Mike Barnes wrote:

For some value of "unusual". I'm a regular Sainsbury's shopper but (like
many people I guess) I wouldn't dream of buying 99.9% of what they sell.

But why is it that the stuff they decide to stop stocking always
comes from the remaining 0.1% ?

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK


Have dancing shoes, will ceilidh.

"TheScullster" wrote in message
. uk...

"Huge" wrote


It isn't just me who does this, then? I cannot abide that high-pitched
shrieking that children do. Needless to say, their parents make no effort
to make them stop. Indeed, these days parents make no effort to control
their
children in public whatsoever.


I want to know what divvy designed those child seats that get issued in
supermarket cafes!
This is a tall plastic cylinder with a moulded seat shape at the top.
Practically every child I've seen sitting in one of these feels duty-bound
to thump their heals against it creating a totally aggravating drumming
sound.
Neither parents nor cafe staff seem interested in preventing this
annoyance.

Phil


Can you imagine what would happen if the staff even mentioned it to the
parents!

Went in a fish and chip cafe a few days ago and a baby was licking and
sucking the top of a tartar sauce dispenser jar on the table - and then
banging it. Mother oblivious.

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:44:36 +0100, Derek Geldard wrote:

It isn't just me who does this, then? I cannot abide that
high-pitched
shrieking that children do.

Nature is working then. Child shrieking gets the attention of an
adult, even if said adult is busy doing something else or has nothing
to do with the said child. Adult has to remove themselves from the
sound to avoid the distress it causes them.

With screaming kids more often than not you see parent telling child
"No, you can't have that", child gets upset, parent sticks with the
no, child starts wailing, parent sticks with no, child throws a
tantrum, parent gives in and lets child have what ever it was. Now
child has got what it wanted and is quiet but child has been rewarded
for their bad behaviour. So next time parent says no, child throws a
tantrum as that gets them what they want.

When ours tried the "throwing a tantrum in the super market" bit, we
just laughed at them and made damn sure they didn't get any reward
for the behaviour. I don't think they tried it more than twice, it
simply didn't get them anywhere.

(My guess is that the kids get plonked en-mass in front of a great big
telly and the volume turned up full.

Quite probably.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 05:32:29 -0700 (PDT), Owain wrote:
On 12 Oct, 08:46, Frank Erskine wrote:
It's good fun dropping something unusual into somebody else's trolley
when they leave it in the middle of an aisle Â*:-)

Were you meaning condoms and nuns by any chance?

Nah, you'd never get a nun into one of those trolleys. Packet of penguins
maybe.

On Oct 12, 10:49*am, Andy Dingley wrote:
On 12 Oct, 10:17, Huge wrote:

It isn't just me who does this, then? I cannot abide that high-pitched
shrieking that children do. Needless to say, their parents make no effort
to make them stop. Indeed, these days parents make no effort to control their
children in public whatsoever.

Duct tape?

Squirty foam?

Angle grinder?

s/car/child/ Body filler.

MBQ

On Oct 12, 11:54*am, Tim W wrote:
Andy Dingley
* wibbled on Monday 12 October 2009 10:49

On 12 Oct, 10:17, Huge wrote:

It isn't just me who does this, then? I cannot abide that high-pitched
shrieking that children do. Needless to say, their parents make no effort
to make them stop. Indeed, these days parents make no effort to control
their children in public whatsoever.

Duct tape?

To quiet the children?

Squirty foam?

To prevent the female reproducing more?



Angle grinder?

To prevent the male reproducing more?

That would be a dangle grinder.

MBQ

"Dave Plowman (News)" wrote in message
...
In article ,
The Medway Handyman wrote:
Twice I've found the bits I wanted in the B&Q plumbing section & had
trouble buying them because they were sans packaging.

"If it hasn't got a bar code you can't buy it". I pointed ut that if it
didn't have a bar code it obviously didn't exist - so could I just take
it? Much confusion.

When that's happened to me they send a runner to get the barcode or
whatever off the label on the shelf.

--
*I don't have a solution, but I admire your problem. *

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

Did the runner use a zimmer frame?

