant even has a Michelin star. Plus of course Le Manoir is not too far from Oxford https://www.twoonefive.co.uk/
Le Manoir is 20 minutes drive from Oxford. In Oxford terms that is Die Groot Trek for an evening out...
But in 1977 Blanc opened Les Quat' Saisons in Summertown and soon had two Michelin stars.
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
Two One Five, Pompette?
Pompette I wasn't impressed with - South Parade has always been a rather average.
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
One Summertown restaurant even has a Michelin star. Plus of course Le Manoir is not too far from Oxford https://www.twoonefive.co.uk/
Le Manoir is 20 minutes drive from Oxford. In Oxford terms that is Die Groot Trek for an evening out...
In the play/film Riot Club/Posh - iirc the Bullingdon types travel far out into the Oxfordshire countryside in order to smash a place up. Fiction of course.
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
It had plenty of relatively smart restaurants when we lived nearby throughout the 80s and 90s. It was always our destination for a meal a cut above the local curry house or pub grub.
45,416 cases in Germany, 244 deaths (both higher than the UK) - as per Worldometer
Really surging there
Is this a statistical freak, or gremlin, or something else? Because 45k cases is way higher than anything expected, and by far the biggest daily number ever reported in Germany
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
Two One Five, Pompette?
Pompette I wasn't impressed with - South Parade has always been a rather average.
Haven't tried Two One Five.
I just wonder what you're comparing Oxford with (then or now) to have such a poor opinion of its restaurant scene.
Try growing up in Hastings or living in Selby, both of which I have... I can tell you Oxford is a culinary paradise in comparison!
Not fine dining by any stretch but Browns was an institution back in the 80s - no booking and queues every night to get a table. Those were the days!
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
Two One Five, Pompette?
Oxford’s kind of like a mini Paris like that. There’s the actual centre flanked by the porte du pont de Magdalen, porte de Keble, porte rue de Banbury and porte de Westgate, and then there’s the Banlieues. Some of them have posh restaurants, but they are still banlieues, outwith the city. Instead of the périphérique there are the rivers and parks acting as a moat.
I have not been following the Rittenhouse case, but after reading the NPR (not exactly a bastion of right-wing, gun-toting, Trumpism), I'd be gobsmacked if he's found guilty.
In the land of the gun toting free, this will be self-defense.
But he went there, with a rifle, into a riot to (in his own words) “protect property”. And now people are dead & he’s in court hoping to avoid a life sentence.
What he actually did was make a bad situation worse.
Can someone do a tl;dr or ELI5 on rittenhouse? Were his victims black? woke? jewish? in the wrong place at the wrong time? Or what?
You can read the court reports on NPR for the basic facts of the case, which appear to be that BLM protests / riots (description might depend on your politics) were happening in Kenosha, Wisconsin after police shot a black man called Jacob Blake and left him paralysed from the waist down. Our hero decided to take his AR-15 & drive from Illinois into Wisconsin to “protect businesses from unrest” (his words I believe). There was then a series of confrontations, where it’s currently unclear whether Rittenhouse was the initial aggressor (this is the main point of contention in the court case), but he was certainly followed & physically attacked by several people, several of whom he shot & killed whilst attempting (in his words) to retreat & turn himself into the police. The details are being hashed out in court. The ultimate outcome is that two people are dead & one shot & injured & now Rittenhouse is facing homicide charges.
So we have a shitshow that the various political sides can twist into whichever narrative they like. Pro-gun? Rittenhouse was obviously defending himself & those who attacked him were ultimately responsible for this terrible outcome: How sad, so sorry. Anti-gun? Rittenhouse acting as a lone warrior stirred up shit & ended up getting people killed. He’s guilty of criminial endagerment even if he was attacked. White supremecist? Rittenhouse was a virtuous soldier out there protecting the law-abiding majority against marauding BLM rioters. And so on & on.
The problem - as is so often the case - is that the defendant behaved very badly, but might not be guilty of actual murder. What they are guilty of is behaving in a way that escalates an existing tense situation and increases the chance of somebody (anybody) dying.
I have little doubt that he was genuinely afraid when he pulled the trigger. He put himself in a stupid situation, and was terrified, and was carrying an assault rifle.
The offence - to my mind - was deliberately putting himself in a situation where those bad things became more likely.
If you carry an assault rifle to a demonstration, that has to be a very, very serious offence.
I'm sure you're right that Rittenhouse was terrified. I wonder, though, if he was as terrified as the two men he killed? Because they're not around to tell us how terrified they were of Rittenhouse.
Regardless, what sort of 'advanced' society is it that allows a 17 year-old to wander around with an assault rifle? Bonkers.
It doesn’t. He was also charged with under-age possession of a firearm, and the person who supplied him with it was also charged with unlawful supply because Rittenhouse was under age.
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
Two One Five, Pompette?
Oxford’s kind of like a mini Paris like that. There’s the actual centre flanked by the porte du pont de Magdalen, porte de Keble, porte rue de Banbury and porte de Westgate, and then there’s the Banlieues. Some of them have posh restaurants, but they are still banlieues, outwith the city. Instead of the périphérique there are the rivers and parks acting as a moat.
No way is Summertown a banlieue in the current meaning of the word! 😂
Cox is popular, do not forget he has turned a seat the LDs held in 1997 and 2001 into one with a Tory voteshare of 60% in 2019 since he first won the seat in 2005
I have not been following the Rittenhouse case, but after reading the NPR (not exactly a bastion of right-wing, gun-toting, Trumpism), I'd be gobsmacked if he's found guilty.
In the land of the gun toting free, this will be self-defense.
But he went there, with a rifle, into a riot to (in his own words) “protect property”. And now people are dead & he’s in court hoping to avoid a life sentence.
What he actually did was make a bad situation worse.
He’s an irresponsible little shit who killed people. What the jury makes of that is a judgment on them.
Jury selection basically struck off anyone who says that racism is a problem.
So all but one potential black juror was struck off.
I don't understand how his case for self defence for killing an unarmed man was that the unarmed man could have grabbed the tactical rifle that he illegally brought to the protest.
Some of his assailants were also armed
The line the prosecutor took about the last person he shot was utterly utterly comical - the guy has a pistol in his hand and is acting threateningly toward Rittenhouse who is vulnerable on the ground. But because the man with the handgun didn't shoot him 10 feet away, or stand in front of him in a standard 2 hand pistol firing position it entirely nullified Rittenhouse's right to self defence. He should never have his AR15 there, but when people
1) Grab your gun barrel after earlier threatening to kill you 2) Kick you in the head & go after you with a skateboard being used as a weapon & 3) Point a gun at you whilst you're lieing on the ground
You're definitely fearing for your life in all those situations.
I think his assailants (And they all were) assumed he wouldn't use his gun being a somewhat short kid or something. The prosecution has been dire, particularly on the final shooting.
But here's the thing. Someone is waving a gun at you. Isn't the logical thing - to protect yourself - to grab the gun barrel?
I'm not saying Rittenhouse is guilty of murder. But it does seem that this is somewhat akin to drunk driving. You are knowingly putting yourself in a position where somebody is dramatically more likely to die as a result of an accident.
I have not been following the Rittenhouse case, but after reading the NPR (not exactly a bastion of right-wing, gun-toting, Trumpism), I'd be gobsmacked if he's found guilty.
In the land of the gun toting free, this will be self-defense.
But he went there, with a rifle, into a riot to (in his own words) “protect property”. And now people are dead & he’s in court hoping to avoid a life sentence.
What he actually did was make a bad situation worse.
Can someone do a tl;dr or ELI5 on rittenhouse? Were his victims black? woke? jewish? in the wrong place at the wrong time? Or what?
You can read the court reports on NPR for the basic facts of the case, which appear to be that BLM protests / riots (description might depend on your politics) were happening in Kenosha, Wisconsin after police shot a black man called Jacob Blake and left him paralysed from the waist down. Our hero decided to take his AR-15 & drive from Illinois into Wisconsin to “protect businesses from unrest” (his words I believe). There was then a series of confrontations, where it’s currently unclear whether Rittenhouse was the initial aggressor (this is the main point of contention in the court case), but he was certainly followed & physically attacked by several people, several of whom he shot & killed whilst attempting (in his words) to retreat & turn himself into the police. The details are being hashed out in court. The ultimate outcome is that two people are dead & one shot & injured & now Rittenhouse is facing homicide charges.
So we have a shitshow that the various political sides can twist into whichever narrative they like. Pro-gun? Rittenhouse was obviously defending himself & those who attacked him were ultimately responsible for this terrible outcome: How sad, so sorry. Anti-gun? Rittenhouse acting as a lone warrior stirred up shit & ended up getting people killed. He’s guilty of criminial endagerment even if he was attacked. White supremecist? Rittenhouse was a virtuous soldier out there protecting the law-abiding majority against marauding BLM rioters. And so on & on.
The problem - as is so often the case - is that the defendant behaved very badly, but might not be guilty of actual murder. What they are guilty of is behaving in a way that escalates an existing tense situation and increases the chance of somebody (anybody) dying.
I have little doubt that he was genuinely afraid when he pulled the trigger. He put himself in a stupid situation, and was terrified, and was carrying an assault rifle.
The offence - to my mind - was deliberately putting himself in a situation where those bad things became more likely.
If you carry an assault rifle to a demonstration, that has to be a very, very serious offence.
I'm sure you're right that Rittenhouse was terrified. I wonder, though, if he was as terrified as the two men he killed? Because they're not around to tell us how terrified they were of Rittenhouse.
Regardless, what sort of 'advanced' society is it that allows a 17 year-old to wander around with an assault rifle? Bonkers.
Well, they’re not around because they assaulted him (apart from the last guy who was shot in the arm). The evidence on that seems pretty clear. They weren’t attacking him in desperate self defence having been cornered - they chased & attacked him. Which is a mad thing to do to someone carrying an AR-15, but I guess they just didn’t believe he would shoot them.
“A company based in Upminster has secured government contracts worth more than £800 million via a controversial ‘VIP’ system.
Uniserve did not have to compete for PPE contracts, worth more than £300 million, despite having no previous experience supplying the equipment according to an investigation by the Good Law Project.
…
The company is based at the same address as MP and Cabinet Office minister Julia Lopez in Hall Lane, Upminster”
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
One Summertown restaurant even has a Michelin star. Plus of course Le Manoir is not too far from Oxford https://www.twoonefive.co.uk/
Le Manoir is 20 minutes drive from Oxford. In Oxford terms that is Die Groot Trek for an evening out...
But in 1977 Blanc opened Les Quat' Saisons in Summertown and soon had two Michelin stars.
He move to Le Manoir, out of town, as fast as he could raise the finance - 83 or 84?
Same place that became the Oxford Kitchen - and then Two One Five - wasn't it?
I have not been following the Rittenhouse case, but after reading the NPR (not exactly a bastion of right-wing, gun-toting, Trumpism), I'd be gobsmacked if he's found guilty.
In the land of the gun toting free, this will be self-defense.
But he went there, with a rifle, into a riot to (in his own words) “protect property”. And now people are dead & he’s in court hoping to avoid a life sentence.
What he actually did was make a bad situation worse.
He’s an irresponsible little shit who killed people. What the jury makes of that is a judgment on them.
Jury selection basically struck off anyone who says that racism is a problem.
So all but one potential black juror was struck off.
I don't understand how his case for self defence for killing an unarmed man was that the unarmed man could have grabbed the tactical rifle that he illegally brought to the protest.
Essentially Rittenhouse tried to retreat & de-escalate. The first victim chased him across a parking lot before trying to grab his rifle. Rittenhouse is claiming in court (possibly reasonably) that in that moment he was in fear of his life & was justified in shooting. This wasn’t a grab that just happened - the events leading up to it caused Rittenhouse to genuinely believe he was under threat.
That the twerp should never have brough an AR-15 to a riot is separate issue.
You mean concerned citizens were shot dead while trying to disarm an active shooter terrorist?
If Rittenhouse were Afro-American or Muslim he would be dead at the scene. He is only on trial because of being who he is.
The prosecution case would say that, however their star witness has said he pointed a gun at the defendant unprovoked. That validated the defence case that it was an act of self defence. Though I'm not an American, were a gun pointed at me I feel as though I would respond in kind and let the consequences be what they will be.
America is such a strange place and none of us really can be 100% sure about what we'd do in the situations that occur. If you can say 100% that you wouldn't defend yourself against someone who had raised their weapon and threatened your life then fair enough. I wouldn't be able to.
One of the people Rittenhouse killed was themselves armed, but the other wasn’t.
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
Two One Five, Pompette?
Oxford’s kind of like a mini Paris like that. There’s the actual centre flanked by the porte du pont de Magdalen, porte de Keble, porte rue de Banbury and porte de Westgate, and then there’s the Banlieues. Some of them have posh restaurants, but they are still banlieues, outwith the city. Instead of the périphérique there are the rivers and parks acting as a moat.
No way is Summertown a banlieue in its current connotation! 😂
A well known author used to refer to the “Kingdom of Oxford” and the “Republic of Oxford”. You can guess which one of these contained Summertown.
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
Two One Five, Pompette?
Oxford’s kind of like a mini Paris like that. There’s the actual centre flanked by the porte du pont de Magdalen, porte de Keble, porte rue de Banbury and porte de Westgate, and then there’s the Banlieues. Some of them have posh restaurants, but they are still banlieues, outwith the city. Instead of the périphérique there are the rivers and parks acting as a moat.
No way is Summertown a banlieue in its current connotation! 😂
Even Neuilly sur Seine is officially banlieue. But yes, the pop culture meaning is more Blackbird Leys.
The better comparison is perhaps Manhattan vs the other boroughs. Similar shape to the city centre too.
45,416 cases in Germany, 244 deaths (both higher than the UK) - as per Worldometer
Really surging there
Is this a statistical freak, or gremlin, or something else? Because 45k cases is way higher than anything expected, and by far the biggest daily number ever reported in Germany
The 7 day averages do seem to be spiking severely there.
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
Two One Five, Pompette?
Pompette I wasn't impressed with - South Parade has always been a rather average.
Haven't tried Two One Five.
I just wonder what you're comparing Oxford with (then or now) to have such a poor opinion of its restaurant scene.
Try growing up in Hastings or living in Selby, both of which I have... I can tell you Oxford is a culinary paradise in comparison!
Not fine dining by any stretch but Browns was an institution back in the 80s - no booking and queues every night to get a table. Those were the days!
Christ... Browns.... The inedible in search of the gullible..... They did do some good cocktails for a while, though.
Cox is popular, do not forget he has turned a seat the LDs held in 1997 and 2001 into one with a Tory voteshare of 60% in 2019 since he first won the seat in 2005
Cox's popularity is not going to be much use once he's resigned is it?
