Politics

[Dimron]

On 29/05/2025 at 17:50, BobyBrno said:

The process started in 2022. (Under the Tories) The reservoirs won’t be complete for another 10-14 years in a part of the world many miles from us. What, exactly, are you getting excited about?

Maybe @Dimron can give us an insight into this exciting news as it’s his part of the world.

Get on with it is what I say... flooding Sleaford sounds like a step forward, as long as you lock them all in their houses while you do it... worked on Brenig Dam in North Wales as a sprog in the mid 70s

[kent_white]

2 minutes ago, Zico said:

 

Exactly - it's got to be the same for everyone hasn't it? Unless we're only punishing people if they're wearing a face covering that's got a religious connotation? Or we're relying on the police to use their 'common sense'. Good luck getting that to stand up in court mind! 

[royal white]

1 minute ago, kent_white said:

So that's three different systems in 3 different countries. Which one are you picking? And which fine? 

See Austria "wearing a burqa (or any other face covering that conceals facial features". It'll be more detailed than that in the guidance. Wearing a pair of sunglasses is a face covering that conceals facial features. 

And you want this to be enforced by the people who fine cigarette butt droppers? Not the police? 

They were examples, I could easily give a few more countries and list their legal process. Amazing ain’t it how some countries are able to crack on with things and here we are making a song and dance over who will do the fining 🙄

[royal white]

6 minutes ago, kent_white said:

Exactly - it's got to be the same for everyone hasn't it? Unless we're only punishing people if they're wearing a face covering that's got a religious connotation? Or we're relying on the police to use their 'common sense'. Good luck getting that to stand up in court mind! 

Remember that thing called common sense, let’s apply it now. 
 

Those 3 photos, let’s say the people in each photo commited a crime. Which one are you struggling to identify? 

Edited June 8, 2025 by royal white

[Zico]

37 minutes ago, Spider said:

Presumably we’re all ok with national ID cards as well then?

 

No problem 

 

[kent_white]

32 minutes ago, royal white said:

They were examples, I could easily give a few more countries and list their legal process. Amazing ain’t it how some countries are able to crack on with things and here we are making a song and dance over who will do the fining 🙄

No I'm not. I'm making a song and dance about the extra pressure it will put on the police force - you were the one that suggested council enforcement officers. And as I've said previously - from the reading I've done - other countries have found it difficult to implement for all the reasons I've already mentioned earlier in the thread. I don't think it would be more or less problematic over here. And I'm not sure what problem it's going to solve to be worth the extra money/police time/additional social problems. 

[kent_white]

33 minutes ago, royal white said:

Remember that thing called common sense, let’s apply it now. 
 

Those 3 photos, let’s say the people in each photo commited a crime. Which one are you struggling to identify? 

From the 3 pictures Zico added. I'd find it difficult to identify the lads with the goggles on. 

[royal white]

1 minute ago, kent_white said:

From the 3 pictures Zico added. I'd find it difficult to identify the lads with the goggles on. 

So The ones with the face coverings?  Who’d of thunk it 

[kent_white]

6 minutes ago, royal white said:

So The ones with the face coverings?  Who’d of thunk it 

Right - now we're getting somewhere at last. So under your legislation - if your entire face is covered then you get punishment - regardless of the reason you're wearing it - if you wear it in a public place?

[Lt. Aldo Raine]

2 minutes ago, kent_white said:

Right - now we're getting somewhere at last. So under your legislation - if your entire face is covered then you get punishment - regardless of the reason you're wearing it - if you wear it in a public place?

.

Edited June 8, 2025 by Lt. Aldo Raine
Cba

[royal white]

5 minutes ago, kent_white said:

Right - now we're getting somewhere at last. So under your legislation - if your entire face is covered then you get punishment - regardless of the reason you're wearing it - if you wear it in a public place?

Yes that includes a burka and niqab. Give them the option to remove, if they don’t then it’s an on the spot fine. Shops, banks, shopping centres, pubs etc should stop anyone covering their face entering their premises. (Some already do) 

[kent_white]

1 minute ago, royal white said:

Yes that includes a burka and niqab. Give them the option to remove, if they don’t then it’s an on the spot fine. Shops, banks, shopping centres, pubs etc should stop anyone covering their face entering their premises. (Some already do) 

But a Niqab doesn't cover the entire face - so you're going to need to change your legislation. Are you saying that any face covering, that might make it hard for the police to identify you if you commit a crime, should be banned? 

