It's coming to that time of the year again when stories like THIS are becoming more common.

It's too cold to run back to the van to get your protection and it's too cold to cold to do anything about it and it's JUST TOO COLD!

Well... safety in DIY is paramount... the traders should know this so it's their fault if they loose limbs and what not but the DIY are less aware due to us not really seing too many things go wrong.

Enough said: I just thought as a new commer to the forum i'd try my best to make people aware about the importance of H&S.

I nearly lost a butty once due to me falling off a couple of buckets I was trying to sit on and we wouldn't want that to happen to anybody!

In message , Snowball
writes

It's coming to that time of the year again when stories like 'THIS'
(http://www.diyplace.co.uk/blog/) are becoming more common.

It's too cold to run back to the van to get your protection and it's
too cold to cold to do anything about it and it's JUST TOO COLD!

Yes, but is it in any way, shape or form actually true ?

Who knows


Well... safety in DIY is paramount... the traders should know this so
it's their fault if they loose limbs and what not but the DIY are less
aware due to us not really seing too many things go wrong.

Well, you wouldn't, would you if you'd lost both eyes due to stereo
angle grinding without a condom


Enough said: I just thought as a new commer

" , " ?


to the forum i'd try my
best to make people aware about the importance of H&S.

S'OK, we have our own safety nazis here



I nearly lost a butty once due to me falling off a couple of buckets I
was trying to sit on and we wouldn't want that to happen to anybody!



Yeah, I lost my virginity once, I won't let it happen again

--
geoff

Snowball wrote:
It's coming to that time of the year again when stories like 'THIS'
(http://www.diyplace.co.uk/blog/) are becoming more common.

It's too cold to run back to the van to get your protection and it's
too cold to cold to do anything about it and it's JUST TOO COLD!

Well... safety in DIY is paramount... the traders should know this so
it's their fault if they loose limbs and what not but the DIY are less
aware due to us not really seing too many things go wrong.

Enough said: I just thought as a new commer to the forum i'd try my
best to make people aware about the importance of H&S.

I nearly lost a butty once due to me falling off a couple of buckets I
was trying to sit on and we wouldn't want that to happen to anybody!

People will now rush out and buy direct vented goggles, and some will
still wind up in hospital. Indirect vented are needed with dangle
grinders.


Next thing ya know these tools will be illegal. To use one you'll have
to pay £500 for a 4 week long training course run by some slightly
clueful 17 yr old who'll try and teach you what you realised was
inaccurate and inadequate 15 years ago. Then you'll need to buy your
license card, which contains all sorts of inappropriate data, and
enables you to buy 1 angle grinder per year after more exhaustive
checks and form filling. For which you pay of course.

The popularity of dangle grinders will drop dramatically due to the ban
on retail sales, so the prices will go up to above where they were 15
years ago.

Admittedly all this could have been avoided by mandating the sale of 1
pair of indirect vent goggles with every retailed grinder, but who
cares if the average Jo is fleeced and our national productivity goes
down the plughole in one area after another.

Think I'm kidding? I am now, but trust me, it will happen. Your basic
freedoms will be whittled away to the point that you become fully
dependant in every area, and you will be thus fleeced into poverty, and
prosecuted for making your house better or safer.


NT

wrote in message
oups.com...

SNIP

Think I'm kidding? I am now, but trust me, it will happen. Your basic
freedoms will be whittled away to the point that you become fully
dependant in every area, and you will be thus fleeced into poverty, and
prosecuted for making your house better or safer.


Already we have Orwellian government intrusion into our lives. Cameras in
the streets watch our movements, Cameras watch our vehicles and the central
big brother computer checks the number plates against central data base to
see if the car is taxed, MOT tested and insured.
Don't even think your home is your castle anymore - big brother has all
sorts of right of entry (Unless you are built like a brick sh*t house and
look as though you would be more trouble than its worth to annoy you)

John

Why don't animal rights campaigners throw paint over a Hells Angel wearing
leather although women in fur seem to be fair game?

"Snowball" wrote:



It's coming to that time of the year again when stories like 'THIS'
(http://www.diyplace.co.uk/blog/) are becoming more common.

A point worthy of mention any time of year.
Unfortunately, there seems to be some sort of "loss-of-face" associated with
the use of safety gear.
Going back to my apprenticeship days, late 70s, this was certainly the case
in the engineering work place at least.