45,416 cases in Germany, 244 deaths (both higher than the UK) - as per Worldometer
Really surging there
Is this a statistical freak, or gremlin, or something else? Because 45k cases is way higher than anything expected, and by far the biggest daily number ever reported in Germany
The 7 day averages do seem to be spiking severely there.
I seem to recall they have very lumpy daily numbers with some quite wild reporting swings, probably because of the federalised healthcare system.
45,416 cases in Germany, 244 deaths (both higher than the UK) - as per Worldometer
Really surging there
Is this a statistical freak, or gremlin, or something else? Because 45k cases is way higher than anything expected, and by far the biggest daily number ever reported in Germany
Could you please stop picking days of reporting from Germany.
For whatever reason, their reporting is very very spiky. So post 7 day averages.
Cox is popular, do not forget he has turned a seat the LDs held in 1997 and 2001 into one with a Tory voteshare of 60% in 2019 since he first won the seat in 2005
Cox's popularity is not going to be much use once he's resigned is it?
That was my point.
He walks because why would someone of his earning power and occupational status put up with the flack he's getting over his earnings just to have MP on his business card?
Difficult to believe he is an MP because he wants to change the world a la Corbyn or Gordon Brown.
‘We're at the point in the discourse when colleges have created the highly scientific and totally legitimate racial category of "Students of Color, minus Asian" ‘
45,416 cases in Germany, 244 deaths (both higher than the UK) - as per Worldometer
Really surging there
Is this a statistical freak, or gremlin, or something else? Because 45k cases is way higher than anything expected, and by far the biggest daily number ever reported in Germany
Could you please stop picking days of reporting from Germany.
For whatever reason, their reporting is very very spiky. So post 7 day averages.
Those are bad enough, at the moment.
I'll do what I like, thanks very much, and you can ignore it or not
45k cases is so completely out of whack it does raise suspicions. The previous highest was ~32k back in April 2021
45,416 cases in Germany, 244 deaths (both higher than the UK) - as per Worldometer
Really surging there
Is this a statistical freak, or gremlin, or something else? Because 45k cases is way higher than anything expected, and by far the biggest daily number ever reported in Germany
I also think it's very important to look at the test positivity rates, as well as the absolute numbers. Places with really high positivity rates are likely to be massively undercounting the actual number of cases, while those with low positivity rates are probably much nearer to the real number.
Slovenia and Croatia, for example, have positivity rates above 40%.
Germany is about 6%, while Denmark and the UK are at 4%.
So, Germany's number is likely worse than their official numbers. But not a lot worse. Likewise, Denmark's jump in case numbers is at least not being flattered by insufficient testing.
You want to know which places have jumping case rates, and rising positivity?
Ireland (14% positivity), Belgium (13%) and Norway (12%). Both those countries probably have at least twice the number of cases that the official figures suggest.
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
Two One Five, Pompette?
Pompette I wasn't impressed with - South Parade has always been a rather average.
Haven't tried Two One Five.
I just wonder what you're comparing Oxford with (then or now) to have such a poor opinion of its restaurant scene.
Try growing up in Hastings or living in Selby, both of which I have... I can tell you Oxford is a culinary paradise in comparison!
Not fine dining by any stretch but Browns was an institution back in the 80s - no booking and queues every night to get a table. Those were the days!
Christ... Browns.... The inedible in search of the gullible..... They did do some good cocktails for a while, though.
The food was certainly edible and not extortionate. It had an atmosphere that was hard to beat. I have many fond memories of boozy meals there. Went back a few years ago for 'old times' sake'... A very strange experience: the decor is entirely unaltered, the atmosphere completely gone.
45,416 cases in Germany, 244 deaths (both higher than the UK) - as per Worldometer
Really surging there
Is this a statistical freak, or gremlin, or something else? Because 45k cases is way higher than anything expected, and by far the biggest daily number ever reported in Germany
Could you please stop picking days of reporting from Germany.
For whatever reason, their reporting is very very spiky. So post 7 day averages.
Those are bad enough, at the moment.
I'll do what I like, thanks very much, and you can ignore it or not
45k cases is so completely out of whack it does raise suspicions. The previous highest was ~32k back in April 2021
Sigh - look at the history. It's a collection of wild spikes. Otherwise you are just fooling yourself.
Cox is popular, do not forget he has turned a seat the LDs held in 1997 and 2001 into one with a Tory voteshare of 60% in 2019 since he first won the seat in 2005
Cox's popularity is not going to be much use once he's resigned is it?
That was my point.
He walks because why would someone of his earning power and occupational status put up with the flack he's getting over his earnings just to have MP on his business card?
Difficult to believe he is an MP because he wants to change the world a la Corbyn or Gordon Brown.
He has had plenty of flack from opposition parties locally on his legal work before but still been easily re elected
45,416 cases in Germany, 244 deaths (both higher than the UK) - as per Worldometer
Really surging there
Is this a statistical freak, or gremlin, or something else? Because 45k cases is way higher than anything expected, and by far the biggest daily number ever reported in Germany
Could you please stop picking days of reporting from Germany.
For whatever reason, their reporting is very very spiky. So post 7 day averages.
Those are bad enough, at the moment.
I'll do what I like, thanks very much, and you can ignore it or not
45k cases is so completely out of whack it does raise suspicions. The previous highest was ~32k back in April 2021
Sigh - look at the history. It's a collection of wild spikes. Otherwise you are just fooling yourself.
But, look at the spikes. This is the wildest spike of all. Coincidence? I doubt it
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
Two One Five, Pompette?
Oxford’s kind of like a mini Paris like that. There’s the actual centre flanked by the porte du pont de Magdalen, porte de Keble, porte rue de Banbury and porte de Westgate, and then there’s the Banlieues. Some of them have posh restaurants, but they are still banlieues, outwith the city. Instead of the périphérique there are the rivers and parks acting as a moat.
One of my key memories of a number of visits on business to Oxford a decade or so ago was being amazed how basic/shit/unforgettable the railway station is compared to the hallowed groves of academia.
Surely the city fathers could have spent a few more quid on a decent station?
45,416 cases in Germany, 244 deaths (both higher than the UK) - as per Worldometer
Really surging there
Is this a statistical freak, or gremlin, or something else? Because 45k cases is way higher than anything expected, and by far the biggest daily number ever reported in Germany
Could you please stop picking days of reporting from Germany.
For whatever reason, their reporting is very very spiky. So post 7 day averages.
Those are bad enough, at the moment.
I'll do what I like, thanks very much, and you can ignore it or not
45k cases is so completely out of whack it does raise suspicions. The previous highest was ~32k back in April 2021
The German seven day average actually started pointing down sharply yesterday, so I suspect this big leap is a catch up from yesterday.
I have not been following the Rittenhouse case, but after reading the NPR (not exactly a bastion of right-wing, gun-toting, Trumpism), I'd be gobsmacked if he's found guilty.
In the land of the gun toting free, this will be self-defense.
But he went there, with a rifle, into a riot to (in his own words) “protect property”. And now people are dead & he’s in court hoping to avoid a life sentence.
What he actually did was make a bad situation worse.
He’s an irresponsible little shit who killed people. What the jury makes of that is a judgment on them.
Jury selection basically struck off anyone who says that racism is a problem.
So all but one potential black juror was struck off.
I don't understand how his case for self defence for killing an unarmed man was that the unarmed man could have grabbed the tactical rifle that he illegally brought to the protest.
Some of his assailants were also armed
The line the prosecutor took about the last person he shot was utterly utterly comical - the guy has a pistol in his hand and is acting threateningly toward Rittenhouse who is vulnerable on the ground. But because the man with the handgun didn't shoot him 10 feet away, or stand in front of him in a standard 2 hand pistol firing position it entirely nullified Rittenhouse's right to self defence. He should never have his AR15 there, but when people
1) Grab your gun barrel after earlier threatening to kill you 2) Kick you in the head & go after you with a skateboard being used as a weapon & 3) Point a gun at you whilst you're lieing on the ground
You're definitely fearing for your life in all those situations.
I think his assailants (And they all were) assumed he wouldn't use his gun being a somewhat short kid or something. The prosecution has been dire, particularly on the final shooting.
But here's the thing. Someone is waving a gun at you. Isn't the logical thing - to protect yourself - to grab the gun barrel?
I'm not saying Rittenhouse is guilty of murder. But it does seem that this is somewhat akin to drunk driving. You are knowingly putting yourself in a position where somebody is dramatically more likely to die as a result of an accident.
But here's the thing. Someone is waving a gun at you. Isn't the logical thing - to protect yourself - to grab the gun barrel?
Err no. The logical thing is to stop chasing after someone who has just pointed a gun at you 5 seconds earlier.
Off topic (like every other post this evening tbf)...
Is there a simple calculator available online that shows the global warming impact we each have through the choices we make?
If we could easily get a summary of the impact of our personal choices (e.g. electric car, flying long-haul, solar panels, new boiler, going veggie, etc. etc.) it might help people decide which steps they could take themsleves.
My assumption is that none of us are going to do everything we possibly could but a simple calculator might make it easy to choose the options that work for us as individuals.
There are quite a few apps and online carbon calculators. The WWF has one. Some seem to be pushing carbon offset sales but I think the calculations themselves are OK.
My carbon footprint on the WWF is 9 tons per year, slightly less than the national average that they cite, and I haven't flown anywhere, and have an electric car and we'll insulated house. It isn't going to be easy going lower.
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
Two One Five, Pompette?
Pompette I wasn't impressed with - South Parade has always been a rather average.
Haven't tried Two One Five.
I just wonder what you're comparing Oxford with (then or now) to have such a poor opinion of its restaurant scene.
Try growing up in Hastings or living in Selby, both of which I have... I can tell you Oxford is a culinary paradise in comparison!
Not fine dining by any stretch but Browns was an institution back in the 80s - no booking and queues every night to get a table. Those were the days!
Christ... Browns.... The inedible in search of the gullible..... They did do some good cocktails for a while, though.
The food was certainly edible and not extortionate. It had an atmosphere that was hard to beat. I have many fond memories of boozy meals there. Went back a few years ago for 'old times' sake'... A very strange experience: the decor is entirely unaltered, the atmosphere completely gone.
Perhaps you were 2 bottles too sober to enjoy it?
It is interesting when you go back to places - have they become shit, or did we just grow out of them?
45,416 cases in Germany, 244 deaths (both higher than the UK) - as per Worldometer
Really surging there
Is this a statistical freak, or gremlin, or something else? Because 45k cases is way higher than anything expected, and by far the biggest daily number ever reported in Germany
Could you please stop picking days of reporting from Germany.
For whatever reason, their reporting is very very spiky. So post 7 day averages.
Those are bad enough, at the moment.
I'll do what I like, thanks very much, and you can ignore it or not
45k cases is so completely out of whack it does raise suspicions. The previous highest was ~32k back in April 2021
Worldometers' 7 day average supports your point here Leon. It's doubled in two weeks.
I have not been following the Rittenhouse case, but after reading the NPR (not exactly a bastion of right-wing, gun-toting, Trumpism), I'd be gobsmacked if he's found guilty.
In the land of the gun toting free, this will be self-defense.
But he went there, with a rifle, into a riot to (in his own words) “protect property”. And now people are dead & he’s in court hoping to avoid a life sentence.
What he actually did was make a bad situation worse.
He’s an irresponsible little shit who killed people. What the jury makes of that is a judgment on them.
Jury selection basically struck off anyone who says that racism is a problem.
So all but one potential black juror was struck off.
I don't understand how his case for self defence for killing an unarmed man was that the unarmed man could have grabbed the tactical rifle that he illegally brought to the protest.
Some of his assailants were also armed
The line the prosecutor took about the last person he shot was utterly utterly comical - the guy has a pistol in his hand and is acting threateningly toward Rittenhouse who is vulnerable on the ground. But because the man with the handgun didn't shoot him 10 feet away, or stand in front of him in a standard 2 hand pistol firing position it entirely nullified Rittenhouse's right to self defence. He should never have his AR15 there, but when people
1) Grab your gun barrel after earlier threatening to kill you 2) Kick you in the head & go after you with a skateboard being used as a weapon & 3) Point a gun at you whilst you're lieing on the ground
You're definitely fearing for your life in all those situations.
I think his assailants (And they all were) assumed he wouldn't use his gun being a somewhat short kid or something. The prosecution has been dire, particularly on the final shooting.
But here's the thing. Someone is waving a gun at you. Isn't the logical thing - to protect yourself - to grab the gun barrel?
I'm not saying Rittenhouse is guilty of murder. But it does seem that this is somewhat akin to drunk driving. You are knowingly putting yourself in a position where somebody is dramatically more likely to die as a result of an accident.
But here's the thing. Someone is waving a gun at you. Isn't the logical thing - to protect yourself - to grab the gun barrel?
Err no. The logical thing is to stop chasing after someone who has just pointed a gun at you 5 seconds earlier.
Fight or flight - if someone has a gun then disarming them is the logical fight choice.
45,416 cases in Germany, 244 deaths (both higher than the UK) - as per Worldometer
Really surging there
Is this a statistical freak, or gremlin, or something else? Because 45k cases is way higher than anything expected, and by far the biggest daily number ever reported in Germany
Could you please stop picking days of reporting from Germany.
For whatever reason, their reporting is very very spiky. So post 7 day averages.
Those are bad enough, at the moment.
I'll do what I like, thanks very much, and you can ignore it or not
45k cases is so completely out of whack it does raise suspicions. The previous highest was ~32k back in April 2021
Sigh - look at the history. It's a collection of wild spikes. Otherwise you are just fooling yourself.
But, look at the spikes. This is the wildest spike of all. Coincidence? I doubt it
So you construct an average. One point of data and all that.
Cox is popular, do not forget he has turned a seat the LDs held in 1997 and 2001 into one with a Tory voteshare of 60% in 2019 since he first won the seat in 2005
Cox's popularity is not going to be much use once he's resigned is it?
That was my point.
He walks because why would someone of his earning power and occupational status put up with the flack he's getting over his earnings just to have MP on his business card?
Difficult to believe he is an MP because he wants to change the world a la Corbyn or Gordon Brown.
He has had plenty of flack from opposition parties locally on his legal work before but still been easily re elected
I'm not saying he wouldn't be reelected - I'm saying why would he bother standing again or walking early?
45,416 cases in Germany, 244 deaths (both higher than the UK) - as per Worldometer
Really surging there
Is this a statistical freak, or gremlin, or something else? Because 45k cases is way higher than anything expected, and by far the biggest daily number ever reported in Germany
Could you please stop picking days of reporting from Germany.
For whatever reason, their reporting is very very spiky. So post 7 day averages.
Those are bad enough, at the moment.
