On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 14:52:58 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 14:24:18 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 13:56:30 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 13:25:35 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/07/17 10:36, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 01:47:52 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre
wrote:

Huge wrote:
On 2017-07-20, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
I just got asked to sign a petition requiring everybody to
install a
lockable fence around their garden pond incase their child (or
someone
else's) falls into it. The reason? Her own 2 year old
fell in
her
unfenced pond and drowned. So because she didn't have a
fence,
she
thinks everyone else should? Er.... so why didn't she have
one
then?

Very sad, but it may be a case of her salving her conscience.

Agreed, but why should I go to a deal of expense and
inconvenience
because
she's a useless moron?

I think we are compelled to do all kinds of things for no logical
reason. All part of the nonsense that is life.

No, all part of the nonsense that is our government. **** the
law,
break the rules, do as you wish. 3 million a year caught
speeding,
yet
they continue to keep speeding as an offence?


Well, I think government can do a few useful things, as long as
they
keep a very low profile. But there's an even worse thing called
politics, which just wrecks everything.

In this case prosecute the woman for child neglect.


When my sister brought her 2 year old to visit, she removed anything
below a height of 3 ft, inmcluding dozens of books,because 'he
likes to
pull things over'


I've a young lad myself, and have been more cautious than I would
ever
have imagined possible. I think I'm one of those 'helicopter
parents'.
But I can't imagine how anyone could be otherwise. I guess it's
one of
those things where you have to have had children to understand.
Probably hormones kicking in :-)

Wrapping your kids in cotton wool will make them inadequate in later
life. You're a **** parent.

I'm aware of the possibility.

Then teach them to look after themselves.

I know. I'd have said exactly the same /before/ the event. Like I say,
I think some weird hormones are at work.

Then why did you say you were cautious?

Because I am. If there appears to be a logical conflict in what I've
said, then I've failed to express myself adequately. Again.

You said you agree with me that kids should be taught to look after themselves, but you also say you protect them a lot. Which is it?

Do you have children of your own?

No, because people should only have children if they'
1) Rich enough to buy them their first house so they never have to have
a mortgage.
2) In perfect health so they don't pass on any inferior genes.
3) Good looking so no more ugly people are created.

Two out of three will have to do for now. I'm trying my hardest for the
third, though one of the others may fall by the wayside in the meantime.

Which one of the three haven't you done?

Not very rich yet (probably never will be), but good at saving. We
could buy said house, although that does conflict with the aim of
'looking after themselves'.

I think it's ridiculous that most people spend half their earnings paying interest. Most houses are technically owned by banks! You buy your kid's house. They buy their kids house, etc, etc, and the banks don't steal all our money.

Actually, not particularly good looking either, but the missus has made
sure that our son is.

I guess as long as one of you is good looking, the chances of your kids looking good is fairly good. So what did your wife see in you? :-)

--
The only substitute for good manners is fast reflexes.

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 14:52:58 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 14:24:18 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 13:56:30 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 13:25:35 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre
wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/07/17 10:36, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 01:47:52 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre
wrote:

Huge wrote:
On 2017-07-20, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
I just got asked to sign a petition requiring everybody to
install a
lockable fence around their garden pond incase their
child (or
someone
else's) falls into it. The reason? Her own 2 year old
fell in
her
unfenced pond and drowned. So because she didn't have a
fence,
she
thinks everyone else should? Er.... so why didn't she have
one
then?

Very sad, but it may be a case of her salving her conscience.

Agreed, but why should I go to a deal of expense and
inconvenience
because
she's a useless moron?

I think we are compelled to do all kinds of things for no
logical
reason. All part of the nonsense that is life.

No, all part of the nonsense that is our government. **** the
law,
break the rules, do as you wish. 3 million a year caught
speeding,
yet
they continue to keep speeding as an offence?


Well, I think government can do a few useful things, as long as
they
keep a very low profile. But there's an even worse thing called
politics, which just wrecks everything.

