Friday, July 31, 2009

EXAMPLE OF NULAB LUNACY AND BIGOTRY


I was recently made aware, thanks to Dick Puddlecote, about a debate taking place on a NuLab councillor's blog about why, in his opinion, people are turning away from what he calls the Labour Party. I think most of us would agree that he was very perceptive in his views but he took the NuLab stance of sticking his fingers in his ears when it was pointed out that the smoking ban is yet another reason why many people (about 15 million of them) also hate NuLab.

I had pointed out that people have a cultural attachment to smoking which NuLab has failed to recognise and if it was just about health, then I don't hear NuLab calling for a blanket ban on other health risk pollutants such as trafiic. This was dismissed in the usual NuLab way by Cllr Tim and reasoned with the same kind of patronising arrogance we have come to expect from this new breed of politician.

By way of illustrating my point, I took the above photo as me and Hampy travelled through the Tyne Tunnel. It was a hot day, the windows of the car were open as we entered the Tunnel, and then Hampy began to cough and choke frantically, and he felt sick. The windows went up when I reminded him of the advice of my daughter not to open windows when going through because of the heavy traffic fumes which she says make her feel ill.

Those of us with some common sense know that if all of the people in those cars walked and smoked through the tunnel, the pollution would be nothing like it is when cars and lorries drive through.

The antis and their allies in Govt are now calling for a ban on smoking in cars. If they weren't such hypocrites and zealots, they would know that it is not going to make an ounce of difference to anyone's health. If they weren't prejudicial bigots who really cared about the health of the nation and the protection of children, they would call for a blanket ban on traffic (and then wouldn't they kill two birds with one stone). Of course they wouldn't do that, and actually I wouldn't want them to, but I would feel less persecuted if they at least tried to level the health playing fields.

CRAP PIC but I hope you take my point


Granted - this is probably one of the worst photos I've ever taken but it was impossible to see how bad it was until I uploaded it to my computer from my phone.

It is, however, an example of why I think the time has come - bearing in mind the smoke-free law - for no smoking signs to be stubbed out (grooaan, sorry, couldn't resist the pun).

Personally, as a polite smoker, I find this sign monumentally offensive. It was displayed inside the Coffee Tempo and Little Chef at the Ferrybridge South Service station on the A1. It has the usual striked through cigarette image with the words underneath : NOT IN HERE, THANKS!

I find it offensive because it takes the premise that smokers are ignorant people who will light up wherever they want and whatever the law when smokers know this is not the case and never has been.

It isn't the only sign that is derogatory towards smokers. There are others, and hopefully, I'll get better pictures of them than this one when I am next in town or shopping.

For example, in the Starbucks cafe in Lincoln, they have a ridiculous sign that says "No smoking because Smoking spoils the taste of our coffee." Urrgghhh.

Tesco's cafe in the north of Lincoln has a sign which says "For the comfort of ALL our customers, smoking is not permitted in this cafe." Uuurrgghhh.

I have actually taken up this ofensive sign with Tesco who just don't get it, and despite the law, they don't seem to understand that a sign that simply says No Smoking is suficient. I haven't shopped at Tesco since my battle began back in the late 90s. Any smoker worth their pride, would not shop there either in protest.

My point is, now that we have a law, and we all know we cannot smoke in planes, trains, cafes, restaurants, pubs, railway platforms, etc, etc, etc.... we don't need a sign to tell us that. The antis are always banging on about "The Children, The Children, We Must Save the Children!" and yet they are quite happy to see these signs everywhere which, in my opinion, create an interest in smoking among children. What is the first question they will ask when they see such a sign? My bet is : "What is smoking?"

If we didn't have the signs, then the nice middle class children that NuLab and their anti-smoking paymasters are trying to protect, probably wouldn't even know what smoking is.

We have a law, we don't need a sign. It's time they were gone.

SMOKERS WELCOME IN THE NORTH EAST


Thanks to Freedom2Choose's list of hotels which welcome smokers, I had a very nice stay at the hotel above in South Shields in the North East managed by Best Western Hotels.
The hotel has one whole floor of smoking rooms which you can book in advance. Me and my other half went because our middle daughter and second grandbaby live in North Shields. It's a lovely place I might never have discovered but for Jessica falling for a Geordie and deciding to settle there.
South Shields is a stone's throw from North Shields - if you can swim across the mouth of the Tyne - but by road it is several miles and involves trips through the Tyne Tunnel to get there at a cost of £1.20 each way.
Hampy couldn't help but comment "robbing bastards" loudly each time he threw the money into the change slot because although we just had the required amount of money in change on our first trip through, the Tunnel operators would not accept copper. We had a one pound coin, a ten pence piece, four 2ps and two 1ps but to get through, we had to give £2 because the Tunnel operators do not give change. Nice little earner there! Robbing bastards indeed!
South Shields itself was a lovely English seaside town with beautiful scenery, a nice beach, lots of stuff about fishing and a memorial in honour of those lost at sea. It also had a fun fair and an arcade which isn't really our cup of tea. As townies, me and Hampy also struggled with the continuos fish menu but we both got quite a taste for it by the end of the two days away. .. but we won't be rushing to our local Iceland any time soon to get the frozen variety we are more used to now we've had a taste of the proper stuff.
Hampy was a bit bemused at my constant paranoia about smoking in a hotel that allowed smoking. Despite the fact that I didn't have to, I still hung out of the window to smoke, I emptied the ashtray constantly into a self seal plastic bag before disposing of that in the bathroom bin with lid to prevent any stale smells getting out. I reasoned that as the hotel welcomed smokers, the least we could do was show them that we are not smelly, inconsiderate, or "dangerous". Treating the room with respect was very important to me. I also stayed at the same hotel during my last trip to the NE and that time I wrote a letter to management thanking them for providing this facility at a time when smokers are being marginalised and discriminated against. I would urge any other smokers to do the same if staying at a smoking hotel. I think they need to be encouraged before the Govt or the antis direct their health venom towards these places in a bid to guilt trip them into withdrawing what is a very welcome service.
Our next trip will be camping in Hampshire with a tent to see my big brother who lives on a camp site. I will also stop off at Cheltenham overnight on the way back to Lincoln to see my eldest daughter, Candy. First stop will be F2C's list of smoking hotels in the area and we hope we can find a place as pleasant as The Sea Hotel. Meanwhile, if anyone knows of any other excellent, non-discriminatory hotels or B&Bs that welcome smokers, please let me know.

Wednesday, July 29, 2009

Time well spent?

In an intensive campaign during June, Gwent police breath-tested no less than 20,772 motorists, of whom a mere 124, or 0.6%, gave positive results. One hopes the 20,648 innocent motorists who had the finger of suspicion pointed at them felt that their time had not been wasted and they had not in any sense been subject to police harassment.

Surely statistics like this underline the point that drink-driving is something that requires a targeted response rather than the mass intimidation of the law-abiding.

And it is interesting that the report says “most of the 20,722 people who took the breath test in the force area did so on a voluntary basis” – in other words, the police had no legal powers to insist on a test, but of course to refuse a “voluntary” test might well have adverse consequences.

Because of course the innocent have nothing to fear, do they?

Cheshire plain

I recently came across this blog of pub reviews in Cheshire, which sadly does not appear to have been updated for over a year. The review of the Three Greyhounds at Allostock is a classic of its kind. But it struck me how “samey” so many of the pubs in Cheshire are – all those rather bland, formulaic, knocked-through, food-led establishments. Given its rich architectural heritage, there are surprisingly few pubs of real character. Yes, there are the famous ones such as the Harrington Arms at Gawsworth and the White Lion at Barthomley, but after that you start to struggle a bit. I’m sure that many other counties, even those with a strong tourist appeal, have a far more distinctive and varied pub stock.

Perhaps a lot of this is to do with the fact that historically both Robinson’s and especially Greenalls – two companies known for an enthusiastic and often insensitive attitude to pub refurbishments – had large holdings of tied houses in the county. The proximity of large centres of population gave pubowners an incentive to do up their pubs to cater for an urban-based dining trade. Many years ago I used to go from time to time to the Boot at Willington, near Kelsall, then a tiny two-roomer in the middle of a row of sandstone cottages up the cul-de-sac of Boothsdale, with a quarry-tiled floor in the tap room and serving Greenalls’ beer on gravity. Sadly now knocked through into the rest of the row and just another open-plan dining pub. So it goes, I suppose.

Monday, July 27, 2009

BACK FRIDAY

As previously mentioned here, http://patnurseblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/holidays.html, I will be away from tommorrow until Thursday and so I'm not likely to be doing much blogging this week.

No doubt I will have much to say on my return and not least a full report on the hotel which permits its guests to smoke.

For now, it's late, I'm tired, and I'm off to bed. Night all.