I'll do what I like, thanks very much, and you can ignore it or not
45k cases is so completely out of whack it does raise suspicions. The previous highest was ~32k back in April 2021
Sigh - look at the history. It's a collection of wild spikes. Otherwise you are just fooling yourself.
Trying to impress logic upon him is like trying to catch wind in a net.
I have not been following the Rittenhouse case, but after reading the NPR (not exactly a bastion of right-wing, gun-toting, Trumpism), I'd be gobsmacked if he's found guilty.
In the land of the gun toting free, this will be self-defense.
But he went there, with a rifle, into a riot to (in his own words) “protect property”. And now people are dead & he’s in court hoping to avoid a life sentence.
What he actually did was make a bad situation worse.
He’s an irresponsible little shit who killed people. What the jury makes of that is a judgment on them.
Jury selection basically struck off anyone who says that racism is a problem.
So all but one potential black juror was struck off.
I don't understand how his case for self defence for killing an unarmed man was that the unarmed man could have grabbed the tactical rifle that he illegally brought to the protest.
Some of his assailants were also armed
The line the prosecutor took about the last person he shot was utterly utterly comical - the guy has a pistol in his hand and is acting threateningly toward Rittenhouse who is vulnerable on the ground. But because the man with the handgun didn't shoot him 10 feet away, or stand in front of him in a standard 2 hand pistol firing position it entirely nullified Rittenhouse's right to self defence. He should never have his AR15 there, but when people
1) Grab your gun barrel after earlier threatening to kill you 2) Kick you in the head & go after you with a skateboard being used as a weapon & 3) Point a gun at you whilst you're lieing on the ground
You're definitely fearing for your life in all those situations.
I think his assailants (And they all were) assumed he wouldn't use his gun being a somewhat short kid or something. The prosecution has been dire, particularly on the final shooting.
But here's the thing. Someone is waving a gun at you. Isn't the logical thing - to protect yourself - to grab the gun barrel?
I'm not saying Rittenhouse is guilty of murder. But it does seem that this is somewhat akin to drunk driving. You are knowingly putting yourself in a position where somebody is dramatically more likely to die as a result of an accident.
But here's the thing. Someone is waving a gun at you. Isn't the logical thing - to protect yourself - to grab the gun barrel?
Err no. The logical thing is to stop chasing after someone who has just pointed a gun at you 5 seconds earlier.
Really? You'd turn your back on someone who'd been waving a gun at you?
Should people be drilled in how to behave if there's a AR15 toting teenager on the street?
'Whatever you do, don't try and disarm him. He may be scared, and then he's allowed to shoot you."
45,416 cases in Germany, 244 deaths (both higher than the UK) - as per Worldometer
Really surging there
Is this a statistical freak, or gremlin, or something else? Because 45k cases is way higher than anything expected, and by far the biggest daily number ever reported in Germany
Could you please stop picking days of reporting from Germany.
For whatever reason, their reporting is very very spiky. So post 7 day averages.
Those are bad enough, at the moment.
I'll do what I like, thanks very much, and you can ignore it or not
45k cases is so completely out of whack it does raise suspicions. The previous highest was ~32k back in April 2021
Sigh - look at the history. It's a collection of wild spikes. Otherwise you are just fooling yourself.
But, look at the spikes. This is the wildest spike of all. Coincidence? I doubt it
So you construct an average. One point of data and all that.
45,416 cases in Germany, 244 deaths (both higher than the UK) - as per Worldometer
Really surging there
Is this a statistical freak, or gremlin, or something else? Because 45k cases is way higher than anything expected, and by far the biggest daily number ever reported in Germany
Could you please stop picking days of reporting from Germany.
For whatever reason, their reporting is very very spiky. So post 7 day averages.
Those are bad enough, at the moment.
I'll do what I like, thanks very much, and you can ignore it or not
45k cases is so completely out of whack it does raise suspicions. The previous highest was ~32k back in April 2021
Sigh - look at the history. It's a collection of wild spikes. Otherwise you are just fooling yourself.
But, look at the spikes. This is the wildest spike of all. Coincidence? I doubt it
So you construct an average. One point of data and all that.
Off topic (like every other post this evening tbf)...
Is there a simple calculator available online that shows the global warming impact we each have through the choices we make?
If we could easily get a summary of the impact of our personal choices (e.g. electric car, flying long-haul, solar panels, new boiler, going veggie, etc. etc.) it might help people decide which steps they could take themsleves.
My assumption is that none of us are going to do everything we possibly could but a simple calculator might make it easy to choose the options that work for us as individuals.
There are simple (ish) calculators but they won't be as good as a complicated calculator, and the truth is that a lot of your impact will be due to choices beyond your control, or you won't have the information to be able to know.
For example, you will find calculators mostly use average values for things like flying or train travel, but different planes are more or less efficient, and it makes a pretty big difference whether your train route is electrified or diesel.
The same applies, but more so, for food. How do you find out what your chicken was fed on? There are massively wide estimates for the carbon impact of foods depending on the animal feed used, or fertilizer, or any number of other factors.
This is why I think the question of individual action is mostly a dead-end. Government has to take a lead and create the market conditions so that the options businesses provide to consumers will be zero carbon, and then you will be green without noticing.
This is what is happening with the growth of wind electricity on the grid, and with the transition to electric cars. Hopefully the same will happen with domestic heating and improving standards in agriculture to reduce emissions. And so on, and so forth.
The best thing you can probably do is to hand write a letter to your MP expressing in your own words why you want them to support things like this.
In terms of whether an electric car is a better choice than solar panels, etc, I think you really need to run the numbers for your personal circumstances. How much fuel do you use each year in your car that wouldn't be burnt if you went electric and compare that to the energy generated by solar panels.
And you don't have to go completely veggie. Have fun experimenting with a few extra meatless meals and you might find some that you want to eat because they're tasty, and then it isn't a penance to reduce your carbon emissions.
45,416 cases in Germany, 244 deaths (both higher than the UK) - as per Worldometer
Really surging there
Is this a statistical freak, or gremlin, or something else? Because 45k cases is way higher than anything expected, and by far the biggest daily number ever reported in Germany
Could you please stop picking days of reporting from Germany.
For whatever reason, their reporting is very very spiky. So post 7 day averages.
Those are bad enough, at the moment.
I'll do what I like, thanks very much, and you can ignore it or not
45k cases is so completely out of whack it does raise suspicions. The previous highest was ~32k back in April 2021
Worldometers' 7 day average supports your point here Leon. It's doubled in two weeks.
It looks like chunks of Europe are heading for new lockdowns. Romania has had a curfew for a while, already
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
Two One Five, Pompette?
Oxford’s kind of like a mini Paris like that. There’s the actual centre flanked by the porte du pont de Magdalen, porte de Keble, porte rue de Banbury and porte de Westgate, and then there’s the Banlieues. Some of them have posh restaurants, but they are still banlieues, outwith the city. Instead of the périphérique there are the rivers and parks acting as a moat.
One of my key memories of a number of visits on business to Oxford a decade or so ago was being amazed how basic/shit/unforgettable the railway station is compared to the hallowed groves of academia.
Surely the city fathers could have spent a few more quid on a decent station?
Ha ha.
Did you see the bus station? That killed any enthusiasm for clever redesigns for the station.
Imagine you are building a station for big coaches. Where do you put it? 90 degree entry to a busy, not especially wide street, obviously. Only one entrance/exit of course. Which is not wide enough for one coach to go in at the same time as one goes out.
The cherry on the cake is that if a bus driver misjudges his turn and comes in as someone tries to leave, they get stuck by the traffic behind them. Which due to Oxford's no-way* traffic system means that the centre of Oxford locks up surprisingly fast.
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
I mean, the Bullingdon Club definitely exists, and it's definitely a dining club. Whether or not the places they go to can always be described as posh is probably not the point. And the antics certainly don't seem made up: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/oxfordshire/4066329.stm
That sounds like exactly the incident in the film/play 'Riot Club', only about 10x less overblown and drunken.
Love the waitress: "It was not through excess drinking, it was planned. They were not really drunk or throwing up."
I have not been following the Rittenhouse case, but after reading the NPR (not exactly a bastion of right-wing, gun-toting, Trumpism), I'd be gobsmacked if he's found guilty.
In the land of the gun toting free, this will be self-defense.
But he went there, with a rifle, into a riot to (in his own words) “protect property”. And now people are dead & he’s in court hoping to avoid a life sentence.
What he actually did was make a bad situation worse.
Can someone do a tl;dr or ELI5 on rittenhouse? Were his victims black? woke? jewish? in the wrong place at the wrong time? Or what?
You can read the court reports on NPR for the basic facts of the case, which appear to be that BLM protests / riots (description might depend on your politics) were happening in Kenosha, Wisconsin after police shot a black man called Jacob Blake and left him paralysed from the waist down. Our hero decided to take his AR-15 & drive from Illinois into Wisconsin to “protect businesses from unrest” (his words I believe). There was then a series of confrontations, where it’s currently unclear whether Rittenhouse was the initial aggressor (this is the main point of contention in the court case), but he was certainly followed & physically attacked by several people, several of whom he shot & killed whilst attempting (in his words) to retreat & turn himself into the police. The details are being hashed out in court. The ultimate outcome is that two people are dead & one shot & injured & now Rittenhouse is facing homicide charges.
So we have a shitshow that the various political sides can twist into whichever narrative they like. Pro-gun? Rittenhouse was obviously defending himself & those who attacked him were ultimately responsible for this terrible outcome: How sad, so sorry. Anti-gun? Rittenhouse acting as a lone warrior stirred up shit & ended up getting people killed. He’s guilty of criminial endagerment even if he was attacked. White supremecist? Rittenhouse was a virtuous soldier out there protecting the law-abiding majority against marauding BLM rioters. And so on & on.
The problem - as is so often the case - is that the defendant behaved very badly, but might not be guilty of actual murder. What they are guilty of is behaving in a way that escalates an existing tense situation and increases the chance of somebody (anybody) dying.
I have little doubt that he was genuinely afraid when he pulled the trigger. He put himself in a stupid situation, and was terrified, and was carrying an assault rifle.
The offence - to my mind - was deliberately putting himself in a situation where those bad things became more likely.
If you carry an assault rifle to a demonstration, that has to be a very, very serious offence.
I'm sure you're right that Rittenhouse was terrified. I wonder, though, if he was as terrified as the two men he killed? Because they're not around to tell us how terrified they were of Rittenhouse.
Regardless, what sort of 'advanced' society is it that allows a 17 year-old to wander around with an assault rifle? Bonkers.
It doesn’t. He was also charged with under-age possession of a firearm, and the person who supplied him with it was also charged with unlawful supply because Rittenhouse was under age.
Fair enough, sorry - 'allows' was the wrong word. But my general point stands - the easy access to guns and the gun culture in the USA is bonkers for a supposedly advanced, civilised society. It's like the Wild West never ended.
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
Two One Five, Pompette?
Oxford’s kind of like a mini Paris like that. There’s the actual centre flanked by the porte du pont de Magdalen, porte de Keble, porte rue de Banbury and porte de Westgate, and then there’s the Banlieues. Some of them have posh restaurants, but they are still banlieues, outwith the city. Instead of the périphérique there are the rivers and parks acting as a moat.
One of my key memories of a number of visits on business to Oxford a decade or so ago was being amazed how basic/shit/unforgettable the railway station is compared to the hallowed groves of academia.
Surely the city fathers could have spent a few more quid on a decent station?
Ha ha.
Did you see the bus station? That killed any enthusiasm for clever redesigns for the station.
Imagine you are building a station for big coaches. Where do you put it? 90 degree entry to a busy, not especially wide street, obviously. Only one entrance/exit of course. Which is not wide enough for one coach to go in at the same time as one goes out.
The cherry on the cake is that if a bus driver misjudges his turn and comes in as someone tries to leave, they get stuck by the traffic behind them. Which due to Oxford's no-way* traffic system means that the centre of Oxford locks up surprisingly fast.
I have not been following the Rittenhouse case, but after reading the NPR (not exactly a bastion of right-wing, gun-toting, Trumpism), I'd be gobsmacked if he's found guilty.
In the land of the gun toting free, this will be self-defense.
But he went there, with a rifle, into a riot to (in his own words) “protect property”. And now people are dead & he’s in court hoping to avoid a life sentence.
What he actually did was make a bad situation worse.
He’s an irresponsible little shit who killed people. What the jury makes of that is a judgment on them.
Jury selection basically struck off anyone who says that racism is a problem.
So all but one potential black juror was struck off.
I don't understand how his case for self defence for killing an unarmed man was that the unarmed man could have grabbed the tactical rifle that he illegally brought to the protest.
Some of his assailants were also armed
The line the prosecutor took about the last person he shot was utterly utterly comical - the guy has a pistol in his hand and is acting threateningly toward Rittenhouse who is vulnerable on the ground. But because the man with the handgun didn't shoot him 10 feet away, or stand in front of him in a standard 2 hand pistol firing position it entirely nullified Rittenhouse's right to self defence. He should never have his AR15 there, but when people
1) Grab your gun barrel after earlier threatening to kill you 2) Kick you in the head & go after you with a skateboard being used as a weapon & 3) Point a gun at you whilst you're lieing on the ground
You're definitely fearing for your life in all those situations.
I think his assailants (And they all were) assumed he wouldn't use his gun being a somewhat short kid or something. The prosecution has been dire, particularly on the final shooting.
But here's the thing. Someone is waving a gun at you. Isn't the logical thing - to protect yourself - to grab the gun barrel?
I'm not saying Rittenhouse is guilty of murder. But it does seem that this is somewhat akin to drunk driving. You are knowingly putting yourself in a position where somebody is dramatically more likely to die as a result of an accident.
But here's the thing. Someone is waving a gun at you. Isn't the logical thing - to protect yourself - to grab the gun barrel?
Err no. The logical thing is to stop chasing after someone who has just pointed a gun at you 5 seconds earlier.
Really? You'd turn your back on someone who'd been waving a gun at you?
Should people be drilled in how to behave if there's a AR15 toting teenager on the street?
'Whatever you do, don't try and disarm him. He may be scared, and then he's allowed to shoot you."
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
Two One Five, Pompette?
Oxford’s kind of like a mini Paris like that. There’s the actual centre flanked by the porte du pont de Magdalen, porte de Keble, porte rue de Banbury and porte de Westgate, and then there’s the Banlieues. Some of them have posh restaurants, but they are still banlieues, outwith the city. Instead of the périphérique there are the rivers and parks acting as a moat.
One of my key memories of a number of visits on business to Oxford a decade or so ago was being amazed how basic/shit/unforgettable the railway station is compared to the hallowed groves of academia.
Surely the city fathers could have spent a few more quid on a decent station?
Ha ha.
Did you see the bus station? That killed any enthusiasm for clever redesigns for the station.