Adam

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 02:49:28 -0700 (PDT), Andy Dingley wrote:

On 12 Oct, 10:17, Huge wrote:

It isn't just me who does this, then? I cannot abide that high-pitched
shrieking that children do. Needless to say, their parents make no effort
to make them stop. Indeed, these days parents make no effort to control their
children in public whatsoever.

Duct tape?

Squirty foam?

Angle grinder?

Game I made up on a ferry where there were kids running through the sitting
areas: splat-a-brat.
--
Peter.
The head of a pin will hold more angels if
it's been flattened with an angel-grinder.

On 12 Oct 2009 09:17:40 GMT, Huge wrote:

On 2009-10-11, David in Normandy wrote:

I had to walk out of Aldi the other day - someone had a screaming kid in
tow. And I do mean SCREAMING. After a few minutes I could stand it no
more and cleared off to sit in the car outside while the wife continued
shopping.

It isn't just me who does this, then? I cannot abide that high-pitched
shrieking that children do. Needless to say, their parents make no effort
to make them stop. Indeed, these days parents make no effort to control their
children in public whatsoever.

Friend said that he was in a small fhop and a kid was running round the
dispalys yelling "Does me ****ing 'ed in!, does me ****ing 'ed in!". This
went on for over a minute, then the mother screamed at her "Will you stop
that? I don't know where you get it from - it does me ****ing 'ed in!".
--
Peter.
The head of a pin will hold more angels if
it's been flattened with an angel-grinder.

Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:44:36 +0100, Derek Geldard wrote:

It isn't just me who does this, then? I cannot abide that
high-pitched shrieking that children do.

Nature is working then. Child shrieking gets the attention of an
adult, even if said adult is busy doing something else or has nothing
to do with the said child. Adult has to remove themselves from the
sound to avoid the distress it causes them.

With screaming kids more often than not you see parent telling child
"No, you can't have that", child gets upset, parent sticks with the
no, child starts wailing, parent sticks with no, child throws a
tantrum, parent gives in and lets child have what ever it was. Now
child has got what it wanted and is quiet but child has been rewarded
for their bad behaviour. So next time parent says no, child throws a
tantrum as that gets them what they want.

When ours tried the "throwing a tantrum in the super market" bit, we
just laughed at them and made damn sure they didn't get any reward
for the behaviour. I don't think they tried it more than twice, it
simply didn't get them anywhere.

First time our granddaughter threw a paddy in a supermarket, her mum laid
down next to her & did the same :-) Granddaughter doesn't go in for paddys
anymore...


--
Dave - The Medway Handyman
www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

Huge wrote:
On 2009-10-11, David in Normandy wrote:

I had to walk out of Aldi the other day - someone had a screaming kid in
tow. And I do mean SCREAMING. After a few minutes I could stand it no
more and cleared off to sit in the car outside while the wife continued
shopping.

It isn't just me who does this, then? I cannot abide that high-pitched
shrieking that children do. Needless to say, their parents make no effort
to make them stop. Indeed, these days parents make no effort to control their
children in public whatsoever.

Easy answer to that - go to Asda. The noise of their 'radio' station,
advertising videos, PA announcements, refrigeration equipment and
everything else does a remarkable job of reducing the screaming of the
brats to relative insignificance.

--
Rod

Huge wrote:

Nature is working then. Child shrieking gets the attention of an
adult, even if said adult is busy doing something else or has nothing
to do with the said child. Adult has to remove themselves from the
sound to avoid the distress it causes them.

Either that or strangle the child with the intestines of its parent.

And you call me grumpy?

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 14:43:39 +0100 (BST), Dave Liquorice wrote:

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:44:36 +0100, Derek Geldard wrote:

It isn't just me who does this, then? I cannot abide that
high-pitched
shrieking that children do.

Nature is working then. Child shrieking gets the attention of an
adult, even if said adult is busy doing something else or has nothing
to do with the said child. Adult has to remove themselves from the
sound to avoid the distress it causes them.