Wind them up and watch them go

You certainly have to hand it to the owners of BrewDog for having a knack for simultaneously getting publicity for themselves and winding up the humourless killjoys of the anti-drink lobby. Their latest effort is Tokyo, an imperial stout weighing in at a mammoth 18.2% ABV, but at the same time priced at an eye-watering £9.99 for a 330ml bottle.

Rather predictably, Jack Law of Alcohol Focus Scotland (sounds like a fakecharity to me), frothed:

“This company is completely deluded if they think that an 18.2% abv beer will help solve Scotland's alcohol problems. It is utterly irresponsible to bring out a beer which is so strong at a time when Scotland is facing unprecedented levels of alcohol-related health and social harm. Just one bottle of this beer contains six units of alcohol - twice the recommended daily limit.”
Umm, Jack, how many alcohol units are in a 70cl bottle of whisky retailing for £9.99? Or, for that matter, in a 75cl bottle of 15% ABV Buckfast? And surely he should be welcoming a drink sold in the off-trade at £1.67 a unit, way above any proposed minimum alcohol price. It’s hard to see Tokyo taking the place of Tennent’s Super in the hands of Rab C. Nesbitt lookalikes stumbling around the streets of the Gorbals.

James Watt of BrewDog responded with a very good point:
“Mass-market, industrially-brewed lagers are so bland and tasteless that you are seduced into drinking a lot of them. We’ve been challenging people to drink less alcohol, and educating the palates of drinkers with progressive craft-brewed beers which have an amazing depth of flavour, body and character. The beers we make at BrewDog, including Tokyo, are providing a cure to binge beer-drinking.”
And Jack Law shouldn’t worry too much, as they’re only making a limited edition of 3,000 bottles.

CHECK THIS OUT


I am very proud of my sister Maureen who is a brilliant photographer. She has just sent me a link to her new website and so I would, obviously urge readers to check it out. Thanks. http://whiskat1.redbubble.com/
The photo above shows the sunset over the fields around my village last winter

SMOKING BAN TO HELP SMOKERS QUIT - YEAH RIGHT!


Lincoln MP and public health minister Gillian Merron recently announced that she only represents smokers who want to quit and not those who don't. She made it clear during a question about whether or not she would support the Save Our Pubs and Clubs amendthesmokingban.com campaign that the Govt wouldn't support it because they want to help smokers who want to quit.
Yeah right, Gillian! Perhaps you should get out in your constituency a bit more because if you sat in the Jolly Brewer pub in Lincoln, you might have had the conversation that I had with one of your pet smokers who wants to quit.
As I sat on an outside table bemoaning the anti-social ban, a drunk on the next table butted in and said he liked it.
"Why?" I asked him. "Isn't it like being a turkey and voting to be killed at Christmas?"
"No," he replied. "I want to stop smoking so I like the ban. The doctor told me I will die if I don't stop. I've recently come out of hospital after having pneumonia." He then a lit a cigarette and began to cough his way through it instead of going inside where he couldn't smoke thanks to his mate Merron.
In truth, Ms Merron, people like him will still smoke whether you ban it inside or outside. In truth, isn't this ban really about the fact that middle class NuLab hates smokers and the smell of smoke and that your party is trying to socially engineer people through discrimnination, coercion, and bullying to create a world in the image that you want without giving a damn about what the majority thinks... and please do not insult me by saying the majority wanted a ban when you must know that your party fiddled the stats and ONS survey to get the result you wanted!
Meanwhile, you hide this bigotry under a false laurel of care. You really do make me sick.

CARED FOR CHILDREN AT RISK IN STALINIST BRITAIN?

I thought I would share a couple of anecdotes I heard from two young mums this weekend. Both scared the hell out of me and made me glad that I am not a parent of a small child today in this paranoid world where the authorities want to believe child abuse is happening all the time so that for once they can stop it before another tragic case hits the headlines.

The first story concerns a mum of two - one under five and the other over five. The woman tells me that she had cause to go into a council accommodation shop where the toddler threw a massive tantrum and threw himself to the floor. The woman couldn't believe it when, later in the day, she had a visit from the SS and police who searched her house and inspected her children. It appears a council member of staff phoned social services to say the mother had dropped her child on its head on purpose. Needless to say the children were fine but the mother was left traumatised and it upset the children.

Now, you might say, so what is the problem? No harm done. Child protection ensured. Well, my point is that the authorities are so terrified of another Baby P case that they are targetting the majority of underclass parents and appear to approch them with a view that because they are from the same class as Baby P, they must be child abusers. Why, I ask, do the majority have to suffer this inhuman indignity because the authorities still cannot stop those minority cases of child abuse from happening? They didn't learn after Maria Coldwell in the 70s, they didn't learn from Victoria Climbie, and I doubt very much that they will learn after Baby P. I would say that picking on young parents who are easy to bully amounts to passing the buck and making the authorities look as if they are actually doing something useful when they are not!
The second case that I found so disturbing was that of another young mum who told of how her little boy was playing, fell, and banged his head on concrete as kids often do. It used to be called part of growing up when my kids were small. Now it terrifies good parents. In this case, the young mum wanted to take her son to A&E to be sure he was OK, but she was terrified that someone in authority, keen to stop another child abuse case, would see the injury differently. She reluctantly decided not to take the boy to hospital. Obviously, she kept a close eye on him and he was absolutely fine. But what on earth have we come to that we live in a country where young parents are terrified of having their children taken from them simply because of innocent cicumstances which could be misread by an inexperienced jobsworth.
I wonder if NuLab's pet middle class parents would be viewed with the same suspicion. I highly doubt it.

AND FINALLY IS NOT THE END

Thanks for the comments on the last And Finally post. It is encouraging to know that I am not the only one who feels this way about the state of the British political parties in this mad age that makes me feel like I was born, brought up and nurtured on another planet.

Both Karen and Mandy are right when they say that the danger in voting UKIP is that Labour will get in again because of the many other fringe parties. I would also like to see the liberatrian parties getting together with UKIP to make a huge difference if it is principals that have made them change their support.

However, that said, I'd obviously love it if UKIP did win the next election, and with the way that the party seems to continually increase its share of the vote it is not impossible, but even if it didn't have a chance and voting for UKIP ensured Labour won by default, it wouldn't matter to me. Lab/Lib dem/ Con - what is the difference exactly?

I do honestly believe that if Labour wins again, this country will be finished. There will be nothing left - no freedoms, no choice, no economy, no tolerance, no pride - but so be it. I cannot vote for that party anymore. I cannot vote for Cameron's Conservatives, or as Karen puts it, Blair Mk II. It will make no difference to me if Lab, Lib Dem or the Cons win. They might as well be one party such is the similarity in their ideologies.

The biggest clowns in all of this, of course is the ilLib Dems. They are in the prime posiiton to show the country after almost 30 years that they are a real alternative to the two party system but what do they do? They decide to try and get the same voters as NuLab and Cons and therefore turn away potential supporters who genuinely want change - but not the sort brought about so tragically by NuLab.

In my view, there is no point to the ilLib Dems anymore. They offered an alternative, they don't anymore. UKIP is that party now and I predict that it will, at the very least, become the third party of the UK and the only real alternative to the stalinist state we are increasingly heading towards.

And Finally is usually just my last thoughts of the day. I do aim to keep this blog updated regularly so any tips, stories and views, please feel free to post them up or send them to me by email.

TIGHTS THEFT PROTEST AT USE OF THIRD WORLD WORKERS

A male shoplifter claimed he stole tights from Primark in protest at the store’s use of third world labour, a court heard.
Lincoln magistrates were told that the man, who appeared in court dressed as a woman, was seen with a companion to be acting suspiciously in the hosiery department.
“He was seen on CCTV to select various tights and place them directly into his shoulder bag,” Helen Jones, prosecuting, said.
“The two men made their way out of the store making no attempt to pay for the items.
“This defendant was stopped outside where he produced six packs of tights.
“He was arrested and said he stole the tights in protest at Primark’s use of slave labour in the third world.”
The 36 year -old from Lincoln, admitted theft on July 13.
He told the court he regretted what he did.
Magistrates fined him £70 and ordered him to pay a victim surcharge of £15.

RECOVERING ADDICT STOLE BETWEEN PRESCRIPTIONS

A recovering heroin addict was desperate between medication and so she stole to get relief, a court heard.
Lincoln magistrates were told that the woman was seen in a store in Gainsborough where she put packs of boxer shorts in her shopping bag before leaving without paying.
Helen Jones, prosecuting, said the defendant was detained by staff, police were called and she was arrested.
The 30 year old from Gainsborough, admitted theft on April 26 and accepted the offence put her in breach of a conditional discharge imposed for 12 months on October 30 last year.
Lloyd Edwards, representing, said the woman had battled with heroin addiction since the age of 18. She had been put on an alternative drug which reacted badly and made her feel ill so she was told she would have methodone.
“She was desperate in the week without a prescription and so she stole to get some heroin but she was caught which avoided her relapse,” Mr Edwards said.
Magistrates fined her £60 and ordered her to pay a victim surcharge of £15. They took no action on the breach and allowed the conditional discharge to run.