Imagine you are building a station for big coaches. Where do you put it? 90 degree entry to a busy, not especially wide street, obviously. Only one entrance/exit of course. Which is not wide enough for one coach to go in at the same time as one goes out.
The cherry on the cake is that if a bus driver misjudges his turn and comes in as someone tries to leave, they get stuck by the traffic behind them. Which due to Oxford's no-way* traffic system means that the centre of Oxford locks up surprisingly fast.
*It's like a one-way system, but less so.
Being posh, I did not see the bus station.
At least you got to see Landmine College from the train station - which is where the bus station should have gone....
45,416 cases in Germany, 244 deaths (both higher than the UK) - as per Worldometer
Really surging there
Is this a statistical freak, or gremlin, or something else? Because 45k cases is way higher than anything expected, and by far the biggest daily number ever reported in Germany
Could you please stop picking days of reporting from Germany.
For whatever reason, their reporting is very very spiky. So post 7 day averages.
Those are bad enough, at the moment.
I'll do what I like, thanks very much, and you can ignore it or not
45k cases is so completely out of whack it does raise suspicions. The previous highest was ~32k back in April 2021
Worldometers' 7 day average supports your point here Leon. It's doubled in two weeks.
It looks like chunks of Europe are heading for new lockdowns. Romania has had a curfew for a while, already
As you said yesterday, though, most places will have restrictions that fall short of 'lockdowns'. There'll be mask mandates and vaxports... but (except in a very few places) no compulsory shutdowns of businesses.
45,416 cases in Germany, 244 deaths (both higher than the UK) - as per Worldometer
Really surging there
Is this a statistical freak, or gremlin, or something else? Because 45k cases is way higher than anything expected, and by far the biggest daily number ever reported in Germany
Could you please stop picking days of reporting from Germany.
For whatever reason, their reporting is very very spiky. So post 7 day averages.
Those are bad enough, at the moment.
I'll do what I like, thanks very much, and you can ignore it or not
45k cases is so completely out of whack it does raise suspicions. The previous highest was ~32k back in April 2021
Worldometers' 7 day average supports your point here Leon. It's doubled in two weeks.
It looks like chunks of Europe are heading for new lockdowns. Romania has had a curfew for a while, already
If - big 'if' alert - europe is in lockdown come xmas and we are wassailing like there's no tomorrow then whether by luck or design Johnson will get an uptick.
I have not been following the Rittenhouse case, but after reading the NPR (not exactly a bastion of right-wing, gun-toting, Trumpism), I'd be gobsmacked if he's found guilty.
In the land of the gun toting free, this will be self-defense.
But he went there, with a rifle, into a riot to (in his own words) “protect property”. And now people are dead & he’s in court hoping to avoid a life sentence.
What he actually did was make a bad situation worse.
He’s an irresponsible little shit who killed people. What the jury makes of that is a judgment on them.
Jury selection basically struck off anyone who says that racism is a problem.
So all but one potential black juror was struck off.
I don't understand how his case for self defence for killing an unarmed man was that the unarmed man could have grabbed the tactical rifle that he illegally brought to the protest.
Some of his assailants were also armed
The line the prosecutor took about the last person he shot was utterly utterly comical - the guy has a pistol in his hand and is acting threateningly toward Rittenhouse who is vulnerable on the ground. But because the man with the handgun didn't shoot him 10 feet away, or stand in front of him in a standard 2 hand pistol firing position it entirely nullified Rittenhouse's right to self defence. He should never have his AR15 there, but when people
1) Grab your gun barrel after earlier threatening to kill you 2) Kick you in the head & go after you with a skateboard being used as a weapon & 3) Point a gun at you whilst you're lieing on the ground
You're definitely fearing for your life in all those situations.
I think his assailants (And they all were) assumed he wouldn't use his gun being a somewhat short kid or something. The prosecution has been dire, particularly on the final shooting.
But here's the thing. Someone is waving a gun at you. Isn't the logical thing - to protect yourself - to grab the gun barrel?
I'm not saying Rittenhouse is guilty of murder. But it does seem that this is somewhat akin to drunk driving. You are knowingly putting yourself in a position where somebody is dramatically more likely to die as a result of an accident.
Isn't the situation the other way around? That he had a gun pointed at him first to which he then responded. That at least seems to line up with what had been said in the courtroom. If that is the case, and I have no reason to doubt it, then it really is self defence. Whether or not he was carrying a gun is irrelevant, at least by American standards.
My sense is that liberals want this guy to be guilty of whatever crime(s) they ascribe white people in the US. The facts, as are seen in court anyway, are not what they expected. A prosecution witness has said he pointed a gun at the defendant unprovoked, that's basically the end of the case in a legal sense. In a cultural sense it will stoke the flames of the culture wars in the US. The right will say they have been unnecessarily turned into villains when the reality is that one of their own was threatened first. The left will be adamant that this is another example of variable justice for white people vs non white people.
It's become a no-win situation and America will pay the price regardless of the verdict. Half of them will say this guy is guilty regardless of the witness statement and if it's a guilty verdict the other side will say it's a liberal conspiracy to lock up a white male.
I have not been following the Rittenhouse case, but after reading the NPR (not exactly a bastion of right-wing, gun-toting, Trumpism), I'd be gobsmacked if he's found guilty.
In the land of the gun toting free, this will be self-defense.
But he went there, with a rifle, into a riot to (in his own words) “protect property”. And now people are dead & he’s in court hoping to avoid a life sentence.
What he actually did was make a bad situation worse.
He’s an irresponsible little shit who killed people. What the jury makes of that is a judgment on them.
Jury selection basically struck off anyone who says that racism is a problem.
So all but one potential black juror was struck off.
I don't understand how his case for self defence for killing an unarmed man was that the unarmed man could have grabbed the tactical rifle that he illegally brought to the protest.
Some of his assailants were also armed
The line the prosecutor took about the last person he shot was utterly utterly comical - the guy has a pistol in his hand and is acting threateningly toward Rittenhouse who is vulnerable on the ground. But because the man with the handgun didn't shoot him 10 feet away, or stand in front of him in a standard 2 hand pistol firing position it entirely nullified Rittenhouse's right to self defence. He should never have his AR15 there, but when people
1) Grab your gun barrel after earlier threatening to kill you 2) Kick you in the head & go after you with a skateboard being used as a weapon & 3) Point a gun at you whilst you're lieing on the ground
You're definitely fearing for your life in all those situations.
I think his assailants (And they all were) assumed he wouldn't use his gun being a somewhat short kid or something. The prosecution has been dire, particularly on the final shooting.
But here's the thing. Someone is waving a gun at you. Isn't the logical thing - to protect yourself - to grab the gun barrel?
I'm not saying Rittenhouse is guilty of murder. But it does seem that this is somewhat akin to drunk driving. You are knowingly putting yourself in a position where somebody is dramatically more likely to die as a result of an accident.
But here's the thing. Someone is waving a gun at you. Isn't the logical thing - to protect yourself - to grab the gun barrel?
Err no. The logical thing is to stop chasing after someone who has just pointed a gun at you 5 seconds earlier.
Really? You'd turn your back on someone who'd been waving a gun at you?
Should people be drilled in how to behave if there's a AR15 toting teenager on the street?
'Whatever you do, don't try and disarm him. He may be scared, and then he's allowed to shoot you."
Whatever you do, don't try and disarm him.
Well, err, yes.
It is also worth noting - of course - that if the armed BLM protestors had shot Rittenhouse when he was waving the AR15, they would also be acting in self defence.
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
Two One Five, Pompette?
Pompette I wasn't impressed with - South Parade has always been a rather average.
Haven't tried Two One Five.
I just wonder what you're comparing Oxford with (then or now) to have such a poor opinion of its restaurant scene.
Try growing up in Hastings or living in Selby, both of which I have... I can tell you Oxford is a culinary paradise in comparison!
Not fine dining by any stretch but Browns was an institution back in the 80s - no booking and queues every night to get a table. Those were the days!
Christ... Browns.... The inedible in search of the gullible..... They did do some good cocktails for a while, though.
The food was certainly edible and not extortionate. It had an atmosphere that was hard to beat. I have many fond memories of boozy meals there. Went back a few years ago for 'old times' sake'... A very strange experience: the decor is entirely unaltered, the atmosphere completely gone.
Perhaps you were 2 bottles too sober to enjoy it?
It is interesting when you go back to places - have they become shit, or did we just grow out of them?
A bit of both with Browns I suspect. The atmosphere was always great and at the time I thought the food was fine too.
Now I reflect back, the food was very ordinary by today's standards... but this was the 80s.
Off topic (like every other post this evening tbf)...
Is there a simple calculator available online that shows the global warming impact we each have through the choices we make?
If we could easily get a summary of the impact of our personal choices (e.g. electric car, flying long-haul, solar panels, new boiler, going veggie, etc. etc.) it might help people decide which steps they could take themsleves.
My assumption is that none of us are going to do everything we possibly could but a simple calculator might make it easy to choose the options that work for us as individuals.
There are simple (ish) calculators but they won't be as good as a complicated calculator, and the truth is that a lot of your impact will be due to choices beyond your control, or you won't have the information to be able to know.
For example, you will find calculators mostly use average values for things like flying or train travel, but different planes are more or less efficient, and it makes a pretty big difference whether your train route is electrified or diesel.
The same applies, but more so, for food. How do you find out what your chicken was fed on? There are massively wide estimates for the carbon impact of foods depending on the animal feed used, or fertilizer, or any number of other factors.
This is why I think the question of individual action is mostly a dead-end. Government has to take a lead and create the market conditions so that the options businesses provide to consumers will be zero carbon, and then you will be green without noticing.
This is what is happening with the growth of wind electricity on the grid, and with the transition to electric cars. Hopefully the same will happen with domestic heating and improving standards in agriculture to reduce emissions. And so on, and so forth.
The best thing you can probably do is to hand write a letter to your MP expressing in your own words why you want them to support things like this.
In terms of whether an electric car is a better choice than solar panels, etc, I think you really need to run the numbers for your personal circumstances. How much fuel do you use each year in your car that wouldn't be burnt if you went electric and compare that to the energy generated by solar panels.
And you don't have to go completely veggie. Have fun experimenting with a few extra meatless meals and you might find some that you want to eat because they're tasty, and then it isn't a penance to reduce your carbon emissions.
Yes, looking at my results, the WWF one is fairly crude. The slightly more detailed one on the Klima App seems to work well, and comes out slightly lower.
I have not flown and eat meat once or twice a week. It seems the biggest share is from home heating. Perhaps that gas boiler has to go.
I do think carbon offset has a whiff of Papal Indulgences about it, but the projects on the Klima App seem fairly decent and independently verified.
I have not been following the Rittenhouse case, but after reading the NPR (not exactly a bastion of right-wing, gun-toting, Trumpism), I'd be gobsmacked if he's found guilty.
In the land of the gun toting free, this will be self-defense.
But he went there, with a rifle, into a riot to (in his own words) “protect property”. And now people are dead & he’s in court hoping to avoid a life sentence.
What he actually did was make a bad situation worse.
He’s an irresponsible little shit who killed people. What the jury makes of that is a judgment on them.
Jury selection basically struck off anyone who says that racism is a problem.
So all but one potential black juror was struck off.
I don't understand how his case for self defence for killing an unarmed man was that the unarmed man could have grabbed the tactical rifle that he illegally brought to the protest.
Some of his assailants were also armed
The line the prosecutor took about the last person he shot was utterly utterly comical - the guy has a pistol in his hand and is acting threateningly toward Rittenhouse who is vulnerable on the ground. But because the man with the handgun didn't shoot him 10 feet away, or stand in front of him in a standard 2 hand pistol firing position it entirely nullified Rittenhouse's right to self defence. He should never have his AR15 there, but when people
1) Grab your gun barrel after earlier threatening to kill you 2) Kick you in the head & go after you with a skateboard being used as a weapon & 3) Point a gun at you whilst you're lieing on the ground
You're definitely fearing for your life in all those situations.
I think his assailants (And they all were) assumed he wouldn't use his gun being a somewhat short kid or something. The prosecution has been dire, particularly on the final shooting.
But here's the thing. Someone is waving a gun at you. Isn't the logical thing - to protect yourself - to grab the gun barrel?
I'm not saying Rittenhouse is guilty of murder. But it does seem that this is somewhat akin to drunk driving. You are knowingly putting yourself in a position where somebody is dramatically more likely to die as a result of an accident.
But here's the thing. Someone is waving a gun at you. Isn't the logical thing - to protect yourself - to grab the gun barrel?
Err no. The logical thing is to stop chasing after someone who has just pointed a gun at you 5 seconds earlier.
Really? You'd turn your back on someone who'd been waving a gun at you?
Should people be drilled in how to behave if there's a AR15 toting teenager on the street?
'Whatever you do, don't try and disarm him. He may be scared, and then he's allowed to shoot you."
45,416 cases in Germany, 244 deaths (both higher than the UK) - as per Worldometer
Really surging there
Is this a statistical freak, or gremlin, or something else? Because 45k cases is way higher than anything expected, and by far the biggest daily number ever reported in Germany
Could you please stop picking days of reporting from Germany.
For whatever reason, their reporting is very very spiky. So post 7 day averages.
Those are bad enough, at the moment.
I'll do what I like, thanks very much, and you can ignore it or not
45k cases is so completely out of whack it does raise suspicions. The previous highest was ~32k back in April 2021
Worldometers' 7 day average supports your point here Leon. It's doubled in two weeks.
It looks like chunks of Europe are heading for new lockdowns. Romania has had a curfew for a while, already
As you said yesterday, though, most places will have restrictions that fall short of 'lockdowns'. There'll be mask mandates and vaxports... but (except in a very few places) no compulsory shutdowns of businesses.
Yes, I still think that is the likelier outcome.
However, remember how close the UK got to new lockdowns. Remember Plan B, Starmer whining, all the wanker-lefty doctors and iSAGE doing their shtick. LOCKDOWN NOW AND FOREVER
I was quite surprised HMG held their ground, and I was pleased they did
Will that be repeated across Europe? Lots of those countries have already gone further than the UK- they have vaxports and 2G and all that. How many days of alarmingly spiking cases can they endure, before the psychological pressure to lockdown "properly" becomes irresistible?
That's one reason I pointed to the German figure today. Yes it is clearly a statistical outlier but you only need a few of those to freak people out.... and then they don't become outliers, anyway. They are a trend
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
Two One Five, Pompette?
Pompette I wasn't impressed with - South Parade has always been a rather average.
Haven't tried Two One Five.
I just wonder what you're comparing Oxford with (then or now) to have such a poor opinion of its restaurant scene.
Try growing up in Hastings or living in Selby, both of which I have... I can tell you Oxford is a culinary paradise in comparison!
Not fine dining by any stretch but Browns was an institution back in the 80s - no booking and queues every night to get a table. Those were the days!