Recently I had some renovation works done on an existing extension and was
horrified to see the builder (very competent in many ways) cutting through a
glazed drain with a Stil (sp) saw - no eye protection and no mask. He was
working on a drain that disappeared under the house wall, so it was akin to
a confined space. The guy all but vanished in the cloud of dust and drain
fragments.

In this case, the weather could not be blamed. So either he is lazy or this
is entrenched poor working practice for the reasons outlined above.

Phil

In article ,
says...
snip
Why don't animal rights campaigners throw paint over a Hells Angel wearing
leather although women in fur seem to be fair game?

Because the cow was going to be killed for meat anyway, whereas the
little furry beasts that make up a coat are only killed for their fur?

In article ,
John wrote:
Already we have Orwellian government intrusion into our lives. Cameras
in the streets watch our movements, Cameras watch our vehicles and the
central big brother computer checks the number plates against central
data base to see if the car is taxed, MOT tested and insured.

By this I can only assume you think it's ok to drive a car that's totally
illegal? Just hope you don't get involved in an accident with an uninsured
driver.

--
*According to my calculations, the problem doesn't exist.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 16:08:05 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

| In article ,
| John wrote:
| Already we have Orwellian government intrusion into our lives. Cameras
| in the streets watch our movements, Cameras watch our vehicles and the
| central big brother computer checks the number plates against central
| data base to see if the car is taxed, MOT tested and insured.

The number plate reading cameras in Bradford got the number of the getaway
car of the gang who killed the policewoman. Lead them straight to a gang
in London. Other number plate reading cameras then tracked it down the M1.

| By this I can only assume you think it's ok to drive a car that's totally
| illegal? Just hope you don't get involved in an accident with an uninsured
| driver.

Uninsured drivers already cost every insured driver GBP30 per year.
Get uninsured drivers off the road ASAP.

--
Dave Fawthrop dave hyphenologist co uk
Sick and tired of Junk Snail Mail?
Register with http://www.tpsonline.org.uk/mpsr/
IME it works :-)

TheScullster wrote:
Unfortunately, there seems to be some sort of "loss-of-face" associated with
the use of safety gear.

Ironically not wearing the right gear can also lead to "loss-of-face"

On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 17:39:08 +0000, Dave Fawthrop
wrote:

On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 16:08:05 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

| In article ,
| John wrote:
| Already we have Orwellian government intrusion into our lives. Cameras
| in the streets watch our movements, Cameras watch our vehicles and the
| central big brother computer checks the number plates against central
| data base to see if the car is taxed, MOT tested and insured.

The number plate reading cameras in Bradford got the number of the getaway
car of the gang who killed the policewoman. Lead them straight to a gang
in London. Other number plate reading cameras then tracked it down the M1.

Get it right:

The number plate reading cameras in Bradford got the number of a car
owned by someone (who could have been anyone, even a poster in
uk.d-i-y) Other number plate reading cameras then tracked it down the
M1. End of story.



--

On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 19:19:49 +0000, Matt
wrote:

| On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 17:39:08 +0000, Dave Fawthrop
| wrote:
|
| On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 16:08:05 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
| wrote:
|
| | In article ,
| | John wrote:
| | Already we have Orwellian government intrusion into our lives. Cameras
| | in the streets watch our movements, Cameras watch our vehicles and the
| | central big brother computer checks the number plates against central
| | data base to see if the car is taxed, MOT tested and insured.
|
| The number plate reading cameras in Bradford got the number of the getaway
| car of the gang who killed the policewoman. Lead them straight to a gang
| in London. Other number plate reading cameras then tracked it down the M1.
|
| Get it right:
|
| The number plate reading cameras in Bradford got the number of a car
| owned by someone (who could have been anyone, even a poster in
| uk.d-i-y) Other number plate reading cameras then tracked it down the
| M1. End of story.

That is what I said, only slightly reworded.
--
Dave Fawthrop dave hyphenologist co uk
Sick and tired of Junk Snail Mail?
Register with http://www.tpsonline.org.uk/mpsr/
IME it works :-)

In article . com,
says...

TheScullster wrote:
Unfortunately, there seems to be some sort of "loss-of-face" associated with
the use of safety gear.

Ironically not wearing the right gear can also lead to "loss-of-face"


I used to know a tree surgeon who ...

In message , Dave Fawthrop
writes
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 16:08:05 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

| In article ,
| John wrote:
| Already we have Orwellian government intrusion into our lives. Cameras
| in the streets watch our movements, Cameras watch our vehicles and the
| central big brother computer checks the number plates against central
| data base to see if the car is taxed, MOT tested and insured.