With screaming kids more often than not you see parent telling child
"No, you can't have that", child gets upset, parent sticks with the
no, child starts wailing, parent sticks with no, child throws a
tantrum, parent gives in and lets child have what ever it was. Now
child has got what it wanted and is quiet but child has been rewarded
for their bad behaviour. So next time parent says no, child throws a
tantrum as that gets them what they want.

When ours tried the "throwing a tantrum in the super market" bit, we
just laughed at them and made damn sure they didn't get any reward
for the behaviour. I don't think they tried it more than twice, it
simply didn't get them anywhere.

With our eldest, that didn't work at all, although with our middle one it
did and the youngest is too young to have reached that stage yet. The
eldest did grow out of it eventually.

SteveW

In message
,
Owain writes
On 12 Oct, 08:46, Frank Erskine wrote:
It's good fun dropping something unusual into somebody else's trolley
when they leave it in the middle of an aisle *:-)

Were you meaning condoms and nuns by any chance?

Or C cell batteries ...


--
geoff

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 21:21:57 +0100, geoff wrote:

In message
,
Owain writes
On 12 Oct, 08:46, Frank Erskine wrote:
It's good fun dropping something unusual into somebody else's trolley
when they leave it in the middle of an aisle Â*:-)

Were you meaning condoms and nuns by any chance?

Or C cell batteries ...

I thought it was candles and nuns...


--
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

Chris J Dixon wrote:
Mike Barnes wrote:

For some value of "unusual". I'm a regular Sainsbury's shopper but (like
many people I guess) I wouldn't dream of buying 99.9% of what they sell.

But why is it that the stuff they decide to stop stocking always
comes from the remaining 0.1% ?

You have noticed as well then :-(

Dave

Owain wrote:
On 12 Oct, 08:46, Frank Erskine wrote:
It's good fun dropping something unusual into somebody else's trolley
when they leave it in the middle of an aisle :-)

Were you meaning condoms and nuns by any chance?

When was the last time you saw a nun shopping? Talking of this, just
where do they shop?

They are usually rattling a collection box.

Dave

Dave wrote:
Owain wrote:


When was the last time you saw a nun shopping? Talking of this, just
where do they shop?

They are usually rattling a collection box.

Dave


Some nuns shop. They're the ones with a shopping habit.

--
Rod

Andy Dingley wrote:
On 11 Oct, 22:46, Harry Bloomfield
wrote:

Until you have paid for the item, it is not your property, so it could be theft.

However it would also be difficult to prove theft, against a halfway
competent brief in a magistrate's court. "Theft" has a very specific
meaning (look it up, it's really very narrow), and doesn't cover this.
Of course if the defendant was before a jury, they'd be unlikely to
have sympathy for a legal nicety like that.

If anything, there would be a stronger case for criminal damage to the
chicken leg.

This subject came up in uk.legal.moderated a few weeks ago and it was
decided that it would be theft, because the original item was not there
any more, it could be proved to the court that by eating the product,
you could not prove that you intended to put it back.

Dave

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 21:57:54 +0100, Dave wrote:

Owain wrote:
On 12 Oct, 08:46, Frank Erskine wrote:
It's good fun dropping something unusual into somebody else's trolley
when they leave it in the middle of an aisle :-)

Were you meaning condoms and nuns by any chance?

When was the last time you saw a nun shopping? Talking of this, just
where do they shop?

Quite a bit. There's a convent down the road. They use the local shops.



--
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

The Medway Handyman wrote:
Dave Liquorice wrote:
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 11:44:36 +0100, Derek Geldard wrote:

It isn't just me who does this, then? I cannot abide that
high-pitched shrieking that children do.
Nature is working then. Child shrieking gets the attention of an
adult, even if said adult is busy doing something else or has nothing
to do with the said child. Adult has to remove themselves from the
sound to avoid the distress it causes them.

With screaming kids more often than not you see parent telling child
"No, you can't have that", child gets upset, parent sticks with the
no, child starts wailing, parent sticks with no, child throws a
tantrum, parent gives in and lets child have what ever it was. Now
child has got what it wanted and is quiet but child has been rewarded
for their bad behaviour. So next time parent says no, child throws a
tantrum as that gets them what they want.