Christ... Browns.... The inedible in search of the gullible..... They did do some good cocktails for a while, though.
The food was certainly edible and not extortionate. It had an atmosphere that was hard to beat. I have many fond memories of boozy meals there. Went back a few years ago for 'old times' sake'... A very strange experience: the decor is entirely unaltered, the atmosphere completely gone.
Perhaps you were 2 bottles too sober to enjoy it?
It is interesting when you go back to places - have they become shit, or did we just grow out of them?
A bit of both with Browns I suspect. The atmosphere was always great and at the time I thought the food was fine too.
Now I reflect back, the food was very ordinary by today's standards... but this was the 80s.
I remember that even drunk and in my 20s they managed to cook a burger to death. To the point I couldn't finish it.
A kebab from the vans was better. Or seemed that way.
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
Two One Five, Pompette?
Pompette I wasn't impressed with - South Parade has always been a rather average.
Haven't tried Two One Five.
I just wonder what you're comparing Oxford with (then or now) to have such a poor opinion of its restaurant scene.
Try growing up in Hastings or living in Selby, both of which I have... I can tell you Oxford is a culinary paradise in comparison!
Not fine dining by any stretch but Browns was an institution back in the 80s - no booking and queues every night to get a table. Those were the days!
Christ... Browns.... The inedible in search of the gullible..... They did do some good cocktails for a while, though.
The food was certainly edible and not extortionate. It had an atmosphere that was hard to beat. I have many fond memories of boozy meals there. Went back a few years ago for 'old times' sake'... A very strange experience: the decor is entirely unaltered, the atmosphere completely gone.
Perhaps you were 2 bottles too sober to enjoy it?
It is interesting when you go back to places - have they become shit, or did we just grow out of them?
A bit of both with Browns I suspect. The atmosphere was always great and at the time I thought the food was fine too.
Now I reflect back, the food was very ordinary by today's standards... but this was the 80s.
I remember enjoying Browns around 1989 or something. In fact they even had a branch in Soho
Looking back it was almost certainly mediocre brasserie food. But I do recall a highly boisterous atmosphere
El Rincon is a welcome addition on South Parade....Mamma Mia's is reliably pretty good,....A nice Artisan bakery has emerged too on South Parade that serves pretty damn good oven baked pizzas, and Alfonso's Ice Cream cart at the weekend is quite delightful. And if you venture down south, the Wilding on Clarendon Street is superb, and there is a wonderful wine bar on the corner... The Freud is back in Jericho and as cool as fuck
Browns (Oxford) is allegedly Boris Johnson's favourite restaurant....so a no go really....
Off topic (like every other post this evening tbf)...
Is there a simple calculator available online that shows the global warming impact we each have through the choices we make?
If we could easily get a summary of the impact of our personal choices (e.g. electric car, flying long-haul, solar panels, new boiler, going veggie, etc. etc.) it might help people decide which steps they could take themsleves.
My assumption is that none of us are going to do everything we possibly could but a simple calculator might make it easy to choose the options that work for us as individuals.
There are quite a few apps and online carbon calculators. The WWF has one. Some seem to be pushing carbon offset sales but I think the calculations themselves are OK.
My carbon footprint on the WWF is 9 tons per year, slightly less than the national average that they cite, and I haven't flown anywhere, and have an electric car and we'll insulated house. It isn't going to be easy going lower.
11 tonnes. I live in a shockingly badly insulated house.
I lied about my flights on the survey. I haven't flown in the last year, but I counted backward from March 2020 so included 1 flight in the year to that point.
Thanks @Foxy that's just the sort of calculator I was looking for.
9.19 tonnes for me. (Disappointed it didn't ask me about our air source heat pump though!)
Off topic (like every other post this evening tbf)...
Is there a simple calculator available online that shows the global warming impact we each have through the choices we make?
If we could easily get a summary of the impact of our personal choices (e.g. electric car, flying long-haul, solar panels, new boiler, going veggie, etc. etc.) it might help people decide which steps they could take themsleves.
My assumption is that none of us are going to do everything we possibly could but a simple calculator might make it easy to choose the options that work for us as individuals.
There are quite a few apps and online carbon calculators. The WWF has one. Some seem to be pushing carbon offset sales but I think the calculations themselves are OK.
My carbon footprint on the WWF is 9 tons per year, slightly less than the national average that they cite, and I haven't flown anywhere, and have an electric car and we'll insulated house. It isn't going to be easy going lower.
11 tonnes. I live in a shockingly badly insulated house.
I lied about my flights on the survey. I haven't flown in the last year, but I counted backward from March 2020 so included 1 flight in the year to that point.
14 tonnes for me, actually not as bad as I thought
The travel gets me (even in the Year of Covid). If it weren't for that I'd have a surprisingly light-footed impact on this green earth
El Rincon is a welcome addition on South Parade....Mamma Mia's is reliably pretty good,....A nice Artisan bakery has emerged too on South Parade that serves pretty damn good oven baked pizzas, and Alfonso's Ice Cream cart at the weekend is quite delightful. And if you venture down south, the Wilding on Clarendon Street is superb, and there is a wonderful wine bar on the corner... The Freud is back in Jericho and as cool as fuck
Browns (Oxford) is allegedly Boris Johnson's favourite restaurant....so a no go really....
Aw f*ck - you've completely ruined it for me now. He was probably in there when we were regulars (there were often some loud hooray henrys leering over the waitresses).
I have not been following the Rittenhouse case, but after reading the NPR (not exactly a bastion of right-wing, gun-toting, Trumpism), I'd be gobsmacked if he's found guilty.
In the land of the gun toting free, this will be self-defense.
But he went there, with a rifle, into a riot to (in his own words) “protect property”. And now people are dead & he’s in court hoping to avoid a life sentence.
What he actually did was make a bad situation worse.
He’s an irresponsible little shit who killed people. What the jury makes of that is a judgment on them.
Jury selection basically struck off anyone who says that racism is a problem.
So all but one potential black juror was struck off.
I don't understand how his case for self defence for killing an unarmed man was that the unarmed man could have grabbed the tactical rifle that he illegally brought to the protest.
Some of his assailants were also armed
The line the prosecutor took about the last person he shot was utterly utterly comical - the guy has a pistol in his hand and is acting threateningly toward Rittenhouse who is vulnerable on the ground. But because the man with the handgun didn't shoot him 10 feet away, or stand in front of him in a standard 2 hand pistol firing position it entirely nullified Rittenhouse's right to self defence. He should never have his AR15 there, but when people
1) Grab your gun barrel after earlier threatening to kill you 2) Kick you in the head & go after you with a skateboard being used as a weapon & 3) Point a gun at you whilst you're lieing on the ground
You're definitely fearing for your life in all those situations.
I think his assailants (And they all were) assumed he wouldn't use his gun being a somewhat short kid or something. The prosecution has been dire, particularly on the final shooting.
But here's the thing. Someone is waving a gun at you. Isn't the logical thing - to protect yourself - to grab the gun barrel?
I'm not saying Rittenhouse is guilty of murder. But it does seem that this is somewhat akin to drunk driving. You are knowingly putting yourself in a position where somebody is dramatically more likely to die as a result of an accident.
Isn't the situation the other way around? That he had a gun pointed at him first to which he then responded. That at least seems to line up with what had been said in the courtroom. If that is the case, and I have no reason to doubt it, then it really is self defence. Whether or not he was carrying a gun is irrelevant, at least by American standards.
My sense is that liberals want this guy to be guilty of whatever crime(s) they ascribe white people in the US. The facts, as are seen in court anyway, are not what they expected. A prosecution witness has said he pointed a gun at the defendant unprovoked, that's basically the end of the case in a legal sense. In a cultural sense it will stoke the flames of the culture wars in the US. The right will say they have been unnecessarily turned into villains when the reality is that one of their own was threatened first. The left will be adamant that this is another example of variable justice for white people vs non white people.
It's become a no-win situation and America will pay the price regardless of the verdict. Half of them will say this guy is guilty regardless of the witness statement and if it's a guilty verdict the other side will say it's a liberal conspiracy to lock up a white male.
I understand that the man who pointed a pistol at him was the third one he shot. In other words, he'd already shot two people before the pistol was pointed. If that is accurate, "unprovoked" is a word that doesn't belong in your description.
Again, none of us were there and America is a different place. Three guys come up to you, one has a gun that is pointed at you. Even though you have done nothing to aggravate them (again this is as per the witness testimony). You're also a bit of an arsehole (maybe more than a bit).
You might not like the answer but ultimately (and this is likely the end result of this court case) it's a situation of self defence. If he wasn't a massive cunt then the people wouldn't have died, for sure, but he is and they are, however, being a cunt isn't against the law.
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
Two One Five, Pompette?
Pompette I wasn't impressed with - South Parade has always been a rather average.
Haven't tried Two One Five.
I just wonder what you're comparing Oxford with (then or now) to have such a poor opinion of its restaurant scene.
Try growing up in Hastings or living in Selby, both of which I have... I can tell you Oxford is a culinary paradise in comparison!
Not fine dining by any stretch but Browns was an institution back in the 80s - no booking and queues every night to get a table. Those were the days!
Christ... Browns.... The inedible in search of the gullible..... They did do some good cocktails for a while, though.
The food was certainly edible and not extortionate. It had an atmosphere that was hard to beat. I have many fond memories of boozy meals there. Went back a few years ago for 'old times' sake'... A very strange experience: the decor is entirely unaltered, the atmosphere completely gone.
Perhaps you were 2 bottles too sober to enjoy it?
It is interesting when you go back to places - have they become shit, or did we just grow out of them?
A bit of both with Browns I suspect. The atmosphere was always great and at the time I thought the food was fine too.
Now I reflect back, the food was very ordinary by today's standards... but this was the 80s.
I remember enjoying Browns around 1989 or something. In fact they even had a branch in Soho
Looking back it was almost certainly mediocre brasserie food. But I do recall a highly boisterous atmosphere
You've nailed it succinctly. (You should become a writer!)
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
Two One Five, Pompette?
Pompette I wasn't impressed with - South Parade has always been a rather average.
Haven't tried Two One Five.
I just wonder what you're comparing Oxford with (then or now) to have such a poor opinion of its restaurant scene.
Try growing up in Hastings or living in Selby, both of which I have... I can tell you Oxford is a culinary paradise in comparison!
Not fine dining by any stretch but Browns was an institution back in the 80s - no booking and queues every night to get a table. Those were the days!
Christ... Browns.... The inedible in search of the gullible..... They did do some good cocktails for a while, though.
The food was certainly edible and not extortionate. It had an atmosphere that was hard to beat. I have many fond memories of boozy meals there. Went back a few years ago for 'old times' sake'... A very strange experience: the decor is entirely unaltered, the atmosphere completely gone.
Perhaps you were 2 bottles too sober to enjoy it?
It is interesting when you go back to places - have they become shit, or did we just grow out of them?
A bit of both with Browns I suspect. The atmosphere was always great and at the time I thought the food was fine too.
Now I reflect back, the food was very ordinary by today's standards... but this was the 80s.
I remember enjoying Browns around 1989 or something. In fact they even had a branch in Soho
Looking back it was almost certainly mediocre brasserie food. But I do recall a highly boisterous atmosphere
You've nailed it succinctly. (You should become a writer!)
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
Two One Five, Pompette?
Pompette I wasn't impressed with - South Parade has always been a rather average.
Haven't tried Two One Five.
I just wonder what you're comparing Oxford with (then or now) to have such a poor opinion of its restaurant scene.
Try growing up in Hastings or living in Selby, both of which I have... I can tell you Oxford is a culinary paradise in comparison!
Not fine dining by any stretch but Browns was an institution back in the 80s - no booking and queues every night to get a table. Those were the days!
Christ... Browns.... The inedible in search of the gullible..... They did do some good cocktails for a while, though.
The food was certainly edible and not extortionate. It had an atmosphere that was hard to beat. I have many fond memories of boozy meals there. Went back a few years ago for 'old times' sake'... A very strange experience: the decor is entirely unaltered, the atmosphere completely gone.
Perhaps you were 2 bottles too sober to enjoy it?
It is interesting when you go back to places - have they become shit, or did we just grow out of them?
A bit of both with Browns I suspect. The atmosphere was always great and at the time I thought the food was fine too.
Now I reflect back, the food was very ordinary by today's standards... but this was the 80s.
I remember that even drunk and in my 20s they managed to cook a burger to death. To the point I couldn't finish it.
A kebab from the vans was better. Or seemed that way.
You're misremembering imo - you could ask for the burgers rare if you liked (this was pre-BSE remember) and they generally got their 'doneness' there ot there abouts.
Brilliant film by Nick Broomfield just finished on BBC4 about his relationship with his father (an important photographer in his own right which I didn't know) plus other important stuff. Intimate is such a whored out word but it's so intimate it hurts. Recommended.
I have not been following the Rittenhouse case, but after reading the NPR (not exactly a bastion of right-wing, gun-toting, Trumpism), I'd be gobsmacked if he's found guilty.
In the land of the gun toting free, this will be self-defense.
But he went there, with a rifle, into a riot to (in his own words) “protect property”. And now people are dead & he’s in court hoping to avoid a life sentence.
What he actually did was make a bad situation worse.
He’s an irresponsible little shit who killed people. What the jury makes of that is a judgment on them.
Jury selection basically struck off anyone who says that racism is a problem.
So all but one potential black juror was struck off.
I don't understand how his case for self defence for killing an unarmed man was that the unarmed man could have grabbed the tactical rifle that he illegally brought to the protest.
Some of his assailants were also armed
If a black man went to small town in West Virginia packing an assault rifle, and shot an armed white West Virginia, I'm fairly sure that that "self defence" argument wouldn't hold up in Court.
Probably not, though OJ was a black man who managed to be found not guilty on a very elastic defence on the evidence
Off topic (like every other post this evening tbf)...
Is there a simple calculator available online that shows the global warming impact we each have through the choices we make?
If we could easily get a summary of the impact of our personal choices (e.g. electric car, flying long-haul, solar panels, new boiler, going veggie, etc. etc.) it might help people decide which steps they could take themsleves.
My assumption is that none of us are going to do everything we possibly could but a simple calculator might make it easy to choose the options that work for us as individuals.
There are quite a few apps and online carbon calculators. The WWF has one. Some seem to be pushing carbon offset sales but I think the calculations themselves are OK.
My carbon footprint on the WWF is 9 tons per year, slightly less than the national average that they cite, and I haven't flown anywhere, and have an electric car and we'll insulated house. It isn't going to be easy going lower.
11 tonnes. I live in a shockingly badly insulated house.
I lied about my flights on the survey. I haven't flown in the last year, but I counted backward from March 2020 so included 1 flight in the year to that point.