TEMPER RULED MAN WHO REPORTED HIMSELF TO POLICE

Temper got the better of a Lincoln man who phoned police to tell them he was going to smash someone’s house up with a cricket bat, a court heard.
Lincoln magistrates were told that the defendant had been drinking and following a discussion between him and the police, he was arrested.
“He did have a small cricket bat down his trousers but he was not charged separately in relation to that,” Helen Jones, prosecuting, said.
“Three days later, police had occasion to go to an address to deal with an aggressive female. She was removed from the scene. She was upset and agitated.
“Other occupants shouted, swore and laughed at her after she had been removed by police but in the officer’s view they were making things more difficult and likely to upset the female further. They were causing officers additional harassment in carrying out their duties
“When an officer asked the group to calm down, this defendant swore at him.”
The 27 year old admitted using threatening or disorderly behaviour within the hearing or sight of someone likely to be caused alarm, harassment or distress on July 14 and July 19.
He said he took the cricket bat to the house because he had phoned police who wouldn’t do anything about his complaint. He said he believed the woman had tried to split him and his girlfriend up and that she had stolen his wallet which had lost him the chance of a full time job.
“I lost my temper but I am getting help with that. With regard to the second incident, I was just gobbing off. It was stupid, I’m sorry and I shouldn’t have done it.”
Magistrates fined him a total of £60 and ordered him to pay a £15 victim surcharge.

Sunday, July 26, 2009

The soul of England

There’s an impassioned piece by Simon Heffer in today’s Sunday Telegraph entitled The soul of England lives in the public house. While I agree with the general sentiment, I can’t help feeling that Simon Heffer is someone who romanticises pubs as part of Olde England but doesn’t actually spend very much time drinking in them.

More supermarket nonsense

42-year-old RAF squadron leader Mark Giles has been prevented from buying red wine at his local Sainsbury’s because he had his 17-year-old son with him. Obviously someone with a commendably low tolerance for such nonsense, he left his shopping where it was and walked out. He also pointed out later that it would be perfectly legal for him to take the wine home and give his son a glass of it. We have seen this kind of thing before, but what is even more appalling in this case is that no apology or mumbling about an “overzealous cashier” was forthcoming from Sainsbury’s. I doubt whether he’ll be shopping there again in a hurry.

Many parents would reasonably expect their children to help them put their supermarket shopping on the conveyor at the checkout, but it’s running a risk if they happen to handle a bottle of beer and then the whole transaction has to be abandoned.

It would be tempting if you knew a supermarket that applied such a ludicrous policy to take your child with you, buy a couple of hundred pounds’ worth of frozen stuff, and a single bottle of weak beer, and leave it all on the checkout if refused service.

Saturday, July 25, 2009

Keeping it quiet

It is likely that over the coming years a major battleground of the anti-alcohol campaign will be potential restrictions on alcohol advertising and promotion. However, there is no convincing evidence that alcohol advertising either increases consumption or encourages young people to start drinking, as this excellent article from Basham and Luik explains.

Based on the empirical evidence, it is clear that the public health establishment’s claims about the effects of alcohol advertising are incorrect. Indeed, the weight of the evidence substantially argues against its assertions about alcohol advertising initiating drinking and increasing consumption and alcohol-related harm. Consequently, there is no public policy justification for measures to restrict or completely ban alcohol advertising that is directed to legal consumers.
Drinking alcohol is so closely interweaved into Western European society that even a total ban would be unlikely to make much difference to consumption patterns. Indeed, as they suggest, by making it seem a forbidden fruit and discouraging brand identification, bans on advertising and promotion could even serve to increase consumption.

Friday, July 24, 2009

Never too fat to preach


President Obama has come in for a lot of criticism for appointing a visibly overweight woman, Dr Regina Benjamin, to the post of US Surgeon General. You know, the official whose name appears on health warnings on cigarette packs. Marcia Angell, a lecturer at Harvard University Medical School, told ABC News: “At a time when a lot of public health concern is about the national epidemic of obesity, having a surgeon general who is noticeably overweight raises questions in people's minds.” Another critic was Dr Sarah Reed, who made a point of saying she kept her own BMI at 19, which is technically underweight. I bet she’s a barrel of laughs at a dinner party.

You have to wonder whether Dr Benjamin would have been appointed had she been a white male rather than an African-American woman. But no doubt her weight won’t stop her preaching to her fellow countrymen and women on how they should live their lives. And has Obama managed to completely stop smoking yet?

And of course, being clinically obese doesn’t stop our own Chief Medical Officer, Sir Liam Donaldson, lecturing us on every subject under the sun, although he does seem to lay off it a bit when it comes to snouts in the trough.

AND FINALLY .....

Watching Question Time the other night, I had to agree with George Galloway who said social mobility and the gap between rich and poor is wider now than it was in Dickensian times.
I wonder if that has anything to do with Tony Blair having a private education (although we call it public school education and I never really understood why) and his utter failure to understand what being poor in the UK means.

As I'm talking politics, I might as well mention that I am seriously upset at the bye-election result in Norwich, although pleased that Labour got such a drubbing. I bet that wiped the smug look off their faces! This NuLabour lot seem to have managed to do what other parties have failed to do - they upset just about everybody all of the time when most governing parties in the past have at least managed to please some of the people some of the time.

I just hope these new breed of Con politicians are not brain-washed idiots incapable of independent thinking but after my spat with the young Mansfield PCC, see earlier post, I am not entirely convinced. Just remember, if you vote these wishy washy publically school educated Con cronies into power at the next election, you will have them for at least 10 years. The country is in a terrible state already - is it really worth finishing it off altogether?

I know that when the general election does come around, I will be voting with my conscience and showing my (formerly) beloved Labour party how much I despise them for stabbing me and my kind in the back with the blanket smoking ban and the tax-funded, abusive, hate health campaigns targeted at smokers.

Anyone with any common sense, in my opinion, and who genuinely cares for this country, should vote UKIP next year. I know I will because I am sick of feeling excluded and I don't think the Cons will do anything to address it.

HOLIDAYS!


Yaayyy - my holidays are about to begin and it is that time of year again when I will be looking to stay where I can smoke, now that I haven't got my lovely home from home anymore.
I will be going to Newcastle next week for a couple of days to see my middle daughter and grand daughter number two and I can't wait. I've booked me and my other half into the Best Western's The Sea Hotel in South Shields which does indeed welcome smokers and makes then feel like proper human beings. I stayed there a couple of months ago with my youngest daughter and grand daughter number one and we all had the best time.
We were all in the same room which was well vetilated and aired but we chose to hang out of the windows to smoke because the view was so nice. I will be posting photos up here when I get back for other smokers who may find themselves in the North East and unsure of where to stay.
After we get back, we will have a few days of peace, as my youngest son will be staying up there for a bit, and then we will all head south to Lee on Solent . If anyone knows of any hotels or B&Bs down there please do let me know. We have booked to pitch up a tent on the site where my big brother Rob lives - a new experience for me - so I'm praying that it doesn't rain. If it does, we will be looking for somewhere a bit more comfortable to move to for the rest of the week.
Meanwhile, I am still mourning the loss of my classic 1978 caravan (pictured) which was given to us as a gift from a couple who almost got divorced because of it. He hated it, she loved it, and they squabbled every time they took it away.
Needless to say, me and Hampy do have different views about it. I used to call it my holiday villa and he called it a F...... piece of junk. As much as I miss it, I also know that when we are heading down the M25, I'll be glad it's not hooked up at the back of the car, and he will be absolutely ecstatic.