The number plate reading cameras in Bradford got the number of the getaway
car of the gang who killed the policewoman. Lead them straight to a gang
in London. Other number plate reading cameras then tracked it down the M1.

I thought that it said on the news tonight that they'd ALL been released
without trial - in other words, they detained the wrong people


--
geoff

On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 19:19:49 +0000, Matt wrote:

On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 17:39:08 +0000, Dave Fawthrop
wrote:

On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 16:08:05 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

| In article ,
| John wrote:
| Already we have Orwellian government intrusion into our lives. Cameras
| in the streets watch our movements, Cameras watch our vehicles and the
| central big brother computer checks the number plates against central
| data base to see if the car is taxed, MOT tested and insured.

The number plate reading cameras in Bradford got the number of the getaway
car of the gang who killed the policewoman. Lead them straight to a gang
in London. Other number plate reading cameras then tracked it down the M1.

Get it right:

The number plate reading cameras in Bradford got the number of a car
owned by someone (who could have been anyone, even a poster in
uk.d-i-y) Other number plate reading cameras then tracked it down the
M1. End of story.

Err, no, the car had been hired at Heathrow a couple of weeks before the
incident occured. Why let the facts stand in the way of taking a swipe at
someone else?


--
the dot wanderer at tesco dot net

On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 22:13:44 GMT, raden wrote:

In message , Dave Fawthrop
writes
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 16:08:05 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

| In article ,
| John wrote:
| Already we have Orwellian government intrusion into our lives. Cameras
| in the streets watch our movements, Cameras watch our vehicles and the
| central big brother computer checks the number plates against central
| data base to see if the car is taxed, MOT tested and insured.

The number plate reading cameras in Bradford got the number of the getaway
car of the gang who killed the policewoman. Lead them straight to a gang
in London. Other number plate reading cameras then tracked it down the M1.

I thought that it said on the news tonight that they'd ALL been released
without trial - in other words, they detained the wrong people


Precisely!


--

On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 20:40:14 +0000, Dave Fawthrop
wrote:

On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 19:19:49 +0000, Matt
wrote:

| On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 17:39:08 +0000, Dave Fawthrop
| wrote:
|
| On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 16:08:05 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
| wrote:
|
| | In article ,
| | John wrote:
| | Already we have Orwellian government intrusion into our lives. Cameras
| | in the streets watch our movements, Cameras watch our vehicles and the
| | central big brother computer checks the number plates against central
| | data base to see if the car is taxed, MOT tested and insured.
|
| The number plate reading cameras in Bradford got the number of the getaway
| car of the gang who killed the policewoman. Lead them straight to a gang
| in London. Other number plate reading cameras then tracked it down the M1.
|
| Get it right:
|
| The number plate reading cameras in Bradford got the number of a car
| owned by someone (who could have been anyone, even a poster in
| uk.d-i-y) Other number plate reading cameras then tracked it down the
| M1. End of story.

That is what I said, only slightly reworded.

Yes, and it's very fortunate they didn't implement the shoot to kill
policy again

(I just wondered from your orignal posting if you had been stuck in a
timewarp for the past three or so days)


--

raden wrote:
In message , Dave Fawthrop
writes
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 16:08:05 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

The number plate reading cameras in Bradford got the number of the getaway
car of the gang who killed the policewoman. Lead them straight to a gang
in London. Other number plate reading cameras then tracked it down the M1.

I thought that it said on the news tonight that they'd ALL been released
without trial - in other words, they detained the wrong people

Whether in one particular case it got them or not, does this justify
universal surveillance? We could catch many more criminals if everyones
house were wired up for centrally controlled surveillance. Is it worth
it? Is it what we want? Or should surveillance be carried out just on
people where there is a genuinely good reason to do so.

Our freedoms are being whittled away quite quickly at the moment, yet
there seem little awareness on the issues in Britain.