When ours tried the "throwing a tantrum in the super market" bit, we
just laughed at them and made damn sure they didn't get any reward
for the behaviour. I don't think they tried it more than twice, it
simply didn't get them anywhere.

First time our granddaughter threw a paddy in a supermarket, her mum laid
down next to her & did the same :-) Granddaughter doesn't go in for paddys
anymore...

I wish ours would do the same :-)

Youngest g daughter throws a fit with her mother. She won't do it with
me, because I turn round to her and say. 'you know you don't win with
me' and she shuts up :-)

We had the g daughters up with us during the summer hols. I took them
back to Portsmouth to see the youngest throw the worst paddy I have ever
seen. If I had been in control, she would never even have tried it, let
alone done it. I don't have to smack her, just hold her until she calms
down, at worst.

Dave

Andy Dingley wrote:
On 11 Oct, 22:46, Harry Bloomfield
wrote:

Until you have paid for the item, it is not your property, so it could be theft.

However it would also be difficult to prove theft, against a halfway
competent brief in a magistrate's court. "Theft" has a very specific
meaning (look it up, it's really very narrow), and doesn't cover this.
Of course if the defendant was before a jury, they'd be unlikely to
have sympathy for a legal nicety like that.

If anything, there would be a stronger case for criminal damage to the
chicken leg.

ISTR that the definition of 'theft' ( at least in Scotland ) went along
the lines of "...with intent to permenantly deprive the legitimate owner"

If there was a stated intention to pay, I think that would certainly be
grounds for 'reasonable doubt', and thus a criminal prosecution would
probably fail.

On that grounds alone, ( liklihood of conviction )I doubt the that the
prosecution would proceed.

As regards juries and points of law: juries don't make decisions about
points of law. They weigh the credibility of differing witness
evidence. If a point of law makes the conviction impossible, they will
be directed to that effect by the judge.

All IMHO, IANAL BMWI( but my wife is )

--
Ron

In message , Bob Eager
writes
On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 21:21:57 +0100, geoff wrote:

In message
,
Owain writes
On 12 Oct, 08:46, Frank Erskine wrote:
It's good fun dropping something unusual into somebody else's trolley
when they leave it in the middle of an aisle *:-)

Were you meaning condoms and nuns by any chance?

Or C cell batteries ...

I thought it was candles and nuns...



Technology moves on

Jesus vibrates in mysterious ways ...

--
geoff

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 22:05:06 +0100, Dave wrote:

If anything, there would be a stronger case for criminal damage to
the
chicken leg.

This subject came up in uk.legal.moderated a few weeks ago and it was
decided that it would be theft, because the original item was not there
any more, it could be proved to the court that by eating the product,
you could not prove that you intended to put it back.

Not convinced. Putting it back or not isn't overly relevant to theft
which is pretty tightly defined along the lines of "permenantly and
intentionally depriving". What is crucial is the intent. You could
eat the chicken leg provided you intend to pay for it. However until
you do pay you could be liable to criminal damage to the chicken leg
as it it not (yet) your property. However (again) it would be theft
if you ate the chicken leg then left the store without paying for it
but you would have to leave the store or at least be at an exit and
on the way out through it, as is the case with normal shop lifting.

--
Cheers
Dave.

On 12 Oct 2009 20:52:52 GMT, Bob Eager wrote:

Were you meaning condoms and nuns by any chance?

Or C cell batteries ...

I thought it was candles and nuns...

Nun 1: Where's the soap?
Nun 2: It does, doesn't it?

--
Cheers
Dave.

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 21:20:17 +0100, Steve Walker wrote:

With our eldest, that didn't work at all, although with our middle one
it did and the youngest is too young to have reached that stage yet. The
eldest did grow out of it eventually.

It's terribly hard to work out the "reward" some times. I suspect you
might have missed what your eldest was treating as a reward for the
paddys. It could be something like leaving the shop before finishing
what you went there for, as they didn't like that shop for some
reason.