ANGRY MAN SMASHED SHOP WINDOWS

An angry young man smashed two shop windows because he was told his girlfriend had cheated on him, a court heard.
Lincoln magistrates were told the 21 year old kicked and punched windows out at a butcher’s premises and an empty shop on Queen Street, Market Rasen.
Jim Clare, prosecuting, said police were sent to the scene and when they dealt with the defendant, he had to be put to the floor and handcuffed because of his aggressive behaviour.
“The owner of the butcher shop says he was angry and frustrated at the damage caused because this had been the fifth time his shop has been attacked,” Mr Clare said.
“The owner of the empty shop estimated it could cost up to £700 to replace the large plate glass window.”
The court was told that while on bail for this matter, the defendant got into trouble with police again after rowing with his girlfriend at a party.
“Police were monitoring the party attended by a large group of teenagers,” Mr Clare said.
“There were no problems initially. Later police received reports of a fight. They could hear a loud argument and saw the man and a female who were shouting at each other.
“The girlfriend was trying to pull away. The defendant was quite drunk and emotional.”
The man, from Market Rasen, admitted causing criminal damage to the two shop windows on June 20 and being drunk and disorderly on June 26.
Gordon Holt, representing, said the defendant had been told by a friend that his girlfriend had been seeing someone else.
“He went to his friend‘s house where he drank himself senseless,” Mr Holt said.
“He found himself in town in the early hours distraught, upset, angry and frustrated. He stupidly took it out on the windows.”
Magistrates adjourned the case until July 30 for reports to be prepared

ABUSIVE BUILDER BURNED WITH CS SPRAY

A builder was sprayed in the face with CS spray after antagonising police, a court heard.
Lincoln magistrates were told the man was seen to be staggering along Ashcroft Road in Gainsborough by police in a parked van at the junction of the town’s Trent Street.
Jim Clare, prosecuting, said the defendant made an offensive comment as he walked past the van and swore at police who warned him about his language.
“He apologised for this but as he walked on he swore again as soon as his back was turned. He was very unsteady on his feet” Mr Clare said.
“When police spoke to him again he became aggressive and was sprayed with CS spray. He was then handcuffed behind his back. On the journey to the police station he did again apologise for his behaviour.”
The 26 year old, from Gainsborough, admitted using threatening and abusive behaviour on July 11. He also accepted that the offence put him in breach of a 12 month conditional discharge imposed at North Ollerton Magistrates for criminal damage.
Thd defendant, who represented himself, said the police were more aggressive than the bench had been told and the use of CS spray had burned his face and neck.
He was fined £90, ordered to pay £60 costs and a victim surcharge of £15. The conditional discharge was allowed to run.

Thursday, July 23, 2009

COMMON SENSE RULES

It's nice to see via the Taking Liberties Blog http://takingliberties.squarespace.com/ that common sense rules in Sark... see, it can be done and both sides of the issue can be accomodated. Easy!

Wednesday, July 22, 2009

A super opportunity?

Interesting news that InBev are considering selling off the Tennent’s beer brands and the associated Wellpark Brewery in Glasgow. They want to concentrate on international brands and divest those that only have a regional appeal. Now, Tennent’s is hardly the first name on the beer lover’s lips, but Tennent’s Lager, first brewed as early as 1885, still accounts for over half the Scottish lager market, and the notorious Tennent’s Super remains the tramp’s preferred route to oblivion. But it could be a unique opportunity for an ambitious entrepreneur to grab a substantial share of the British beer market. On the other hand, with the Scottish Government doing their utmost to put brewers and distillers out of business with their anti-drink crusade, it could be a poisoned chalice.

A farewell to pubs

Depressing, although scarcely surprising, news today from the British Beer & Pub Association that the rate of pub closures has now reached 52 a week, or 2,700 a year. And that’s a net figure, after taking account of all the new trendy box bars that have opened. The real figure of losses of proper pubs is more like 70 a week. The number of pubs in Britain – 70,000 not so many years ago – is now down below the 54,000 mark. This is no more than I have hinted at in previous posts such as here and here. It’s wishful thinking, though, to expect the current government to do anything about it, as they have made it abundantly clear that they couldn’t care less about pubs and seem to view them almost as a kind of health hazard.

This blog posting by the ever-eloquent Raedwald is a poignant reminder of what we are rapidly losing forever. A whole way of life is disappearing, and pubgoing is becoming a niche activity that is irrelevant to vast swathes of the community.

But some people still don’t seem to get it, and complacently go on about how it’s just the crappy keg pubs that are closing. Broadly speaking, it is, but they aren’t closing because they are crappy keg pubs, they are closing because the overall demand for pubs has dramatically declined. Obviously, in such a situation, it is the less appealing pubs that will go to the wall first, but in the past the market was healthy enough for these pubs to make a decent living. All too often, people who really should know better fail to draw a distinction between the factors dictating the overall size of the market, and the factors determining how trade is distributed within a shrinking market.

Tuesday, July 21, 2009

NOTHING TO WORRY ABOUT...?



It seems that people living in the principality are waging a war against CCTV and showing their dislike over the spy in the sky.

It reminds me of when cameras first began to controversially appear almost 20 years ago. They used to say - and still do - that if you have done nothing wrong, then you have nothing to fear.

But, obviously, over time, they have moved the goal posts somewhat. 20 years ago, for example, smoking was not a crime that could get the smoker an £80 penalty for dropping a cig end.

Would we really have ignored the future impact of CCTV on "innocent" people if we had known it would lead to such oppression of law-abiding citizens?

Personally, I think that CCTV is largely a waste of time and money. We employ police to do what they used to do before cameras did the work for them - find criminals and stop crime from happening. CCTV today doesn't stop serious crime but simply shows it taking place... and it works more as a tax collector for HM revenue than a useful tool in the war on crime - especially when it comes to motorists.


Never enough

Forty-five major drinks companies are planning to spend £100 million on a major publicity drive called The Campaign for Smarter Drinking in an attempt to encourage responsible drinking amongst the young. Fairly obviously, this is a response to the tide of (generally exaggerated or groundless) anti-drink sentiment we have seen over the past couple of years.

I have my doubts, though, as to what effect it will have. If anything, campaigns of this nature tend to moderate the behaviour of those who are already acting responsibly while doing little to affect those who are overdoing it.

Attitudes to drinking are driven more by social change than official campaigns. Over the years, pubs and bars have gone in and out of fashion with the young, and it’s very likely that in ten years time we’ll be wondering what all the fuss was about. I can see the malaise that is now affecting the mainstream pub trade eventually spreading to the weekend binge-drinking scene.

Predictably, though, anti-drink fakecharity Alcohol Concern have condemned the plan as not going far enough. Chief executive Don Shenker said: “This new initiative appears to be yet another example of the drinks industry trying desperately to avoid mandatory legislation to pass on health information to consumers.”

In reality, of course, these people, however reasonable they may sound, can never be appeased. They will never state an acceptable final position, and are really primarily concerned with the direction of travel. However much you give them, they will always want more. So long as the tide is flowing in an anti-drink direction, Shenker and his bansturbatory chums will be happy.

SMOKING CAN BE GOOD FOR YOU ...

I like the article here http://frank-davis.livejournal.com/7703.html from Frank Davis. It's a common sense, reasonable argument, with sound advice - isn't that what we want in any healthy debate.

The only cancerous thing about the smoking issue is the vitriol in which smokers are being described by those who are trying to make them feel abnormal because of their own fears, prejudices, and outright hatred. .. 'nuff said !

Voting with your feet

One argument often advanced in favour of the smoking ban was that the licensed trade dragged its feet in providing non-smoking areas. Now, I tend to believe that this is disingenuous, as nothing the licensed trade could have done short of imposing a 100% “voluntary” ban would in practice have dissuaded the antismoking lobby from going for the jugular. But I don’t think it’s true anyway – in fact, even pre-ban, the provision of non-smoking areas was far greater than the trade is usually given credit for. I’m not saying it covered a majority of pubs, but in most areas of the country there were a substantial number of places where you could go, if you so wished, and have a drink in a smoke-free environment.

Clearly it isn’t possible to get into a time machine to prove this point, but, for a start, every single Wetherspoon’s pub had a non-smoking area, so there was one in the centre of pretty much every substantial town. Some had even prematurely gone wholly non-smoking, although they stopped that policy as soon as they realised that trade in those pubs had fallen off a cliff. All of M&B’s Vintage Inns chain, including the March Hare in Cheadle Hulme, only allowed smoking in a small area near the bar. The Phoenix in Hazel Grove had gone wholly non-smoking (although it had no cask beer either). The Davenport Arms in Woodford had, following a consultation with customers, confined smoking to the tap room, while the Griffin in Heaton Mersey, an archetypal down-to-earth boozer and certainly no upmarket dining pub, had a non-smoking room of long standing. I could go on, but you get the point.

In the early days of CAMRA, there were large areas of the country where real ale was very hard to find and people had to, and did, travel a long way to drink it. If they were prepared to do that, then it was a lot easier, if you were sufficiently bothered, to find somewhere in the mid-2000s where you could drink in a non-smoking environment. The thing was, though, very few people were that bothered.

This was not the case with eating out, as there were enough people who actively preferred to eat in a non-smoking environment that, by 2005, the vast majority of food-oriented pubs were at least 50% non-smoking. There was a clear economic demand here, and without any legislation the market had evolved to cater for it. But when it came to just going out for a drink, the vast majority of people were either smokers, part of mixed groups of smokers and non-smokers, or not really too concerned about a smoky environment. Not that a lot of pubs were particularly smoky anyway. The antismokers, if they really did want to vote with their feet, could still enjoy a varied drinking experience by sticking to the pubs with non-smoking areas, which may have been predominantly food-oriented but, as I suggested before, included a fair smattering of traditional pubs as well. Perhaps if they had been able to do more to demonstrate a demand for non-smoking areas for drinkers, we might have some genuine choice now.