NT

On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 22:28:53 +0000, Matt
wrote:

| On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 20:40:14 +0000, Dave Fawthrop
| wrote:
|
| On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 19:19:49 +0000, Matt
| wrote:
|
| | On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 17:39:08 +0000, Dave Fawthrop
| | wrote:
| |
| | On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 16:08:05 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
| | wrote:
| |
| | | In article ,
| | | John wrote:
| | | Already we have Orwellian government intrusion into our lives. Cameras
| | | in the streets watch our movements, Cameras watch our vehicles and the
| | | central big brother computer checks the number plates against central
| | | data base to see if the car is taxed, MOT tested and insured.
| |
| | The number plate reading cameras in Bradford got the number of the getaway
| | car of the gang who killed the policewoman. Lead them straight to a gang
| | in London. Other number plate reading cameras then tracked it down the M1.
| |
| | Get it right:
| |
| | The number plate reading cameras in Bradford got the number of a car
| | owned by someone (who could have been anyone, even a poster in
| | uk.d-i-y) Other number plate reading cameras then tracked it down the
| | M1. End of story.
|
| That is what I said, only slightly reworded.
|
| Yes, and it's very fortunate they didn't implement the shoot to kill
| policy again

Paranoia is a nasty condition :-(
--
Dave Fawthrop dave hyphenologist co uk
Sick and tired of Junk Snail Mail?
Register with http://www.tpsonline.org.uk/mpsr/
IME it works :-)

On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 22:13:44 GMT, raden wrote:

| In message , Dave Fawthrop
| writes
| On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 16:08:05 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
| wrote:
|
| | In article ,
| | John wrote:
| | Already we have Orwellian government intrusion into our lives. Cameras
| | in the streets watch our movements, Cameras watch our vehicles and the
| | central big brother computer checks the number plates against central
| | data base to see if the car is taxed, MOT tested and insured.
|
| The number plate reading cameras in Bradford got the number of the getaway
| car of the gang who killed the policewoman. Lead them straight to a gang
| in London. Other number plate reading cameras then tracked it down the M1.
|
| I thought that it said on the news tonight that they'd ALL been released
| without trial - in other words, they detained the wrong people

Letting them out on bail only indicates that they have not got enough
evidence yet. It has the disadvantage that they will probably skip bail
and disappear back to Somalia, where there is *no* chance of bringing them
to trial.
--
Dave Fawthrop dave hyphenologist co uk
Sick and tired of Junk Snail Mail?
Register with http://www.tpsonline.org.uk/mpsr/
IME it works :-)

"Rob Morley" wrote in message
t...
In article ,
says...
snip
Why don't animal rights campaigners throw paint over a Hells Angel
wearing
leather although women in fur seem to be fair game?

Because the cow was going to be killed for meat anyway, whereas the
little furry beasts that make up a coat are only killed for their fur?

Yes of course - now lets consider a Hells Angel with a fur trim - still
think he'll get painted or does the prospect of non pc retalliation still
deter the activist?

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
John wrote:
Already we have Orwellian government intrusion into our lives. Cameras
in the streets watch our movements, Cameras watch our vehicles and the
central big brother computer checks the number plates against central
data base to see if the car is taxed, MOT tested and insured.

By this I can only assume you think it's ok to drive a car that's totally
illegal? Just hope you don't get involved in an accident with an uninsured
driver.


you assume too much - your approach is exactly the way the goverment gets
its big brother systems into place.
I have comprehensive insurance so I don't really care if the other guy is
insured or not.
If the government "really" want to tax motorists, adding the cost of the
road tax to fuel ensures that usage is proportional to payment. This crowd
just want you on the system for control.

wrote in message
ups.com...
raden wrote:
In message , Dave Fawthrop
writes
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 16:08:05 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

The number plate reading cameras in Bradford got the number of the
getaway
car of the gang who killed the policewoman. Lead them straight to a
gang
in London. Other number plate reading cameras then tracked it down the
M1.

I thought that it said on the news tonight that they'd ALL been released
without trial - in other words, they detained the wrong people

Whether in one particular case it got them or not, does this justify
universal surveillance? We could catch many more criminals if everyones
house were wired up for centrally controlled surveillance. Is it worth
it? Is it what we want?


Did we want part P? did we want to be watched by automatic systems when we
drive? Did we want a thick **** in charge of all this?


Or should surveillance be carried out just on
people where there is a genuinely good reason to do so.

Our freedoms are being whittled away quite quickly at the moment, yet
there seem little awareness on the issues in Britain.


The British are singularly good at waking up too late and passively
accepting they have been mugged. Try it with a French Farmer and see where
you get.

In article ,
John wrote:
By this I can only assume you think it's ok to drive a car that's
totally illegal? Just hope you don't get involved in an accident with
an uninsured driver.


you assume too much - your approach is exactly the way the goverment
gets its big brother systems into place. I have comprehensive insurance
so I don't really care if the other guy is insured or not.

Someone who is uninsured and knocks down your wife or kids is unlikely to
stop. Your own insurance won't help there.

If the government "really" want to tax motorists, adding the cost of the
road tax to fuel ensures that usage is proportional to payment. This
crowd just want you on the system for control.