I think the keys are not to give in once you have said no(*) and if
you make a threat be prepared to carry that threat out. So don't make
threats you can't carry out! It only takes one or two threats not to
be carried out for the child to come to the conclusion that threats
are harmless and can be sfely ignored.

(*) At least not as a direct result of throwing a paddy or other
unacceptable behaviour. Tell them that if they calm down behave
nicely for a pewriod of time they might (don't tell them the will or
promise they will) get what they want or some other reward.

--
Cheers
Dave.

Dave wrote:
Andy Dingley wrote:

However it would also be difficult to prove theft, against a halfway
competent brief in a magistrate's court. "Theft" has a very specific
meaning (look it up, it's really very narrow), and doesn't cover this.

This subject came up in uk.legal.moderated a few weeks ago and it was
decided that it would be theft,

If this is the u.l.m thread I'm thinking of, there's the rather crucial
difference that the OP had gone beyond the checkouts when she was pulled
up by shop staff.

Of course, I might have missed another thread you're referring to :-)

Pete

Dave Liquorice wrote:

(*) At least not as a direct result of throwing a paddy or other
unacceptable behaviour. Tell them that if they calm down behave
nicely for a pewriod of time they might (don't tell them the will or
promise they will) get what they want or some other reward.

Small child outside shop crying loudly. Stops a bit. Cries a bit
more. "Mummy, can't you hear me? I'm crying!"

Chris
--
Chris J Dixon Nottingham UK


Have dancing shoes, will ceilidh.

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 19:19:13 +0100, Rod wrote:

Easy answer to that - go to Asda.

Yuk - I don't like that place. per ardua ad asda!
--
Peter.
The head of a pin will hold more angels if
it's been flattened with an angel-grinder.

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 23:00:56 +0100 (BST), Dave Liquorice wrote:

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 21:20:17 +0100, Steve Walker wrote:

With our eldest, that didn't work at all, although with our middle one
it did and the youngest is too young to have reached that stage yet. The
eldest did grow out of it eventually.

It's terribly hard to work out the "reward" some times. I suspect you
might have missed what your eldest was treating as a reward for the
paddys. It could be something like leaving the shop before finishing
what you went there for, as they didn't like that shop for some
reason.

The only difference it made was that he was told off instead of praised. We
still finished the shopping, as we needed it, but he lost his treat
(usually a magazine). Further punishments (loss of dessert and going
straight to bed after his meal) followed if he didn't calm down and behave
from there.

I think the keys are not to give in once you have said no(*) and if
you make a threat be prepared to carry that threat out. So don't make
threats you can't carry out! It only takes one or two threats not to
be carried out for the child to come to the conclusion that threats
are harmless and can be sfely ignored.

(*) At least not as a direct result of throwing a paddy or other
unacceptable behaviour. Tell them that if they calm down behave
nicely for a pewriod of time they might (don't tell them the will or
promise they will) get what they want or some other reward.

We tried offering rewards for good behaviour, we tried witholding things
for bad, we tried threats of being sent straight to bed on our return home
(and carried it out repeatedly). No matter what, he just seemed unable to
stop the bad behaviour. He's still extremely stubborn and self-willed
today, but much better behaved.

Steve W

On Mon, 12 Oct 2009 21:57:54 +0100, Dave wrote:

Owain wrote:
On 12 Oct, 08:46, Frank Erskine wrote:
It's good fun dropping something unusual into somebody else's trolley
when they leave it in the middle of an aisle :-)

Were you meaning condoms and nuns by any chance?

When was the last time you saw a nun shopping?

End of August.

Talking of this, just
where do they shop?

There were three of them, in Super U, Matignon, France.

SteveW

On Tue, 13 Oct 2009 23:30:41 +0100, Steve Walker wrote:

We tried offering rewards for good behaviour, we tried witholding things
for bad, we tried threats of being sent straight to bed on our return
home (and carried it out repeatedly). No matter what, he just seemed
unable to stop the bad behaviour. He's still extremely stubborn and
self-willed today, but much better behaved.

I know another young person who fits that description very well.
Though she can behave very well when she wants to...

--
Cheers
Dave.