But instead we ended up getting a “solution” imposed by non-pubgoers on the pub trade for which there was no genuine demand within the trade, as the lack of non-smoking provision purely for drinkers showed. And the legacy in terms of the swathes of closed and deserted pubs is only too obvious. If you don’t like a particular state of affairs, and know that the market isn’t going to deliver your preferred solution as there is insufficient demand for it, it is all too easy to go crying to Nanny to remove choice and get it banned.

Monday, July 20, 2009

More from the Conservative prick for Mansfield

More abuse from the Conservative PCC for Mansfield - him of narrow mind and lying justification - has just come in and so I thought I would share it so that anyone thinking of voting Conservative in the next election, especially those from his potential constituency, can see the error of their ways.

The young Master McFarland said this below to the F2C south east chairman who took him to task for his views on this particular minority who the little Con thinks don't deserve anything, zilch, zero, nowt.

McFarland said : "The lady in question was trying to argue that the minority of people who smoke should have there way and ignore the majority whom wanted the smoking ban. She then went on to say smoking was healthy and was in no way addictive, strange opinions for a University lecturer in my opinion. I assume you do not follow this opinions.I look forward to your replyFraser McFarlandChairmanLincoln and Lincolnshire Conservative FutureDate: Sun, 19 Jul 2009 21:22:02 +"

First of all, anyone who knows me, knows that I am not one who thinks "smokers should have their way" - at least not everywhere but I do think they are entitled to smoke SOMEWHERE inside and I stand by that view because I am not a bigot, narrow minded, health zealot, but someone who has researched past the DoH and ASH et al brainwashing lies to discover that there is more to this than meets the eye. That Master McFarland hasn't got the intellect to see further than his nose is extremely worrying given that he could become an MP.

Secondly, I argued that the majority didn't want a blanket smoking ban. He said they voted for Labour when Labour put in their manifesto that they would ban smoking so the majority did want a ban. Of course those of us who are a bit more grown up and not still in nappies when Labour was voted in last time, know they lied on their manifesto when they said smoking would NOT be banned during the life of this parliament. I also said they lied when they turned around the ONS figures to suit their own ends.

I said, and I strongly believe and make no apologies for it, that if you are a lifelong smoker do not stop or your health will be affected - if you do not smoke do not start because your health will be affected. That is what I said about health.

Regarding addiction, I said it wasn't a physical addiction like heroin but it was a phsycological habit. Heroin is physical. The body needs it. The body does not need nictotine. I then used this practical example that if you lock a heroin addict and a smoker in a room together, denied them both their drug of choice for two days, and then let them out and see who need serious medical attention and who is a bit peed off.

As a University lecturer, I feel it is my duty to research, and analyse further than the press reports on this issue, and self interest groups' press releases on how smoking kills zillions every year.

I also stand by my assertion that Master McFarland is a prick and the Conservatives are desperate if this is the quality of the PCCs they are putting forward.

Yet another reason, in my opinion, to vote UKIP. It is the only party that will move away from the nanny and bully state. You cannot trust NuLabour, CONservatives and the ilLiberal Dems.

CANNABIS USER ESCAPES SUPPLY CHARGE

A cannabis user escaped a drug supply charge after handing a bush grinder to his girlfriend as his car was searched by police, a court heard.
Lincoln magistrates were told the 20 year old’s car was stopped and he was found in possession of £10 worth of the class B drug.
Mark Holmes, prosecuting, said he could have got his girlfriend into a lot of trouble by handing her the grinder and himself a charge of supply but because of his lack of previous convictions, and full co-operation with the police, the charge would not be pursued this time.
“If he were to do this in future, then it would be a serious crown court matter,” Mr Holmes said.
The 20 year-old from Newark, admitted possession of cannabis on July 3.
Justin Atkinson, representing, said the defendant volunteered that he had the drug when he was stopped.
“This is his first appearance in court and he has been very worried about it,” Mr Atkinson said.
The young man told the court he had learned his lesson.
Magistrates fined him £65, ordered him to pay costs of £30 and a victim surcharge of £15.

AD HOC RENT COLLECTOR RUNS OFF WITH CASH

A man who collected rent on a casual basis for his former landlord disappeared with £710 and was not caught until three years later, a court heard.
Lincoln magistrates were told that the defendant had committed a serious breach of trust even though he was not formally employed by his former landlord but worked for him on an ad hoc basis.
Mark Holmes, prosecuting, said the defendant had not been arrested at the time of the offence three years ago because he had moved from pillar to post, had not offended and so had not come to the attention of police.
“He was not trying to evade the police, he was just nomadic,” Mr Holmes said.
The 38 year old from Lincoln admitted theft on April 7, 2006.
Justin Atkinson, representing, said the defendant accepted he had been dishonest but claimed he had not taken as much as had been reported by the landlord.
Magistrates imposed a 12 month supervision order and 60 hours of community work. The man also has to pay £300 compensation to his landlord.

YOUNG DRINK DRIVER’S SECOND BAN

A young drink driver was stopped by police because he was driving 10 miles above the speed limit, a court heard.
Lincoln magistrates were told the 21 year-old was stopped on Legsby Road, Market Rasen, by an officer who clocked him doing 30mph in a 40mph zone.
Mark Holmes, prosecuting, said when tested, the defendant was found to have 61mg of alcohol in 100ml of breath. The legal limit is 35mg.
The man from Willoughton , near Gainsborough, admitted drink driving on July 5.
John Bradley, representing, urged magistrates to impose the lowest level of disqualification on the defendant who now has two drink driving convictions in a 10 year period.
“He did not cause any accident, injury or damage to anyone or anything,” Mr Bradley said.
Magistrates banned the man from driving for three years with a reduction if he completes a rehabilitation course. He also has to pay a fine of £200, costs of £60 and a victim surcharge of £15.

FORMER HEROIN ADDICT STOLE BEER

A former heroin addict turned to alcohol to beat her addiction but was caught shoplifting when she took two cans of lager to feed her new problem, a court heard.
Lincoln magistrates were told police recognised the 31 year old on CCTV footage taken at the store on Brayford because she has some 87 previous convictions for shop theft.
She was passed two cans of lager by a male companion which she then took outside without making payment.
The defendant from Lincoln admitted theft of lager worth £3.60 on May 21.
Sunil Khanna, representing, said the woman had beaten a drug problem by using alcohol and she was now working with the Probation Service to conquer that addiction.
Magistrates took account of her good progress and conditionally discharged her for six months and ordered her to pay £30 costs and £3.60 compensation

SHOPLIFTER TOOK MEAT FROM STORE

A self employed man stole meat from a town store, a court heard.
Lincoln magistrates were told that the defendant went into Asda in North Hykeham and put products in a trolley worth £37.37 before walking out without paying.
Mark Holmes, prosecuting, said he was stopped, arrested, and admitted what he had done to police.
The 45 year-old, from Lincoln, pleaded guilty to theft on July 5. He had nothing to say to the court.
Magistrates fined him £110, ordered him to pay £60 costs and a victim surcharge of £15.

Sunday, July 19, 2009

Game, boy?

In the local this lunchtime, and there was a kid of about five years old busy playing on a hand-held games machine, with all the associated beeping and warbling. Since when was this remotely acceptable in a pub? The old-school landlord would instantly have said "stop that now or you're out!"

Little wonder adult customers prefer the quiet and order of their own homes.

FUMING

I'm still fuming following a spat with the recently announced young Conservative PCC for Mansfield Fraser McFarland. I commented on his Facebook post at this news and simply said Save Our Pubs and Clubs amendthesmokingban.com.
He replied and pointed me to the Conservatives own campaign to save the pubs which didn't, of course, mention the smoking ban.
Needless to say, it sparked a debate which ended when McFarland told me that smokers didn't matter because they are in the minority. Even more insulting, he told me to look at the root cause of my addiction and think about the impact on my family. Patronising little dick!
Those of us without the health propaganda blinkers on, and who have researched the issue and not just swallowed what we've been told, will understand my frustration at the above comment - especially as a smoker of 42 years. McFarland is just 19. I've smoked for more than twice the amount of time he's lived. Is this really the best - blinkered, naieve, politically correct and dismissive - the Conservatives can offer us to vote for in the next election?

This link http://thelinc.co.uk/2009/04/facebook-libel-comments/ shows McFarland is used to getting into spats without thinking - and he dared to call me naieve - Hrmph!

THE PLOT THICKENS ...


Me and my other half came up with the above cunning plan to try and get rid of the thing that lives under our lawn. We blocked up the hole in the hope that it would move somewhere else. Ha! we thought. Gotcha!!

Then this appeared next to the blocked hole.... Grrrrr .....

.... So we responded with this :


... but I have to say before both holes were covered, my other half decided to put a firework down there. I'm afraid there is no photo of the rocket stuffed in the hole and smouldering because I didn't dare watch what might happen ... I'm told there was abang, a lot of smoke, and that was that.
I don't know if the blockage or the firework worked but there is no new hole today.