Thanks @Foxy that's just the sort of calculator I was looking for.
9.19 tonnes for me. (Disappointed it didn't ask me about our air source heat pump though!)
I'm really surprised by your figures. I thought the UK average was down to 7 tonnes.
Hard to know without looking at the details whether the calculator is up-to-date.
That said, the Monbiot article today had some startling figures on the disparities in carbon use with wealth, so perhaps that explains it.
I have not been following the Rittenhouse case, but after reading the NPR (not exactly a bastion of right-wing, gun-toting, Trumpism), I'd be gobsmacked if he's found guilty.
In the land of the gun toting free, this will be self-defense.
But he went there, with a rifle, into a riot to (in his own words) “protect property”. And now people are dead & he’s in court hoping to avoid a life sentence.
What he actually did was make a bad situation worse.
He’s an irresponsible little shit who killed people. What the jury makes of that is a judgment on them.
Jury selection basically struck off anyone who says that racism is a problem.
So all but one potential black juror was struck off.
I don't understand how his case for self defence for killing an unarmed man was that the unarmed man could have grabbed the tactical rifle that he illegally brought to the protest.
Some of his assailants were also armed
The line the prosecutor took about the last person he shot was utterly utterly comical - the guy has a pistol in his hand and is acting threateningly toward Rittenhouse who is vulnerable on the ground. But because the man with the handgun didn't shoot him 10 feet away, or stand in front of him in a standard 2 hand pistol firing position it entirely nullified Rittenhouse's right to self defence. He should never have his AR15 there, but when people
1) Grab your gun barrel after earlier threatening to kill you 2) Kick you in the head & go after you with a skateboard being used as a weapon & 3) Point a gun at you whilst you're lieing on the ground
You're definitely fearing for your life in all those situations.
I think his assailants (And they all were) assumed he wouldn't use his gun being a somewhat short kid or something. The prosecution has been dire, particularly on the final shooting.
But here's the thing. Someone is waving a gun at you. Isn't the logical thing - to protect yourself - to grab the gun barrel?
I'm not saying Rittenhouse is guilty of murder. But it does seem that this is somewhat akin to drunk driving. You are knowingly putting yourself in a position where somebody is dramatically more likely to die as a result of an accident.
But here's the thing. Someone is waving a gun at you. Isn't the logical thing - to protect yourself - to grab the gun barrel?
Err no. The logical thing is to stop chasing after someone who has just pointed a gun at you 5 seconds earlier.
Really? You'd turn your back on someone who'd been waving a gun at you?
Should people be drilled in how to behave if there's a AR15 toting teenager on the street?
RUN - Escape if you can - Consider the safest options - Is there a safe route? Run, if not Hide - Can you get there without exposing yourself to greater danger? - Insist others leave with you, but don’t let their indecision slow you down. - Leave belongings behind. - Do not attempt to film the incident. Run.
HIDE
- If you cannot Run, Hide
Pretty straightforward advice. If any of Rittenhouse's three assailants had followed it, they would have been fine.
Off topic (like every other post this evening tbf)...
Is there a simple calculator available online that shows the global warming impact we each have through the choices we make?
If we could easily get a summary of the impact of our personal choices (e.g. electric car, flying long-haul, solar panels, new boiler, going veggie, etc. etc.) it might help people decide which steps they could take themsleves.
My assumption is that none of us are going to do everything we possibly could but a simple calculator might make it easy to choose the options that work for us as individuals.
There are quite a few apps and online carbon calculators. The WWF has one. Some seem to be pushing carbon offset sales but I think the calculations themselves are OK.
My carbon footprint on the WWF is 9 tons per year, slightly less than the national average that they cite, and I haven't flown anywhere, and have an electric car and we'll insulated house. It isn't going to be easy going lower.
11 tonnes. I live in a shockingly badly insulated house.
I lied about my flights on the survey. I haven't flown in the last year, but I counted backward from March 2020 so included 1 flight in the year to that point.
14 tonnes for me, actually not as bad as I thought
The travel gets me (even in the Year of Covid). If it weren't for that I'd have a surprisingly light-footed impact on this green earth
Yes a small flat and limited driving helps.
I should downsize really, now that my boys have left home.
I have not been following the Rittenhouse case, but after reading the NPR (not exactly a bastion of right-wing, gun-toting, Trumpism), I'd be gobsmacked if he's found guilty.
In the land of the gun toting free, this will be self-defense.
But he went there, with a rifle, into a riot to (in his own words) “protect property”. And now people are dead & he’s in court hoping to avoid a life sentence.
What he actually did was make a bad situation worse.
He’s an irresponsible little shit who killed people. What the jury makes of that is a judgment on them.
Jury selection basically struck off anyone who says that racism is a problem.
So all but one potential black juror was struck off.
I don't understand how his case for self defence for killing an unarmed man was that the unarmed man could have grabbed the tactical rifle that he illegally brought to the protest.
Essentially Rittenhouse tried to retreat & de-escalate. The first victim chased him across a parking lot before trying to grab his rifle. Rittenhouse is claiming in court (possibly reasonably) that in that moment he was in fear of his life & was justified in shooting. This wasn’t a grab that just happened - the events leading up to it caused Rittenhouse to genuinely believe he was under threat.
That the twerp should never have brough an AR-15 to a riot is separate issue.
You mean concerned citizens were shot dead while trying to disarm an active shooter terrorist?
If Rittenhouse were Afro-American or Muslim he would be dead at the scene. He is only on trial because of being who he is.
The prosecution case would say that, however their star witness has said he pointed a gun at the defendant unprovoked. That validated the defence case that it was an act of self defence. Though I'm not an American, were a gun pointed at me I feel as though I would respond in kind and let the consequences be what they will be.
America is such a strange place and none of us really can be 100% sure about what we'd do in the situations that occur. If you can say 100% that you wouldn't defend yourself against someone who had raised their weapon and threatened your life then fair enough. I wouldn't be able to.
Strange place indeed. Their use of our language masks some of its bizarre weirdness. Especially outside cities.
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
Two One Five, Pompette?
Pompette I wasn't impressed with - South Parade has always been a rather average.
Haven't tried Two One Five.
I just wonder what you're comparing Oxford with (then or now) to have such a poor opinion of its restaurant scene.
Try growing up in Hastings or living in Selby, both of which I have... I can tell you Oxford is a culinary paradise in comparison!
Not fine dining by any stretch but Browns was an institution back in the 80s - no booking and queues every night to get a table. Those were the days!
Christ... Browns.... The inedible in search of the gullible..... They did do some good cocktails for a while, though.
The food was certainly edible and not extortionate. It had an atmosphere that was hard to beat. I have many fond memories of boozy meals there. Went back a few years ago for 'old times' sake'... A very strange experience: the decor is entirely unaltered, the atmosphere completely gone.
Perhaps you were 2 bottles too sober to enjoy it?
It is interesting when you go back to places - have they become shit, or did we just grow out of them?
A bit of both with Browns I suspect. The atmosphere was always great and at the time I thought the food was fine too.
Now I reflect back, the food was very ordinary by today's standards... but this was the 80s.
I remember enjoying Browns around 1989 or something. In fact they even had a branch in Soho
Looking back it was almost certainly mediocre brasserie food. But I do recall a highly boisterous atmosphere
You've nailed it succinctly. (You should become a writer!)
I don't think it requires Tolstoy to pin down Browns circa 1989
A lot of fun but iffy food. Anyone who was young in the 80s or 90s and went to Oxford (as a visitor, resident or student) went to Browns. Not surprising Boris did too
Incidentally a friend of mine from UCL (where we were both students in the 80s) went back there in a professional capacity last week. He went to the student union, to the cloisters, to several of our favoured cafes and pubs. He told me it is all eerily quiet. Everyone works hard and looks studious. Lots of diligent East Asians. No one openly dealing speed on the 5th floor
I found his account unfathomably depressing. I know we were irresponsible fuckwits with student grants (rather than loans) but my God we had fun. I am really not sure these modern kids are having fun. They stare at their phones. They swipe left. They worry about climate change. They end up in debt
Cox is popular, do not forget he has turned a seat the LDs held in 1997 and 2001 into one with a Tory voteshare of 60% in 2019 since he first won the seat in 2005
Off topic (like every other post this evening tbf)...
Is there a simple calculator available online that shows the global warming impact we each have through the choices we make?
If we could easily get a summary of the impact of our personal choices (e.g. electric car, flying long-haul, solar panels, new boiler, going veggie, etc. etc.) it might help people decide which steps they could take themsleves.
My assumption is that none of us are going to do everything we possibly could but a simple calculator might make it easy to choose the options that work for us as individuals.
There are quite a few apps and online carbon calculators. The WWF has one. Some seem to be pushing carbon offset sales but I think the calculations themselves are OK.
My carbon footprint on the WWF is 9 tons per year, slightly less than the national average that they cite, and I haven't flown anywhere, and have an electric car and we'll insulated house. It isn't going to be easy going lower.
11 tonnes. I live in a shockingly badly insulated house.
I lied about my flights on the survey. I haven't flown in the last year, but I counted backward from March 2020 so included 1 flight in the year to that point.
Thanks @Foxy that's just the sort of calculator I was looking for.
9.19 tonnes for me. (Disappointed it didn't ask me about our air source heat pump though!)
Yes, I have seen more sophisticated ones. I need to think seriously about a heat pump system while the subsidy is going. I pay enough in tax, so perhaps should try to get some back, like I did with the electric car.
Off topic (like every other post this evening tbf)...
Is there a simple calculator available online that shows the global warming impact we each have through the choices we make?
If we could easily get a summary of the impact of our personal choices (e.g. electric car, flying long-haul, solar panels, new boiler, going veggie, etc. etc.) it might help people decide which steps they could take themsleves.
My assumption is that none of us are going to do everything we possibly could but a simple calculator might make it easy to choose the options that work for us as individuals.
There are quite a few apps and online carbon calculators. The WWF has one. Some seem to be pushing carbon offset sales but I think the calculations themselves are OK.
My carbon footprint on the WWF is 9 tons per year, slightly less than the national average that they cite, and I haven't flown anywhere, and have an electric car and we'll insulated house. It isn't going to be easy going lower.
11 tonnes. I live in a shockingly badly insulated house.
I lied about my flights on the survey. I haven't flown in the last year, but I counted backward from March 2020 so included 1 flight in the year to that point.
14 tonnes for me, actually not as bad as I thought
The travel gets me (even in the Year of Covid). If it weren't for that I'd have a surprisingly light-footed impact on this green earth
Yes a small flat and limited driving helps.
I should downsize really, now that my boys have left home.
Yes, that's where I "win". And I don't commute. I walk everywhere if I can (and I generally can in central London)
I feel positively virtuous
I have a lefty, somewhat virtue-signalling friend.... who also has a private jet which he uses quite a lot. His carbon footprint must be insane. I wonder how long he can endure the cognitive dissonance. Indeed I wonder how long private jets will be publicly admissible. Unless you are literally a president or a prime minister, no one *needs* a private jet, ever, and the carbon footprint is surely horrific
I bet in about 10 years they will be shamefully hidden away, and no one will admit to using one. Then they will actually banned, perhaps
Off topic (like every other post this evening tbf)...
Is there a simple calculator available online that shows the global warming impact we each have through the choices we make?
If we could easily get a summary of the impact of our personal choices (e.g. electric car, flying long-haul, solar panels, new boiler, going veggie, etc. etc.) it might help people decide which steps they could take themsleves.
My assumption is that none of us are going to do everything we possibly could but a simple calculator might make it easy to choose the options that work for us as individuals.
There are quite a few apps and online carbon calculators. The WWF has one. Some seem to be pushing carbon offset sales but I think the calculations themselves are OK.
My carbon footprint on the WWF is 9 tons per year, slightly less than the national average that they cite, and I haven't flown anywhere, and have an electric car and we'll insulated house. It isn't going to be easy going lower.
11 tonnes. I live in a shockingly badly insulated house.
I lied about my flights on the survey. I haven't flown in the last year, but I counted backward from March 2020 so included 1 flight in the year to that point.
14 tonnes for me, actually not as bad as I thought
The travel gets me (even in the Year of Covid). If it weren't for that I'd have a surprisingly light-footed impact on this green earth
Yes a small flat and limited driving helps.
I should downsize really, now that my boys have left home.
It's all about choices though isn't it? I should downsize, give up meat (go vegan even), stop travelling, buy no more stuff...
But I'm only going to do some of those things, not all, hence it's good to understand how those choices affect my footprint.
Off topic (like every other post this evening tbf)...
Is there a simple calculator available online that shows the global warming impact we each have through the choices we make?
If we could easily get a summary of the impact of our personal choices (e.g. electric car, flying long-haul, solar panels, new boiler, going veggie, etc. etc.) it might help people decide which steps they could take themsleves.
My assumption is that none of us are going to do everything we possibly could but a simple calculator might make it easy to choose the options that work for us as individuals.
There are quite a few apps and online carbon calculators. The WWF has one. Some seem to be pushing carbon offset sales but I think the calculations themselves are OK.
My carbon footprint on the WWF is 9 tons per year, slightly less than the national average that they cite, and I haven't flown anywhere, and have an electric car and we'll insulated house. It isn't going to be easy going lower.
11 tonnes. I live in a shockingly badly insulated house.
I lied about my flights on the survey. I haven't flown in the last year, but I counted backward from March 2020 so included 1 flight in the year to that point.
14 tonnes for me, actually not as bad as I thought
The travel gets me (even in the Year of Covid). If it weren't for that I'd have a surprisingly light-footed impact on this green earth
Yes a small flat and limited driving helps.
I should downsize really, now that my boys have left home.
Yes, that's where I "win". And I don't commute. I walk everywhere if I can (and I generally can in central London)
I feel positively virtuous
I have a lefty, somewhat virtue-signalling friend.... who also has a private jet which he uses quite a lot. His carbon footprint must be insane. I wonder how long he can endure the cognitive dissonance. Indeed I wonder how long private jets will be publicly admissible. Unless you are literally a president or a prime minister, no one *needs* a private jet, ever, and the carbon footprint is surely horrific
I bet in about 10 years they will be shamefully hidden away, and no one will admit to using one. Then they will actually banned, perhaps
Yeah, I already keep mine under wraps, behind the yacht.
Off topic (like every other post this evening tbf)...
Is there a simple calculator available online that shows the global warming impact we each have through the choices we make?
If we could easily get a summary of the impact of our personal choices (e.g. electric car, flying long-haul, solar panels, new boiler, going veggie, etc. etc.) it might help people decide which steps they could take themsleves.
My assumption is that none of us are going to do everything we possibly could but a simple calculator might make it easy to choose the options that work for us as individuals.
There are quite a few apps and online carbon calculators. The WWF has one. Some seem to be pushing carbon offset sales but I think the calculations themselves are OK.
