Britons named world's biggest emitters

[Aliantha]

NIMBY!

[DanaC]

*grins*

Oh please, I have to deal with a lot of NIMBYism in my work. Frustrates the living hell out of me. It always amazes me how quickly people can whip up a protest group steering committee if it involves the slightest change to the look of their street, but damn, can ya get these people out of their houses when something big is going off?

[Aliantha]

Many industries have the same problem with nimbyism, some rightly so. It's a big problem in a lot of ways though. someone's always going to be unhappy. The trick is to start paying people to accept having things in their back yard. Then you get swamped by people being pissed of because they weren't offered.

Doesn't really matter what you do, you can't win.

[Sundae]

At least you have a fair amount of space over there. We're such a crowded little island that everything is in someone's back yard.

[Aliantha]

lol...believe me Sundae, it can be 500 km's away and someone will still claim it's in their personal space.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

I'm a descendant of a puritan. *shivers violently*

Hell, on my father's side, I am myself -- of one William _____, a glover by trade, from a village south of Norwich in East Anglia, who hit Massachusetts in 1638. Some of his grandkids had these really Massachusetts Puritan Old Testament names, too. When the Puritans let up, they became Congregationalists, I'm told.

I think my mother's people, Scots by way of Northern Ireland, were a couple centuries later.

I manage. I just plays me bagpipes...

[ZenGum]

I can claim one genuine convict: Richard Welch. Transported for life in (I think) 1802, and none of this wimpy stealing-a-loaf-of-bread nonsense. The charges:
Firing a pistol at Mr J. Dennis with intent to kill him.
Firing a pistol at Mr J. Dennis with intent to disable him.
Firing a pistol at Mr J. Dennis with intent to do him actual bodily harm.
Merely firing a pistol at Mr J. Dennis.
Being in unlawful possession of a firearm.
Burglary in the house of Mr J. Dennis.
(My favourite: )
Being in the High street, with his face blackened, and being otherwise disguised against the statute.

The phrase "threw the book at him" comes to mind. Also, given that this was in Ireland, the phrase "You land-owning English bastard" might also fit in somewhere, but we don't know the complete details.
He was found guilty of the first four charges, judgment being reserved on the remaining three.
He was originally sentenced to be hanged, but this was commuted to transportation for life, and eventually he was paroled on condition he remain Down Under.
Five generations later his offspring was a lord mayor of a council in Sydney.

[DanaC]

My great-great...not sure how many greats-grandfather on dad's side was a country parson, who went out to India with the British East India Company. Did very well for himself and his offspring became Indigo plantation owners. In fact Dad's family were the last of the great Indigo families in India. Grandfather, as the second son, would not have inherited the family estate anyway, so he went into governance. He was Chief Auditor of Indian railways, with (I kid ye not) his own train, or rather a train for his own use.

He used to tell fabulous stories, like when some bandits (or rebels, I could never be sure) tried to derail his train. I don't remember at what point he ended up stood on a rock firing his army revolver, but it was a good story:P Oh and the time his servant was bitten by a poisonous snake, whilst they were out hunting crocodile.


Brits may have come across the Fast Show, with Paul Whitehouse. The old man telling stories, really reminds me of Grandfather, right down to the green leather chair he's sitting on.

[Cicero]

~snip~"If there's a criminal we're interested in, not necessarily in a position to arrest him, but if you're trying to track this criminal, learn his lifestyle, his movements, his vehicle number will be put into the system, and any time he comes into the city, his movements will be tracked," said Roger Clayton, chief inspector of Gloucester.~snip~

Here in the United States the people are saying that you at least need probable cause. I guess that is the difference between Americans and Britons. Not that I'm sitting here calculating differences, but I believe in peoples right to privacy.

If I were there I think I would get confused between the actual trash and the actual receptacle and might throw the wrong thing in the wrong place...but I am a rude American.

It's suprising what we can get used to. Being investigated without cause has never made me feel safer.

Yea....I do think catching people for loitering and then releaseing them is a great idea and a great way to spend the public's money and your time.....I'm not sure why we should put up with people doing nothing in the wrong place here in America. We should adopt this all across the United States...just like Colorado where people were caught loitering in public parks.

[DanaC]

~"If there's a criminal we're interested in, not necessarily in a position to arrest him, but if you're trying to track this criminal, learn his lifestyle, his movements, his vehicle number will be put into the system, and any time he comes into the city, his movements will be tracked,"

This sounds to me like probable cause. Just not enough evidence to actually issue an arrest warrant. You can be breathalised, or have your bag searched, if the police feel they have reasonable cause for suspicion. That doesn't mean they have enough evidence to convict. If the police were only ever able to search/question/breathalise or investigate people when they already have enough evidence for an arrest then they would be unlikely to ever gain that evidence.

He's not said that anybody they don't like the look of will be tracked; he's suggesting that if they have reasonable grounds for suspicion they will continue to monitor and investigate that individual. I would have thought that constituted much of police work.

[Cicero]

Yes...you are right Dana. That statement is too ambiguous to tell. Now isn't it?

It's alright if you are all under a self-imposed investigation in Britain and you don't mind. Hey, if that's what you guys really want-do it. The people have spoken.

Oooh...I've got that Kafka feeling...I hate that feeling.

I will not accept this in the country I live in if I get the choice. People have a right to privacy. I am an adult that doesn't need to be told how to throw my trash away or how to wipe my own ass.

Tell me when they finally report the OmegaVision goggles and how it's ok to peer into your home and watch you scratch your ass on the way to your fridge for milk. (the scenarios could get worse from there) When will you say enough is enough? When is when? How far is too far?

I don't think you need to be filmed all the time Dana. As fun as that sounds..... Is it ok to be taken in for suspicion of loitering if it keeps the real loiterers off the streets?

[Aliantha]

Gee...take out the smilies from Ciceros' posts and there you have rkz.

I don't know how Dana and other Brits feel about what you've put in your last couple of posts Cicero, but from the outside looking in (and also being from a country with very similar laws) I'd say you've got no idea. That's the problem with some people from the US. You're so wrapped up in your own ideals about things that you can't see that there are other ways of doing things which might be just as good... or heaven forbid. Even better!

[Cicero]

I know Ali....

Some people have this version of heaven that happens to be my version of hell and vice versa. American or not.

But I would still like the answer from Dana....on when will enough be enough because I give a flip about her opinion.

[DanaC]

I don't think you need to be filmed all the time Dana. As fun as that sounds..... Is it ok to be taken in for suspicion of loitering if it keeps the real loiterers off the streets?

I don't think people get taken in here for loitering. Unless it's loitering with intent

[DanaC]

But I would still like the answer from Dana....on when will enough be enough because I give a flip about her opinion.

I dunno. When will it enough be enough in America? In another thread we see that your president and whitehouse can act outside of the law, on such things as phone tapping without a warrant. Yet Americans consistently point to our law enforcement and cameras and tell me that this is an invasion of our privacy.

If the people are requesting, nay demanding, more cctv, who are the police and politicians to deny them that? If the police have enough evidence to suspect a criminal, but not enough to issue an arrest warrant, should they just throw up their hands and say "oh well, let him go, don't bother watching him or attempting to gather evidence about his activities"?

Honestly Cicero, I think you guys have a strange view of freedom. There's a real double standard in what you allow in your own country and what you perceive as amiss in mine.