QUITE ...

http://tobaccoland.blogspot.com/2009/07/please-raise-tobacco-taxes.html

I came across this blog today and agreed with this sentiment - "I would rather see more money going to honest tobacco smugglers as opposed to parasites in government. Illegal tobacco dealers don't bother me. They don't steal from productive people to fund their various schemes."

Was he talking about Ash in America, I wonder ....?

Saturday, July 18, 2009

Jack the flapjack

You might have imagined that a flapjack was a fairly innocent item of oat-based confectionery, but apparently it is such a toxic substance that Dame Deirdre Hutton, retiring chairperson of the Food Standards Agency, believes it should be banned. It seems that it is so energy-dense in relation to its size that it is a positive invitation to obesity. She said, “I don’t think that supermarkets should be selling this very energy-driven food. We should be making low-calorie food the norm and anything that is high in fat should be niche.” Presumably she believes we should be more like cattle who have to spend all day chomping away because of the low level of nutrition contained in grass.

She goes on to say “stores should sell 90 per cent healthy food and 10 per cent unhealthy.” Setting aside how that is defined in the first place, surely supermarkets should be selling what their customers want to buy rather than what some Righteous health fascist thinks they should be eating. She probably thinks it would be a good thing too if pubs sold nine soft drinks for every alcoholic one, and is no doubt one of those who harks back to the days of rationing as a laudable public health initiative.

Friday, July 17, 2009

CAPTION COMPETITION - Go on - Take the piss, it's fine :))


Me and my other half recently attended the wedding of a friend's daughter and someone took this pic as I was talking to one of the guests - a very nice woman who was, actually, explaining that she had recently stayed at a hotel, hung out of the window to smoke, and then got slapped with an extra "cleaning" charge of £60 because she had been caught on CCTV.
She argued that she was outside - because she was leaning right out of the window - but they argued that her feet were inside and so therefore she was liable to pay the charge!
Anyway... I do digress somewhat. No prizes in this comp - although I could probably stump up a pic of a tea bag to the winner - so go on, have some fun.
My own idea is : "What was that slap for? I didn't think my hat looked that bad!"
I'm fairly sure that there is someone out there who could do a lot better ...

WOMAN STOPPED FOR DRINK DRIVING SPED FROM POLICE

A woman drink driver sped off when a police officer said he was going to give her a breath test, a court heard.
Lincoln magistrates were told the woman's Rover came to the attention of police in Market Square, Caistor, because it was damaged and the driver’s side wing mirror was out of use.
Jim Clare, prosecuting, said the officer followed with blue lights and sirens on and stopped the car on Plough Hill.
“The officer spoke to the defendant and noticed she smelled of intoxicants although she denied she had been drinking,” Mr Clare said.
“The officer turned to get the device from the police vehicle. She started up the car despite the officer shouting at her to stop.
“He put his hand in the window and tried to grab the ignition key but she continued to accelerate. The officer pulled his arm out, returned to his car and followed until she pulled up to a house in the town.
“She said she had been drinking white wine at 5am that morning. She was tested at 12.52pm and found to have 96mg of alcohol in 100ml of breath. The legal limit is 35mg.
The 43 year old from Caistor, admitted drink driving on July 1.
Tony Cunningham, representing, said there were mitigating factors but he anticipated magistrates would want reports before sentencing.
The case was adjourned until August 12 for reports to be prepared before sentencing.

MAN CONFESSED BURGLARLY TO GIRLFRIEND’S MUM.

A man with a gambling addiction took items from his girlfriend’s sister’s house and then confessed to the girls’ mum when she confronted him, a court heard.
Lincoln magistrates were told that the defendant had let himself into the house with his girlfriend’s key and he then unscrewed a lock on the sister’s bedroom door to get at the items before replacing it.
Jim Clare, prosecuting, said he initially stole a Nintendo console and sold it to a Lincoln store on a buy back scheme and then returned it. He stole and sold it a second time and had intended buying it back but failed to so.
“When the mother got a call from the victim to say she suspected the defendant of stealing from her house, the mother confronted him and asked him if he was in trouble,” Mr Clare said.
“He said no but she asked him to be honest. He put his head in his hands and said yes.
“He does have a gambling problem but he is getting counselling for this.”
The 30 year-old from Lincoln, admitted burglary between October 23, 2008 and January 28, 2009 and the theft of a PS2 console, a PSP, and Nintendo console and Wii worth a total of £809.
Tony Cunningham, representing, said he anticipated the bench would probably want reports before sentencing and magistrates agreed.
They adjourned the case until July 30 and told the man he faces jail.

MAN CAUGHT WITH DRUGS HE FOUND

A man caught with a class B drug in his possession claimed he found it after overhearing two homeless men say they had lost it in the railway station car park, a court heard.
Lincoln magistrates were told that CCTV operators informed police that the defendant was in the car park and police wanted to talk to him about other matters.
Jim Clare, prosecuting, said he was searched and officers found a white putty substance which was later analysed and found to be amphetamine with an estimated street value of £60.
The 30 year-old from Lincoln admitted possession of a class B drug on June 25.
Justin Atkinson, representing, said the defendant was in the Cornhill when he overheard the men talking about the drugs they lost so he thought he would go and have a look.
“He had just found it when police arrived and he says the CCTV will show this to be true,” Mr Atkinson said.
Magistrates fined Frow £75 and ordered the drug to be forfeited and destroyed.

Thursday, July 16, 2009

WHAT'S THIS?



As a townie, who now lives in the counryside, I have to say that I am somewhat bemused as to what has caused this hole that first appeared in my garden yesterday.

Me and my other half looked at it, then at each other, shrugged our shoulders, filled it in, and thought no more about it. Today, it has reappeared. We reckon it could be a rat but on closer insection, it doesn't appear to go anywhere so it isn't a tunnel.

We've now put a huge stone on top of it. If that moves, and the damn hole comes back, then I'll be seriously worried that we've got a monster living underground - yikes!






MAN CLAIMED TO BE ARMY HERO TO GET JOB

A man who was desperate for work falsely claimed he was an army hero, a court heard.
Lincoln Magistrates were told that the defendant told the lie when he was interviewed for a position as account manager with a timber firm in Keelby, Lincolnshire.
Jim Clare, prosecuting, said he told his employer that he had served in the army - the Royal Green Jackets - from 1985 - 1997 but they did not know he had lied until they looked into his background following his dismissal from the job.
“He produced medals at the interview to back up his claim,” Mr Clare said.
Mr Clare said the offence came to light after the employer called in police following inaccuracies with a £170 company cheque which the defendant said was for his employer's vehicle excise licence when he used it to pay for his own vehicle.
“It was only after his dismissal, due his employers being unhappy with his work, that the offences came to light,” Mr Clare said.
The man was arrested four years after the offence. He said he did not know the police were looking for him or he would have got in touch with them.
The 40 year-old from Birmingham, admitted obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception and theft between June 13, 2005 and May 30, 2006.
The man, who represented himself, said he was extremely remorseful for what he had done and he regretted his “absolute foolishness and stupidity” at a time when he was desperate for work.
“What I did was wrong. I am more sorry than I can express,” he said.
Magistrates said they had seriously considered sending him to jail but because of his early guilty plea, obvious remorse and lack of previous convictions, they would impose 300 hours of community service and a community order of 12 months. He also has to pay costs of £60 and compensation of £170.

DRUNK MADE EMERGENCY CALL TO GET RID OF RESIDENT

A man who had too much to drink rang police and told them his flat was under attack from masked men with daggers because he did not like a fellow resident, a court heard.
Lincoln magistrates were told that Lincoln police received an emergency call saying the men were smashing up the defendant's flat and one of the men was called Gary.
Jim Clare, prosecuting, said when police arrived, they found a group of men sitting outside in the sunshine drinking but there were no signs of a disturbance or a break in.
“The building had been split into 10 bedsits. On checking with control, the officers were told the mobile number that had made the call,” Mr Clare said.
“The defendant denied he had a phone but when his landlady told officers that he did own one, he produced it from his pocket.
“When asked why he had made the call, he said it was because he did not like another resident called Gary.
“He told the police he had been stupid and daft.”
The 22 year old from Lincoln admitted making a hoax call likely to cause annoyance, inconvenience or anxiety on June 26.
Gordon Holt, representing, said the man drank more than he should have done and more than was sensible.
“What starts as a great idea when drunk turns out to be dreadful when sober,” Mr Holt said.
Magistrates fined the defendant £75 and ordered him to pay a £15 surcharge

YELLOW KNICKER SHOP THIEF RAN

A young male shoplifter was spotted putting yellow knickers in his pocket before leaving a Lincoln store, a court heard.
City magistrates were told that a security officer at Primark saw the man with a female. They both huddled together and the defendant selected the item before pocketing it.
Jim Clare, prosecuting, said he began to run when the officer tried to stop him but he was soon restrained.
The 20 year-old from Lincoln admitted theft on June 27.
Roisin McCaffrey, representing, said he stole the pants for his girlfriend.
Magistrates fined him £50 and ordered him to pay a surcharge of £15.