The VED is tiny compared to insurance for most.

--
*When it rains, why don't sheep shrink? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 18:20:37 +0000 (UTC), "John"
wrote:


| I have comprehensive insurance so I don't really care if the other guy is
| insured or not.

So you do not care that you spend GBP30 per year on your insurance premium,
paying for third parties injured by uninsured drivers?
--
Dave Fawthrop dave hyphenologist co uk
Sick and tired of Junk Snail Mail?
Register with http://www.tpsonline.org.uk/mpsr/
IME it works :-)

"Dave Fawthrop" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 24 Nov 2005 18:20:37 +0000 (UTC), "John"
wrote:


| I have comprehensive insurance so I don't really care if the other guy
is
| insured or not.

So you do not care that you spend GBP30 per year on your insurance
premium,
paying for third parties injured by uninsured drivers?

I care more that Big Brother is watching me uninvited.

Are you now saying that the premiums I pay will immediately come down by £30
per year?

In message , John
writes

wrote in message
oups.com...
raden wrote:
In message , Dave Fawthrop
writes
On Wed, 23 Nov 2005 16:08:05 +0000 (GMT), "Dave Plowman (News)"
wrote:

The number plate reading cameras in Bradford got the number of the
getaway
car of the gang who killed the policewoman. Lead them straight to a
gang
in London. Other number plate reading cameras then tracked it down the
M1.

I thought that it said on the news tonight that they'd ALL been released
without trial - in other words, they detained the wrong people

Whether in one particular case it got them or not, does this justify
universal surveillance? We could catch many more criminals if everyones
house were wired up for centrally controlled surveillance. Is it worth
it? Is it what we want?


Did we want part P? did we want to be watched by automatic systems when we
drive? Did we want a thick **** in charge of all this?


And at the end of the day, David Icke will turn round and say "I told
you all this would happen" because it's going just as he predicted


--
geoff

In article ,
says...

"Rob Morley" wrote in message
t...
In article ,
says...
snip
Why don't animal rights campaigners throw paint over a Hells Angel
wearing
leather although women in fur seem to be fair game?

Because the cow was going to be killed for meat anyway, whereas the
little furry beasts that make up a coat are only killed for their fur?

Yes of course - now lets consider a Hells Angel with a fur trim -

It's probably roadkill :-)

still think he'll get painted or does the prospect of non pc retalliation
still deter the activist?

I don't think outlaw bikers are much to do with the fashion scene, so
targeting them wouldn't really achieve much in terms of raising
awareness of cruelty to animals in the cause of human vanity, would it?

In article ,
John wrote:
So you do not care that you spend GBP30 per year on your insurance
premium,
paying for third parties injured by uninsured drivers?

I care more that Big Brother is watching me uninvited.

Why? What are you doing that might interest 'him'? You don't really think
there's someone logging your every move when you walk down the street, do
you? And I really can't see the difference between a camera checking your
car reg number to see if it's taxed etc than a policeman walking down the
street doing exactly the same.

Are you now saying that the premiums I pay will immediately come down by
£30 per year?

No, but it's such a competitive market it should stop them rising so fast.

--
*To be intoxicated is to feel sophisticated, but not be able to say it.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

And at the end of the day, David Icke will turn round and say "I told you
all this would happen" because it's going just as he predicted

What, even the reptile's ruling the world thing ?!

In article , "Séan
Connolly" mrcATseanDASHconnollyDOTcoDOTuk says...
And at the end of the day, David Icke will turn round and say "I told you
all this would happen" because it's going just as he predicted

What, even the reptile's ruling the world thing ?!

Look at Bush and Blair, watch them carefully - do you ever see flies
daring to get close?

In message , Séan
Connolly writes
And at the end of the day, David Icke will turn round and say "I told you
all this would happen" because it's going just as he predicted

What, even the reptile's ruling the world thing ?!

Well that too (I don't do smilies)

I did actually get all the way through one of his books once, I'll have
you know !

--
geoff

In message , Rob Morley
writes
In article , "Séan
Connolly" mrcATseanDASHconnollyDOTcoDOTuk says...
And at the end of the day, David Icke will turn round and say "I told you
all this would happen" because it's going just as he predicted

What, even the reptile's ruling the world thing ?!

Look at Bush and Blair, watch them carefully - do you ever see flies
daring to get close?

Oh dear, unrelated, but you've just somehow brought back the vision of
the scargill fly and thatcher by spitting image

--
geoff