I agree with your option to remove it by the way. I think it would be crazy to punish someone without giving them a chance to put it right. 

[Farrelli]

1 hour ago, royal white said:

I mean The other little Hitlers, council enforcement officer. 

I think you are being unrealistic. Councils are cutting back as they are skint.  They don’t need another thing to control. Police can’t deal with present crime levels without adding another. 

[royal white]

7 minutes ago, kent_white said:

But a Niqab doesn't cover the entire face - so you're going to need to change your legislation. Are you saying that any face covering, that might make it hard for the police to identify you if you commit a crime, should be banned? 

I agree with your option to remove it by the way. I think it would be crazy to punish someone without giving them a chance to put it right. 

Which is why I mentioned them as I knew you was going to come Back with a smart arse comment 😁 and the 3 photos didn’t give me that option! 

 

 

Edited June 8, 2025 by royal white

[kent_white]

Just now, royal white said:

Which is why I mentioned them as I knew you was going to come Back with a smart arse comment 😁 and the 3 photos didn’t give me that option! 

 

It's not a smart arse comment - I'm just thinking through your thought process to it's logical conclusion. 

So we're also banning the attire above?

[royal white]

5 minutes ago, Farrelli said:

I think you are being unrealistic. Councils are cutting back as they are skint.  They don’t need another thing to control. Police can’t deal with present crime levels without adding another. 

Why? They can fine people for dropping fags why not for this? More fines means more money for the council. Win win 

[royal white]

Just now, kent_white said:

It's not a smart arse comment - I'm just thinking through your thought process to it's logical conclusion. 

So we're also banning the attire above?

Yes face coverings, as I’ve said god knows how many posts ago. 

[kent_white]

Just now, royal white said:

Yes face coverings, as I’ve said god knows how many posts ago. 

So you're now back to my original post. What are you classing as a face covering? And are you only applying it to garments that have a religious connotation? Or all face coverings? And if it's all face coverings - from the original pictures - which are OK/not OK? Or are you banning them all for the sake of consistency?

[royal white]

2 minutes ago, kent_white said:

So you're now back to my original post. What are you classing as a face covering? And are you only applying it to garments that have a religious connotation? Or all face coverings? And if it's all face coverings - from the original pictures - which are OK/not OK? Or are you banning them all for the sake of consistency?

FFs I’ve literally just said a few posts back the guys with goggles. Fucks knows what religion that would be. 
 
the majority is common sense. If a gorilla is walking into a pub with Hitler, a Xmas tree and a banana then it’s obvious he’s at a fancy dress. 
 

If 4 people are walking into a bank or a shopping centre with their faces covered then they should be stopped and told to remove them.

Has cheese logged into your account? 

[royal white]

16 minutes ago, Farrelli said:

I think you are being unrealistic. Councils are cutting back as they are skint.  They don’t need another thing to control. Police can’t deal with present crime levels without adding another. 

This mon will sort them all! 
 

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1HtQLx6G9s/?mibextid=wwXIfr

[Farrelli]

8 minutes ago, royal white said:

Why? They can fine people for dropping fags why not for this? More fines means more money for the council. Win win 

There is a cost. Are you happy to add more money to your council bill? The vast majority wouldn’t want that in order to catch a few people wearing face masks. I’d rather they prosecute people deliberately littering the streets. 

[royal white]

6 minutes ago, Farrelli said:

There is a cost. Are you happy to add more money to your council bill? The vast majority wouldn’t want that in order to catch a few people wearing face masks. I’d rather they prosecute people deliberately littering the streets. 

And there is a gain. “Jimmy you get him smoking I’ll get the person (not sure of sex as I can’t see them) with the face covering” 

 

Whos this vast majority that would want someone fined over dropping a cig butt over someone covering their face. Or have you just made it up? 

Edited June 8, 2025 by royal white

[DazBob]

19 minutes ago, royal white said:

Yes face coverings, as I’ve said god knows how many posts ago. 

What about folk with health concerns who want to wear a face mask?

[gonzo]

I'd want it banning for it's oppressive and divisionary nature and nothing else.

Bringing fancy dress and blokes in motorcycle helmets in to is for the birds.

Nobody wants to see their face anyway. It just looks fucking awful, it makes them even more of a secular bunch than they are already and it represents stone age beliefs that have should be no part of this country or any civilised western society.

 

[royal white]

1 minute ago, DazBob said:

What about folk with health concerns who want to wear a face mask?

See above for common sense