POLICE RAN AFTER MAN ON BIKE WHO SWORE

Police called to a domestic dispute chased after the alledged aggressor because he swore at them, a court heard.
Lincoln magistrates were told the officers had been informed that the man involved in the domestic incident had ridden away on a blue mountain bike.
Jim Clare, prosecuting, said police saw the bike and tried to speak to the defendant.
“They wound down the police vehicle window and told him to stop but he swore at them and rode on,” Mr Clare said.
“An officer then chased him on foot. The defendant looked back and shouted more abuse.”
The man was then arrested and cautioned and responded with more abuse.
The 22 year old, from Lincoln, admitted using threatening words likely to cause distress on June 29.
He apologised for his behaviour.
“I had a stupid argument with my family. I was upset and not thinking straight,” he said.
Magistrates said his behaviour was unacceptable towards the police who “work on behalf of the citizens of this city and this country”.
They fined him £50 and ordered him to pay a surcharge of £15

ERRACTIC INDICATORS GAVE AWAY DRINK DRIVER

A drink driver came to the attention of police because of the way his indicators went off randomly, a court heard.
Lincoln magistrates were told officers were on North Kelsey Road when they spotted the defendant’s car coming the other way.
Jim Clare, prosecuting, said the right hand indicator came on despite the car travelling straight ahead.
“The left hand indicator came on and the rear fog lamp was lit. The vehicle was stopped, the driver identified himself, and a road side breath test showed he had 60mg of alcohol in his breath. The legal limit is 35mg.
The 24 year old from Market Rasen, pleaded guilty to drink driving on June 27.
Gordon Holt, representing, said the defendant had been to a pub about three or four miles from his home and although he had driven there, he was promised a lift home.
“A friend who was due to give him a lift was not there, he tried to get a taxi without success, so he took the risk to drive the short journey,” Mr Holt said.
Magistrates banned the man from driving for 12 months, with a three month reduction if he completes a rehabilitation course. He was also fined £150 and ordered to pay £30 costs and a £15 surcharge.

WOMAN SWORE AT POLICE WHO “WOULDN’T LISTEN”

An angry woman was abusive to police because she claims they were not listening to her complaint, a court heard.
Lincoln magistrates were told officers saw the 39 year old acting aggressively on a residential street.
Jim Clare, prosecuting, said she was shouting and swearing and told to calm down.
“She claimed she had been hit but she would offer no details of any offender despite being repeatedly asked,” Mr Clare said.
“She continued her abuse towards the officer and throwing her arms about and pacing. It was early evening and members of the public were alarmed by her behaviour.”
The court heard that the defendant was arrested and cuffed and she continued to be aggressive.
She admitted using threatening behaviour on May 21.

The defendant said she was drunk and apologised for her behaviour but said she was only abusive because her partner had been beaten up and no-one was doing anything about it.
Magistrates fined her £50 and ordered her to pay a £15 surcharge.

Wednesday, July 15, 2009

Another sort of smoke

I’ve recently been following an interesting debate on a web forum (unfortunately hidden behind a registration wall) on the subject of cannabis legalisation. Now, while this isn’t something of any personal interest to me, I’ve always thought a strong libertarian case could be made for it. However, the pro-cannabis lobby aren’t going to win many supporters amongst libertarian smokers and drinkers by constantly going about how dangerous tobacco and alcohol are in comparison with their drug of choice. I have often thought that, if cannabis was legalised and sold on a commercial basis, the very Guardianistas who currently express sympathy for liberalisation would be campaigning for it to be further taxed and restricted.

Realistically, given the current ban-everything climate, the chances of cannabis legalisation in my lifetime must be infinitesimal, and certainly much less than the chances of the smoking ban being amended. We’ll see the metrication of road signs and Britain joining the Euro first. And, given the current climate of legislative persecution and social opprobrium that tobacco smokers have to endure, despite tobacco being a legal product, maybe the cannabis legalisers should be careful what they wish for. Perhaps it is better for their favourite weed to be technically illegal, but widely tolerated and perceived as something a bit cool and alternative.

More papadums please!

“We should stick to what we do best: steak & chips and scampi & chips, carveries and home-cooked Sunday lunches. And we should leave the papadums to those who know how to make them,” says Mark Daniels on the Publican website. Now I have to say he couldn’t be more wrong. One of the biggest problems with pub food is that so many pubs have boxed themselves into a corner of being a kind of English ethnic restaurant, and there are vast swathes of international cuisine that they refuse to touch. This can only serve to perpetuate an old-fashioned, stodgy image of pubs to people who happily tuck in to all kinds of exotic cuisines at home and in restaurants.

Thirty years ago, many pubs were more imaginative and innovative with food than they are now, and there was more difference between their menu offers. As one of the comments says, why don’t pubs offer “Guest meals” alongside “Guest beers” – and that means something genuinely different, not just another variant on the same tired old theme on the specials board.

AND FINALLY .....

No court stories today. The list included benefit fraud and probabtion breaches and I thought I'd struggle to stay awake so I decided to pass and try for a better day tommorrow.

I did pick up a bit of gossip, though, which I found quite interesting. Apparently, a solicitor defending someone on a few hundred quids' benefit fraud charges began to liken it to the MPs "fraudulent" expenses claims, saying that it would take a claimant a lifetime and more to con that much out of the state. The solicitor was stopped in her tracks by the bench. Magistrates said they didn't want to hear that argument put forward because it was not relevant to the case.

I can't help wondering if a memo has been sent to all magistrates by the Lord Chief Justice warning them not to listen to such a defence for benefit fraud because of the unstable effect it could have .....?

Either way, in my opinion, conning the state is conning the state and I don't see any difference between those who claim more than they should whether they live in the Palace of Westminster or the local council sink estate.

GLOBAL BANK FOUNDED BY LINCOLNIAN

As the post below would indicate, Lincoln is not exactly the most progressive place in the world but one of our biggest banks, The NatWest, was founded here by Richard Ellison from Lincoln who at that time lived in this house above which has since been made into flats.

The Ellisons were a huge family here and they owned most of the city. The sons fought in various wars the most notable being the Boer War. Legend has it that the Ellisons lost their fortune due to having to pay death taxes on their fallen sons who died fighting for their country.

I wonder what Richard Ellison would think of today's bankers and the financial crisis that brought so many to ruin .... and what he would think about the fact that my best mate is due to move into the bottom floor of this building within the next few weeks.

SMOKERS WELCOME AT NEW CAFE (and their kids of course)

I hope this photo does justice to a very nice place I found to eat breakfast and lunch today because I'm most definately not the world's greatest snapper! It's like a veritable hamlet of peace for smokers in this city which must be anti-smoking if it has voted in the likes of Gillian Merron in for the last 10 years.

Yes - THAT Gillian Merron - the one who only cares about those smokers who want to quit and not those who don't which is why the public health minister dismissed any talk of an ammendment to the smoking ban that would help to save pubs and clubs in the 'onourable member's very own constituency.

Note the little pink table and chairs for kids outside on the cafe's smoking patio and how the blanket smoking ban is also forcing children out into the cold. I guess the antis must be feeling a bit ashamed about that as they are now bleating for smokers to be completely excluded from even standing out in the open air.

OK - so I know that the Cafe Delight in Lincoln is not quite as sophisticated as Boisdales of Belgravia, but around these parts it's as good as it gets - certainly as far as cafes are concerned. As for the pubs, there are some with nice gardens, terraces and patios and for anyone who wants to celebrate being a smoker and proud, then watch this space for news of the Smoker's Festival due to be held at the excellent city centre pub, The Jolly Brewer in August.

Tuesday, July 14, 2009

If pubs didn't exist...

Would anyone bother inventing them? I’ve been going in pubs (legally) for over thirty years, and over the last twenty of those I’ve seen their trade steadily dwindle away. Pubgoing has become something of a way of life for me, but when I consider the number of near-empty, dying-on-their-feet establishments I come across nowadays, I can’t avoid thinking that it’s not something someone reaching the age at which they can legally drink would really want to bother with. I remember when you’d go in pubs and they were usually busy, with a convivial crowd of locals and regulars. Not any more. Back in the day, you’d worry whether you’d get a seat. Now, you worry if you’ll be sitting in splendid, embarrassing isolation.

A short walk through Stockport town centre at around 8 pm the other Thursday night revealed five pubs with their doors closed that as far as I knew were supposed to be still trading. Discussing it later, it seems that some were in fact opening at lunchtimes and weekend evenings, but for a town centre pub to be closed on a Thursday evening is a pretty desperate state of affairs. Now, none of these were exactly the cream of the crop, but even so there was always enough trade to sustain them in the past. This suggests that even the pessimists may be understating the plight of the pub trade.