My carbon footprint on the WWF is 9 tons per year, slightly less than the national average that they cite, and I haven't flown anywhere, and have an electric car and we'll insulated house. It isn't going to be easy going lower.
11 tonnes. I live in a shockingly badly insulated house.
I lied about my flights on the survey. I haven't flown in the last year, but I counted backward from March 2020 so included 1 flight in the year to that point.
Thanks @Foxy that's just the sort of calculator I was looking for.
9.19 tonnes for me. (Disappointed it didn't ask me about our air source heat pump though!)
I'm really surprised by your figures. I thought the UK average was down to 7 tonnes.
Hard to know without looking at the details whether the calculator is up-to-date.
That said, the Monbiot article today had some startling figures on the disparities in carbon use with wealth, so perhaps that explains it.
According to the WWF calculator the UK average looks to be about 12.5 tonnes (hard to be sure, it's a dodgy looking graph).
Off topic (like every other post this evening tbf)...
Is there a simple calculator available online that shows the global warming impact we each have through the choices we make?
If we could easily get a summary of the impact of our personal choices (e.g. electric car, flying long-haul, solar panels, new boiler, going veggie, etc. etc.) it might help people decide which steps they could take themsleves.
My assumption is that none of us are going to do everything we possibly could but a simple calculator might make it easy to choose the options that work for us as individuals.
There are quite a few apps and online carbon calculators. The WWF has one. Some seem to be pushing carbon offset sales but I think the calculations themselves are OK.
My carbon footprint on the WWF is 9 tons per year, slightly less than the national average that they cite, and I haven't flown anywhere, and have an electric car and we'll insulated house. It isn't going to be easy going lower.
11 tonnes. I live in a shockingly badly insulated house.
I lied about my flights on the survey. I haven't flown in the last year, but I counted backward from March 2020 so included 1 flight in the year to that point.
14 tonnes for me, actually not as bad as I thought
The travel gets me (even in the Year of Covid). If it weren't for that I'd have a surprisingly light-footed impact on this green earth
Yes a small flat and limited driving helps.
I should downsize really, now that my boys have left home.
Yes, that's where I "win". And I don't commute. I walk everywhere if I can (and I generally can in central London)
I feel positively virtuous
I have a lefty, somewhat virtue-signalling friend.... who also has a private jet which he uses quite a lot. His carbon footprint must be insane. I wonder how long he can endure the cognitive dissonance. Indeed I wonder how long private jets will be publicly admissible. Unless you are literally a president or a prime minister, no one *needs* a private jet, ever, and the carbon footprint is surely horrific
I bet in about 10 years they will be shamefully hidden away, and no one will admit to using one. Then they will actually banned, perhaps
I know quite a lot of people that use private jets, but no-one that actually owns one. Unless you are insanely wealthy (I'm talking minimum $3-400m), then it's much more sensible to do charters or to have jet card.
Cox is popular, do not forget he has turned a seat the LDs held in 1997 and 2001 into one with a Tory voteshare of 60% in 2019 since he first won the seat in 2005
Off topic (like every other post this evening tbf)...
Is there a simple calculator available online that shows the global warming impact we each have through the choices we make?
If we could easily get a summary of the impact of our personal choices (e.g. electric car, flying long-haul, solar panels, new boiler, going veggie, etc. etc.) it might help people decide which steps they could take themsleves.
My assumption is that none of us are going to do everything we possibly could but a simple calculator might make it easy to choose the options that work for us as individuals.
There are quite a few apps and online carbon calculators. The WWF has one. Some seem to be pushing carbon offset sales but I think the calculations themselves are OK.
My carbon footprint on the WWF is 9 tons per year, slightly less than the national average that they cite, and I haven't flown anywhere, and have an electric car and we'll insulated house. It isn't going to be easy going lower.
11 tonnes. I live in a shockingly badly insulated house.
I lied about my flights on the survey. I haven't flown in the last year, but I counted backward from March 2020 so included 1 flight in the year to that point.
14 tonnes for me, actually not as bad as I thought
The travel gets me (even in the Year of Covid). If it weren't for that I'd have a surprisingly light-footed impact on this green earth
Yes a small flat and limited driving helps.
I should downsize really, now that my boys have left home.
Yes, that's where I "win". And I don't commute. I walk everywhere if I can (and I generally can in central London)
I feel positively virtuous
I have a lefty, somewhat virtue-signalling friend.... who also has a private jet which he uses quite a lot. His carbon footprint must be insane. I wonder how long he can endure the cognitive dissonance. Indeed I wonder how long private jets will be publicly admissible. Unless you are literally a president or a prime minister, no one *needs* a private jet, ever, and the carbon footprint is surely horrific
I bet in about 10 years they will be shamefully hidden away, and no one will admit to using one. Then they will actually banned, perhaps
I know quite a lot of people that use private jets, but no-one that actually owns one. Unless you are insanely wealthy (I'm talking minimum $3-400m), then it's much more sensible to do charters or to have jet card.
He owns. He and his wife are insanely wealthy. He actually invited me on it a few weeks ago, to catch some Californian sun, but it was impossible as the US was not letting in Europeans then (plus I had to go take my older daughter to see a sixth form in North Finchley, which is quite bathetic)
Off topic (like every other post this evening tbf)...
Is there a simple calculator available online that shows the global warming impact we each have through the choices we make?
If we could easily get a summary of the impact of our personal choices (e.g. electric car, flying long-haul, solar panels, new boiler, going veggie, etc. etc.) it might help people decide which steps they could take themsleves.
My assumption is that none of us are going to do everything we possibly could but a simple calculator might make it easy to choose the options that work for us as individuals.
There are quite a few apps and online carbon calculators. The WWF has one. Some seem to be pushing carbon offset sales but I think the calculations themselves are OK.
My carbon footprint on the WWF is 9 tons per year, slightly less than the national average that they cite, and I haven't flown anywhere, and have an electric car and we'll insulated house. It isn't going to be easy going lower.
11 tonnes. I live in a shockingly badly insulated house.
I lied about my flights on the survey. I haven't flown in the last year, but I counted backward from March 2020 so included 1 flight in the year to that point.
Thanks @Foxy that's just the sort of calculator I was looking for.
9.19 tonnes for me. (Disappointed it didn't ask me about our air source heat pump though!)
Yes, I have seen more sophisticated ones. I need to think seriously about a heat pump system while the subsidy is going. I pay enough in tax, so perhaps should try to get some back, like I did with the electric car.
At least some of the questions are fairly stupidly written. I've not got a clue how many hours a week I spend driving. I know I drive about 25k miles a year, at about 50mpg (although it's dropped by about 10% since the switch to E10 - which reduction will be more than offsetting any eco-virtue from switching from E5, as well as costing me a fortune - thanks stupid green morons).
45,416 cases in Germany, 244 deaths (both higher than the UK) - as per Worldometer
Really surging there
Is this a statistical freak, or gremlin, or something else? Because 45k cases is way higher than anything expected, and by far the biggest daily number ever reported in Germany
Could you please stop picking days of reporting from Germany.
For whatever reason, their reporting is very very spiky. So post 7 day averages.
Those are bad enough, at the moment.
I'll do what I like, thanks very much, and you can ignore it or not
45k cases is so completely out of whack it does raise suspicions. The previous highest was ~32k back in April 2021
Worldometers' 7 day average supports your point here Leon. It's doubled in two weeks.
It looks like chunks of Europe are heading for new lockdowns. Romania has had a curfew for a while, already
As you said yesterday, though, most places will have restrictions that fall short of 'lockdowns'. There'll be mask mandates and vaxports... but (except in a very few places) no compulsory shutdowns of businesses.
Yes, I still think that is the likelier outcome.
However, remember how close the UK got to new lockdowns. Remember Plan B, Starmer whining, all the wanker-lefty doctors and iSAGE doing their shtick. LOCKDOWN NOW AND FOREVER
I was quite surprised HMG held their ground, and I was pleased they did
Will that be repeated across Europe? Lots of those countries have already gone further than the UK- they have vaxports and 2G and all that. How many days of alarmingly spiking cases can they endure, before the psychological pressure to lockdown "properly" becomes irresistible?
That's one reason I pointed to the German figure today. Yes it is clearly a statistical outlier but you only need a few of those to freak people out.... and then they don't become outliers, anyway. They are a trend
I'm not sure why you always insist on inaccuracy whenever you mention Germany. It is really very simple to get the actual German figure, as you have been told several times, rather than the made up "worldometer" figure. Eg here: https://www.rki.de/DE/Content/InfAZ/N/Neuartiges_Coronavirus/Fallzahlen.html 39,676 Also, daily cases and deaths are lower than the UK per capita, although that will change very soon.
But I don't know why you imagine 45k cases would be way higher than expected (in general terms), I am actually surprised it didn't reach that kind of figure a weeks ago.
Anyway, the problem in Germany is not numbers of cases, it's the very high number of unvaccinated people. Even now there are 3.5 million over 60s who are unvaccinated - this is why nobody has been tempted to deliberately have an exit wave. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be much of any kind of plan.
Not really. For me it's about riding a horse across country *on a wholly unpredictable route*. The trouble with the current pretendy substitute is that you know in advance that the route has been planned by a human being, with all the elf n safety considerations that entails. Nobody goes hunting to "see an animal ripped to pieces" any more than they eat beef to celebrate a bullock being killed in an abattoir.
You can ride a horse across the countryside without ripping foxes to shreds you know.
I would have thought it impossible to miss the point I was making, while still having the ability to connect to and post on the internet. Thank you for surprising me.
Un pre dict ab le.
5 syllables.
The point you were making was that you wish to make a mess of other people’s land without any responsibility purely in the name of “fun”.
I thought you aspired to be a lawyer? Do you genuinely think that hunts cross country without the consent of the landowner? How do you think that would happen?
“Consent of the landowner” aye of course
Jesus. Before a day's hunting a hunt rings each and every landowner in the area, and keeps off land on which it does not have permission to go.
How else do you think it works? Is there a hunting exemption in the law of trespass? Where?
Care to answer my point?
Are you a gallowgate sockpuppet? Because I'm not seeing a point in your own name here
No, I asked about the pets killed by foxhounds that clearly do not have permission to be where they kill the pets.
I find it useful to consider what would happen if a purely working class or chav group came along with dogs and killed someone's cat, or trashed their crop and lawn.
I'm sure the feds would understand that accidents happen
They do. Consider the history of Oxford University dining clubs, and compare the result with what the magistrates would say if a dozen skinheads from the Cowley housing schemes came into a nice Oxon restaurant and then trashed the place. Obviously very understanding, at least until recent years, though.
I grew up in Oxford during the 80s and 90s
- There were nearly no posh eateries. There are a few now, but that is post 2000. - It's a small town. The bar staff all work the different places and know each other. - When the Bullingdon stories first became a thing, when Cameron became Opposition leader, journalists started offering 5 figures for evidence.
So either, the stories were true and a group of university students trashed non-existent posh restaurants and then covered it up so that no-one ever said "I was there". Despite the offer of serious sums of money.
Or a bunch of students threw some bread rolls around in a curry shop and the tales got... enlarged.
Oxford is a city of over 150,000 people, not a small town
More like it’s a small town of over 150,000 people. Or a small town surrounded by fields ringed by a donut of 150,000 people.
An urban area of 150,000 people is on no definition a small town.
A small town is typically a market town of less than 50,000 people, not 3 times that.
Oxford is a city on any definition, confirmed by the fact it has a cathedral and 2 universities too
It's a lot of housing, sure.
In terms of places you go out to in the evening - a few small areas, and you can cover most of them on foot, unless you are heading up the Cowley Road or something.
Have you ever been there?
I spend half my time there alongside Epping as my wife works there, indeed I am there now in Summertown which has plenty of high quality eateries
High quality? In Summertown? You are having a laugh.
Or do you class the "New Dancing Dragon Bar" as high end?
Two One Five, Pompette?
Pompette I wasn't impressed with - South Parade has always been a rather average.
Haven't tried Two One Five.
I just wonder what you're comparing Oxford with (then or now) to have such a poor opinion of its restaurant scene.
Try growing up in Hastings or living in Selby, both of which I have... I can tell you Oxford is a culinary paradise in comparison!
Not fine dining by any stretch but Browns was an institution back in the 80s - no booking and queues every night to get a table. Those were the days!
Christ... Browns.... The inedible in search of the gullible..... They did do some good cocktails for a while, though.
The food was certainly edible and not extortionate. It had an atmosphere that was hard to beat. I have many fond memories of boozy meals there. Went back a few years ago for 'old times' sake'... A very strange experience: the decor is entirely unaltered, the atmosphere completely gone.
Perhaps you were 2 bottles too sober to enjoy it?
It is interesting when you go back to places - have they become shit, or did we just grow out of them?
A bit of both with Browns I suspect. The atmosphere was always great and at the time I thought the food was fine too.
Now I reflect back, the food was very ordinary by today's standards... but this was the 80s.
Ahmed's Kebab van outside Univ? The Carfax chippy?
No Michelin starred restaurant could possibly compete.
On topic, it isn't a very balanced understanding between the parties, because while the LDs have a good chance of winning North Shropshire, there's not much possibility of Old Bexley going to Labour.
Off topic (like every other post this evening tbf)...
Is there a simple calculator available online that shows the global warming impact we each have through the choices we make?
If we could easily get a summary of the impact of our personal choices (e.g. electric car, flying long-haul, solar panels, new boiler, going veggie, etc. etc.) it might help people decide which steps they could take themsleves.
My assumption is that none of us are going to do everything we possibly could but a simple calculator might make it easy to choose the options that work for us as individuals.
There are quite a few apps and online carbon calculators. The WWF has one. Some seem to be pushing carbon offset sales but I think the calculations themselves are OK.
My carbon footprint on the WWF is 9 tons per year, slightly less than the national average that they cite, and I haven't flown anywhere, and have an electric car and we'll insulated house. It isn't going to be easy going lower.
11 tonnes. I live in a shockingly badly insulated house.
I lied about my flights on the survey. I haven't flown in the last year, but I counted backward from March 2020 so included 1 flight in the year to that point.
Thanks @Foxy that's just the sort of calculator I was looking for.
9.19 tonnes for me. (Disappointed it didn't ask me about our air source heat pump though!)
Yes, I have seen more sophisticated ones. I need to think seriously about a heat pump system while the subsidy is going. I pay enough in tax, so perhaps should try to get some back, like I did with the electric car.
At least some of the questions are fairly stupidly written. I've not got a clue how many hours a week I spend driving. I know I drive about 25k miles a year, at about 50mpg (although it's dropped by about 10% since the switch to E10 - which reduction will be more than offsetting any eco-virtue from switching from E5, as well as costing me a fortune - thanks stupid green morons).