Getting on for 4,000 pubs have closed in the past couple of years and, looking around Northern industrial towns, I can well believe that is an underestimate. There must be as many again, if not more, like those pubs in Stockport, clinging on for the time being but not really looking very viable in the longer term. Yes, some pubs aren't doing too badly, but I can only think of five or six in central Stockport that could really be described as busy. And, when a pub is near-empty, you can’t really blame people for not wanting to go there, thus creating a vicious circle of decline.

Yet this collapse in trade still doesn’t really seem to have hit home – we still hear many folks saying “I went in the Dog & Duck last Friday night and it was heaving, so I can’t see anything wrong with the pub trade that a bit of good management can’t fix”, conveniently ignoring the five other pubs in the vicinity that have either closed down or are dead zones most of the time. I know this sounds pessimistic, but are we now seeing the end of the pub trade as we once knew it?

Over the next twenty years, I can see anything remotely resembling a traditional pub as the term is commonly understood completely disappearing. We currently have maybe 55,000 licensed premises in Great Britain, and that will at least halve. We will be left with restaurants in the guise of pubs, weekend circuit venues, niche beer bars, and virtually nothing else apart from the ubiquitous Wetherspoons, which have become a kind of licensed cafeteria. The idea of a pub being part of a community, or people just going out for a social drink, will be a thing of the past.

And no, this won’t be entirely the fault of the smoking ban, but history may well show the ban to have been the “tipping point” that turned a slow, steady decline into a fall off the precipice.

Monday, July 13, 2009

BURGLAR’S LOOT FOUND IN GIRL’S FLAT

Police intelligence led to the arrest of a vulnerable young woman and two other men who were found with stolen goods, a court heard.
Magistrates were told there had been a burglary at a house where property including a laptop and PS3 console, plus games, were taken.
The prosecutor said the woman was present with her partner when her address was searched a matter of hours after the house had been broken into.
“Property and drugs were found and taken away. The householder identified the goods as those stolen earlier in the burglary,” the prosecutor said.
“Two other men have also been charged with handling and both have yet to be sentenced.”
The 23 year old woman from Lincoln, admitted handling stolen goods on May 8 and possession of cannabis worth £63.90 and amphetamine with a street value of £28.
Her solicitor said the defendant was a vulnerable young woman who had been taken advantage of by people who had taken liberties with her flat.
“She woke up and discovered her sitting room was in a mess with items there that she knew did not belong to the people who had stayed in the flat,” the solicitor said.
“The drugs were for her own use. She does not have any issues with drugs or alcohol but she does suffer from depressions and is receiving treatment and counselling.”
Magistrates fined the defendant £75 for handling and £75 on each drugs offence. She also has to pay a £15 surcharge and £30 costs.

MAN STOLE FOUNDATION FOR GIRLFRIEND

A man out shopping with his girlfriend stole make-up for her even though he had money to pay for it, a court heard.
Magistrates were told that the 21 year-old was spotted on CCTV in Boots in the city centre picking up the foundation and slipping it into his carrier bag.
The prosecutor said he was stopped outside the store and found in possession of the item worth £5.86.
“He told police that his girlfriend had made a purchase and while she was doing this, he saw the foundation that she liked and stole it,” the prosecutor said.
“He said he had £5 on him. He offered to pay for the item which he intended to give to his girlfriend.”
The defendant from Lincoln admitted theft on June 25.
His solicitor said the man was angry with himself for letting himself slip.
“His ex-girlfriend was not in any way involved,” the solicitor said.
“The defendant picked up the item but he doesn’t know why when he had money in his pocket.”
Magistrates fined the defendant £50 and ordered him to pay a surcharge of £15. He also has to pay £20 costs.

HEADBUTT GROUNDED BOXER WHO WOULDN’T USE HIS FISTS

An amateur boxer has been grounded at weekends after he told a court he used his head instead of his fists because he didn’t want to cause damage during a city centre spat with youths.
Magistrates were told the 23 year-old was seen on CCTV having an argument with three young men before the altercation became physical. .
The prosecutor said the defendant head butted one of the youths and he then turned on another and head butted him in the face.
“He was arrested and interviewed. He said he is a boxer and he used his head instead of his fists because he didn’t want to do too much damage,” she said.
The 23 year-old from Lincoln, admitted using threatening behaviour on June 25 this year.
His solicitor said the man was provoked by the youths who tried to sell him drugs he didn’t want.
“They threatened violence towards him when he refused,” the solicitor said.
“They did not want to make a complaint against him and one of the youths was later arrested for an unrelated matter.”
Magistrates imposed a 180 hour community order and told the defendant that he would be on a curfew, tagged for two months, and unable to go out on Friday and Saturday nights between 8pm and 7am. He also has to pay costs of £20.

COURT REPORTS

I went back to reporting from my local magistrates court today in a bid to keep myself busy and active over summer now that my university course has taken a break.

I used to report from there regularly up to about five years ago. Not much has changed except there are more laws to be broken and some new sentencing options.

I won't make any comment myself about what you will read. It's reported here as it was heard in court. I'll leave any comment on the facts of these cases to anyone who wants to leave one.

Friday, July 10, 2009

Transports of delight

Something I‘ve noticed amongst many of the Guardianistas in CAMRA is a perverse prejudice against using taxis. Often public transport anoraks as well as beer geeks, for the sake of saving a bit of money that they could easily afford anyway, they are happy to research obscure bus services and hang around in the freezing cold at late-night bus stops. The working classes, in my experience, have no such compunctions, and when going out drinking are quite happy to use taxis. They value the extra convenience and understand that, especially if there are three or four of you, it can be no more expensive than taking the bus. They also factor it in to the overall cost of a night out rather than considering it in isolation. But, for hair-shirted middle-class liberals, taxis come across as something selfish and vulgar. This is also reflected in the opinion often expressed on transport forums that taxis don’t really qualify as “public transport” when, for vast numbers of ordinary people in our major cities, most famously Belfast, they undoubtedly are treated as such.

Sunday, July 5, 2009

Buffet bafflement

Over the years I’ve enjoyed numerous buffets in pubs at various events. But a perennial problem is that plates of mixed sandwiches are put out without any indication of what the sandwiches are. Now, I don’t eat egg, and so am constantly worried I might pick up what I think is a cheese sandwich but turns out to be egg. But if you’re a vegetarian the problem is far worse. Especially in poor light it can be very hard to determine exactly what is on a sandwich, and you could even miss out on something appetising because you didn’t know what it was. So surely it would make sense to put out all the same type of sandwich on each plate, and if possible even to attach little signs saying what they are. The principle that “not everyone eats everything” could also usefully be adopted by those who put together pub menus.

Saturday, July 4, 2009

Five myths about alcohol

  1. We are drinking more than ever and 1 in 4 people are drinking at hazardous levels
  2. Alcohol is cheaper than it was 20 years ago
  3. There is a worsening epidemic of underage drinking
  4. Alcohol-related hospital admissions have risen by 69%
  5. Lager is cheaper than water
All effectively dispatched here by the Filthy Smoker. He concludes:
It is doubtful that even the British Medical Association really believes that charging 50p a unit or banning Guinness adverts will make the slightest difference to rates of consumption, but that is not really the objective. The objective is to officially identify drinking as 'bad' in the same way that smoking is 'bad'. From that starting point, all else follows.

Thursday, July 2, 2009

Further down the slippery slope

You still hear plenty of deluded Pollyannas claiming that we really have nothing to fear from the anti-drink lobby in this country, and those who say we do are just scaremongering. But then along comes Mike Craik, Chief Constable of Northumbria and Association of Chief Police Officers national spokesman on licensing, and thus someone whose views cannot be easily dismissed, arguing in favour of an 80p minimum price per alcohol unit and a complete ban on all alcohol advertising.

Now, some people have said that a minimum price of 40 or 50p a unit wouldn’t be anything to worry about, but once the principle has been established it opens the door for the level to be constantly ratcheted up. 80p a unit would effectively double the price of mainstream drinks in the off-trade, thus making a huge hole in the budgets of ordinary households, and would start to impact on the lower end of the on-trade, for example the Sam Smiths’ estate, notorious for scenes of alcohol-related disorder. Holts Bitter in one of my local pubs is £1.84 a pint, which at 4.0% ABV is almost exactly 80p per unit.

One assumes he’d have to ban home brewing and personal imports of alcohol at the same time, otherwise legitimate domestic off-sales would decline to virtually zero.

A total advertising ban would, as I said the other day, lead to the drinks market stagnating and keep the door firmly shut against any new entrants. What’s more, it would effectively turn CAMRA into a proscribed organisation, as all its activities either revolve around the promotion of beer drinking or are funded by alcohol advertising. You can’t run a beer festival if you’re not allowed to tell anyone about it. Though you have to wonder whether they would realise what was happening until it was already too late.

Maybe this is a good argument for having elected chief police officers, as then Craik would have to submit his authoritarian, élitist views to the voters.