Yes, it wasn't exactly sophisticated. Some questions seemed to be more advert targeting than CO2 calculations.
For the record, about 7.8t here. No flying and not vast amounts of driving (before or after covid), small house, don't buy a lot of 'stuff'.
Going to be annoying when I do get free to go places and it is all banned or 5 times the price of today. I guess the bicycle collection will just have to get a bit larger.
Every public building I've been in recently has had the heating turned up to 100% despite the fact that it's been around 12-15 degrees outside. I had to walk out of one building because it was so hot inside, in order to get some fresh air. Therefore one way to help with climate change might be to not put the heating on unless it's actually necessary, which would be less than 10 degrees.
Every public building I've been in recently has had the heating turned up to 100% despite the fact that it's been around 12-15 degrees outside. I had to walk out of one building because it was so hot inside, in order to get some fresh air. Therefore one way to help with climate change might be to not put the heating on unless it's actually necessary, which would be less than 10 degrees.
It is worth remembering that there is no gradient with building heating system: they are either on or they are off. The issue is supposed to be solved with thermostats that mean heating only comes on when the temperature inside the building is below a certain level.
The problem with some buildings is that they tend to see-saw: when the thermostat trips off, there is still 2-3 degrees of heating to come, and when it trips on, the temperature is still going to drop a couple of percent before the heating compensates.
45,416 cases in Germany, 244 deaths (both higher than the UK) - as per Worldometer
Really surging there
Is this a statistical freak, or gremlin, or something else? Because 45k cases is way higher than anything expected, and by far the biggest daily number ever reported in Germany
Could you please stop picking days of reporting from Germany.
For whatever reason, their reporting is very very spiky. So post 7 day averages.
Those are bad enough, at the moment.
I'll do what I like, thanks very much, and you can ignore it or not
45k cases is so completely out of whack it does raise suspicions. The previous highest was ~32k back in April 2021
Worldometers' 7 day average supports your point here Leon. It's doubled in two weeks.
It looks like chunks of Europe are heading for new lockdowns. Romania has had a curfew for a while, already
As you said yesterday, though, most places will have restrictions that fall short of 'lockdowns'. There'll be mask mandates and vaxports... but (except in a very few places) no compulsory shutdowns of businesses.
Yes, I still think that is the likelier outcome.
However, remember how close the UK got to new lockdowns. Remember Plan B, Starmer whining, all the wanker-lefty doctors and iSAGE doing their shtick. LOCKDOWN NOW AND FOREVER
I was quite surprised HMG held their ground, and I was pleased they did
Will that be repeated across Europe? Lots of those countries have already gone further than the UK- they have vaxports and 2G and all that. How many days of alarmingly spiking cases can they endure, before the psychological pressure to lockdown "properly" becomes irresistible?
That's one reason I pointed to the German figure today. Yes it is clearly a statistical outlier but you only need a few of those to freak people out.... and then they don't become outliers, anyway. They are a trend
I'm not sure why you always insist on inaccuracy whenever you mention Germany. It is really very simple to get the actual German figure, as you have been told several times, rather than the made up "worldometer" figure. Eg here: https://www.rki.de/DE/Content/InfAZ/N/Neuartiges_Coronavirus/Fallzahlen.html 39,676 Also, daily cases and deaths are lower than the UK per capita, although that will change very soon.
But I don't know why you imagine 45k cases would be way higher than expected (in general terms), I am actually surprised it didn't reach that kind of figure a weeks ago.
Anyway, the problem in Germany is not numbers of cases, it's the very high number of unvaccinated people. Even now there are 3.5 million over 60s who are unvaccinated - this is why nobody has been tempted to deliberately have an exit wave. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be much of any kind of plan.
Worldometers was publishing a cumulative number as data became available, but the official RKI figure has just been released and it's +50,196.
Brilliant film by Nick Broomfield just finished on BBC4 about his relationship with his father (an important photographer in his own right which I didn't know) plus other important stuff. Intimate is such a whored out word but it's so intimate it hurts. Recommended.
He can be such an egoitist which can drive you mad but he really got that one right. I saw it a while ago. Well worth watching. It's excellent
Comments
Haven't tried Two One Five.
Gees was good at one point....
Really surging there
Is this a statistical freak, or gremlin, or something else? Because 45k cases is way higher than anything expected, and by far the biggest daily number ever reported in Germany
Try growing up in Hastings or living in Selby, both of which I have... I can tell you Oxford is a culinary paradise in comparison!
Not fine dining by any stretch but Browns was an institution back in the 80s - no booking and queues every night to get a table. Those were the days!
I'm not saying Rittenhouse is guilty of murder. But it does seem that this is somewhat akin to drunk driving. You are knowingly putting yourself in a position where somebody is dramatically more likely to die as a result of an accident.
The whole thing is a total shitshow.
“A company based in Upminster has secured government contracts worth more than £800 million via a controversial ‘VIP’ system.
Uniserve did not have to compete for PPE contracts, worth more than £300 million, despite having no previous experience supplying the equipment according to an investigation by the Good Law Project.
…
The company is based at the same address as MP and Cabinet Office minister Julia Lopez in Hall Lane, Upminster”
https://www.time1075.net/173289-2-upminster-company-vip-ppe-contracts/
Same place that became the Oxford Kitchen - and then Two One Five - wasn't it?
The better comparison is perhaps Manhattan vs the other boroughs. Similar shape to the city centre too.
For whatever reason, their reporting is very very spiky. So post 7 day averages.
Those are bad enough, at the moment.
He walks because why would someone of his earning power and occupational status put up with the flack he's getting over his earnings just to have MP on his business card?
Difficult to believe he is an MP because he wants to change the world a la Corbyn or Gordon Brown.
‘We're at the point in the discourse when colleges have created the highly scientific and totally legitimate racial category of "Students of Color, minus Asian" ‘
https://twitter.com/realchrisrufo/status/1458563907837038595?s=21
45k cases is so completely out of whack it does raise suspicions. The previous highest was ~32k back in April 2021
Slovenia and Croatia, for example, have positivity rates above 40%.
Germany is about 6%, while Denmark and the UK are at 4%.
So, Germany's number is likely worse than their official numbers. But not a lot worse. Likewise, Denmark's jump in case numbers is at least not being flattered by insufficient testing.
You want to know which places have jumping case rates, and rising positivity?
Ireland (14% positivity), Belgium (13%) and Norway (12%). Both those countries probably have at least twice the number of cases that the official figures suggest.
Surely the city fathers could have spent a few more quid on a decent station?
Err no. The logical thing is to stop chasing after someone who has just pointed a gun at you 5 seconds earlier.
My carbon footprint on the WWF is 9 tons per year, slightly less than the national average that they cite, and I haven't flown anywhere, and have an electric car and we'll insulated house. It isn't going to be easy going lower.
https://footprint.wwf.org.uk/#/results/
It is interesting when you go back to places - have they become shit, or did we just grow out of them?
He isn't there to stop world poverty.
Should people be drilled in how to behave if there's a AR15 toting teenager on the street?
'Whatever you do, don't try and disarm him. He may be scared, and then he's allowed to shoot you."
For example, you will find calculators mostly use average values for things like flying or train travel, but different planes are more or less efficient, and it makes a pretty big difference whether your train route is electrified or diesel.
The same applies, but more so, for food. How do you find out what your chicken was fed on? There are massively wide estimates for the carbon impact of foods depending on the animal feed used, or fertilizer, or any number of other factors.
This is why I think the question of individual action is mostly a dead-end. Government has to take a lead and create the market conditions so that the options businesses provide to consumers will be zero carbon, and then you will be green without noticing.
This is what is happening with the growth of wind electricity on the grid, and with the transition to electric cars. Hopefully the same will happen with domestic heating and improving standards in agriculture to reduce emissions. And so on, and so forth.
The best thing you can probably do is to hand write a letter to your MP expressing in your own words why you want them to support things like this.
In terms of whether an electric car is a better choice than solar panels, etc, I think you really need to run the numbers for your personal circumstances. How much fuel do you use each year in your car that wouldn't be burnt if you went electric and compare that to the energy generated by solar panels.
And you don't have to go completely veggie. Have fun experimenting with a few extra meatless meals and you might find some that you want to eat because they're tasty, and then it isn't a penance to reduce your carbon emissions.
69 percent say cancel culture unfairly punishes people for past actions, statements
https://thehill.com/hilltv/what-americas-thinking/580747-poll-69-percent-say-cancel-culture-unfairly-punishes-people-for
Did you see the bus station? That killed any enthusiasm for clever redesigns for the station.
Imagine you are building a station for big coaches. Where do you put it? 90 degree entry to a busy, not especially wide street, obviously. Only one entrance/exit of course. Which is not wide enough for one coach to go in at the same time as one goes out.
The cherry on the cake is that if a bus driver misjudges his turn and comes in as someone tries to leave, they get stuck by the traffic behind them. Which due to Oxford's no-way* traffic system means that the centre of Oxford locks up surprisingly fast.
*It's like a one-way system, but less so.
Love the waitress: "It was not through excess drinking, it was planned. They were not really drunk or throwing up."
Well, err, yes.
My sense is that liberals want this guy to be guilty of whatever crime(s) they ascribe white people in the US. The facts, as are seen in court anyway, are not what they expected. A prosecution witness has said he pointed a gun at the defendant unprovoked, that's basically the end of the case in a legal sense. In a cultural sense it will stoke the flames of the culture wars in the US. The right will say they have been unnecessarily turned into villains when the reality is that one of their own was threatened first. The left will be adamant that this is another example of variable justice for white people vs non white people.
It's become a no-win situation and America will pay the price regardless of the verdict. Half of them will say this guy is guilty regardless of the witness statement and if it's a guilty verdict the other side will say it's a liberal conspiracy to lock up a white male.
Now I reflect back, the food was very ordinary by today's standards... but this was the 80s.
I have not flown and eat meat once or twice a week. It seems the biggest share is from home heating. Perhaps that gas boiler has to go.
I do think carbon offset has a whiff of Papal Indulgences about it, but the projects on the Klima App seem fairly decent and independently verified.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vi_QF5Jtuug
However, remember how close the UK got to new lockdowns. Remember Plan B, Starmer whining, all the wanker-lefty doctors and iSAGE doing their shtick. LOCKDOWN NOW AND FOREVER
I was quite surprised HMG held their ground, and I was pleased they did
Will that be repeated across Europe? Lots of those countries have already gone further than the UK- they have vaxports and 2G and all that. How many days of alarmingly spiking cases can they endure, before the psychological pressure to lockdown "properly" becomes irresistible?
That's one reason I pointed to the German figure today. Yes it is clearly a statistical outlier but you only need a few of those to freak people out.... and then they don't become outliers, anyway. They are a trend
A kebab from the vans was better. Or seemed that way.
Looking back it was almost certainly mediocre brasserie food. But I do recall a highly boisterous atmosphere
Browns (Oxford) is allegedly Boris Johnson's favourite restaurant....so a no go really....
9.19 tonnes for me. (Disappointed it didn't ask me about our air source heat pump though!)
The travel gets me (even in the Year of Covid). If it weren't for that I'd have a surprisingly light-footed impact on this green earth
You might not like the answer but ultimately (and this is likely the end result of this court case) it's a situation of self defence. If he wasn't a massive cunt then the people wouldn't have died, for sure, but he is and they are, however, being a cunt isn't against the law.
You're misremembering imo - you could ask for the burgers rare if you liked (this was pre-BSE remember) and they generally got their 'doneness' there ot there abouts.
Hard to know without looking at the details whether the calculator is up-to-date.
That said, the Monbiot article today had some startling figures on the disparities in carbon use with wealth, so perhaps that explains it.
Marauding Terrorist Attack (MTA): RUN. HIDE. TELL.
RUN
- Escape if you can
- Consider the safest options
- Is there a safe route? Run, if not Hide
- Can you get there without exposing yourself to greater danger?
- Insist others leave with you, but don’t let their indecision slow you down.
- Leave belongings behind.
- Do not attempt to film the incident. Run.
HIDE
- If you cannot Run, Hide
Pretty straightforward advice. If any of Rittenhouse's three assailants had followed it, they would have been fine.
I should downsize really, now that my boys have left home.
A lot of fun but iffy food. Anyone who was young in the 80s or 90s and went to Oxford (as a visitor, resident or student) went to Browns. Not surprising Boris did too
Incidentally a friend of mine from UCL (where we were both students in the 80s) went back there in a professional capacity last week. He went to the student union, to the cloisters, to several of our favoured cafes and pubs. He told me it is all eerily quiet. Everyone works hard and looks studious. Lots of diligent East Asians. No one openly dealing speed on the 5th floor
I found his account unfathomably depressing. I know we were irresponsible fuckwits with student grants (rather than loans) but my God we had fun. I am really not sure these modern kids are having fun. They stare at their phones. They swipe left. They worry about climate change. They end up in debt
Sad
I feel positively virtuous
I have a lefty, somewhat virtue-signalling friend.... who also has a private jet which he uses quite a lot. His carbon footprint must be insane. I wonder how long he can endure the cognitive dissonance. Indeed I wonder how long private jets will be publicly admissible. Unless you are literally a president or a prime minister, no one *needs* a private jet, ever, and the carbon footprint is surely horrific
I bet in about 10 years they will be shamefully hidden away, and no one will admit to using one. Then they will actually banned, perhaps
But I'm only going to do some of those things, not all, hence it's good to understand how those choices affect my footprint.
https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/us/
Only to be expected. Lower vax rates than Europe, early vaxxing (hence waning immunity). It would be a miracle if they entirely avoided Europe's fate
Under the rules as amended it should be settled for Yes today (11/11).
He does rent it out to poorer friends
Eg here:
https://www.rki.de/DE/Content/InfAZ/N/Neuartiges_Coronavirus/Fallzahlen.html
39,676
Also, daily cases and deaths are lower than the UK per capita, although that will change very soon.
But I don't know why you imagine 45k cases would be way higher than expected (in general terms), I am actually surprised it didn't reach that kind of figure a weeks ago.
Anyway, the problem in Germany is not numbers of cases, it's the very high number of unvaccinated people. Even now there are 3.5 million over 60s who are unvaccinated - this is why nobody has been tempted to deliberately have an exit wave. Unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be much of any kind of plan.
No Michelin starred restaurant could possibly compete.
For the record, about 7.8t here. No flying and not vast amounts of driving (before or after covid), small house, don't buy a lot of 'stuff'.
Going to be annoying when I do get free to go places and it is all banned or 5 times the price of today. I guess the bicycle collection will just have to get a bit larger.
The problem with some buildings is that they tend to see-saw: when the thermostat trips off, there is still 2-3 degrees of heating to come, and when it trips on, the temperature is still going to drop a couple of percent before the heating compensates.