In this case prosecute the woman for child neglect.


When my sister brought her 2 year old to visit, she removed
anything
below a height of 3 ft, inmcluding dozens of books,because 'he
likes to
pull things over'


I've a young lad myself, and have been more cautious than I would
ever
have imagined possible. I think I'm one of those 'helicopter
parents'.
But I can't imagine how anyone could be otherwise. I guess it's
one of
those things where you have to have had children to understand.
Probably hormones kicking in :-)

Wrapping your kids in cotton wool will make them inadequate in later
life. You're a **** parent.

I'm aware of the possibility.

Then teach them to look after themselves.

I know. I'd have said exactly the same /before/ the event. Like I
say,
I think some weird hormones are at work.

Then why did you say you were cautious?

Because I am. If there appears to be a logical conflict in what I've
said, then I've failed to express myself adequately. Again.

You said you agree with me that kids should be taught to look after
themselves, but you also say you protect them a lot. Which is it?


Oh, right. I mean I know what I should do, but am compelled to do
something else. My sense of danger has gone out of all proportion.

Do you have children of your own?

No, because people should only have children if they'
1) Rich enough to buy them their first house so they never have to
have
a mortgage.
2) In perfect health so they don't pass on any inferior genes.
3) Good looking so no more ugly people are created.

Two out of three will have to do for now. I'm trying my hardest for
the
third, though one of the others may fall by the wayside in the
meantime.

Which one of the three haven't you done?

Not very rich yet (probably never will be), but good at saving. We
could buy said house, although that does conflict with the aim of
'looking after themselves'.

I think it's ridiculous that most people spend half their earnings
paying interest. Most houses are technically owned by banks! You buy
your kid's house. They buy their kids house, etc, etc, and the banks
don't steal all our money.


I agree. Borrowing is not (for most of us, at least) a good investment.

Actually, not particularly good looking either, but the missus has made
sure that our son is.

I guess as long as one of you is good looking, the chances of your kids
looking good is fairly good. So what did your wife see in you? :-)


No idea. She's Italian and thinks all English people are suave and
sophisticated, so I guess I took advantage of a delusion :-)

On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 15:55:39 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 14:52:58 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 14:24:18 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 13:56:30 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 13:25:35 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre
wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/07/17 10:36, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 01:47:52 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre
wrote:

Huge wrote:
On 2017-07-20, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
I just got asked to sign a petition requiring everybody to
install a
lockable fence around their garden pond incase their
child (or
someone
else's) falls into it. The reason? Her own 2 year old
fell in
her
unfenced pond and drowned. So because she didn't have a
fence,
she
thinks everyone else should? Er.... so why didn't she have
one
then?

Very sad, but it may be a case of her salving her conscience.

Agreed, but why should I go to a deal of expense and
inconvenience
because
she's a useless moron?

I think we are compelled to do all kinds of things for no
logical
reason. All part of the nonsense that is life.

No, all part of the nonsense that is our government. **** the
law,
break the rules, do as you wish. 3 million a year caught
speeding,
yet
they continue to keep speeding as an offence?


Well, I think government can do a few useful things, as long as
they
keep a very low profile. But there's an even worse thing called
politics, which just wrecks everything.

In this case prosecute the woman for child neglect.


When my sister brought her 2 year old to visit, she removed
anything
below a height of 3 ft, inmcluding dozens of books,because 'he
likes to
pull things over'


I've a young lad myself, and have been more cautious than I would
ever
have imagined possible. I think I'm one of those 'helicopter
parents'.
But I can't imagine how anyone could be otherwise. I guess it's
one of
those things where you have to have had children to understand..
Probably hormones kicking in :-)

Wrapping your kids in cotton wool will make them inadequate in later
life. You're a **** parent.

I'm aware of the possibility.

Then teach them to look after themselves.

I know. I'd have said exactly the same /before/ the event. Like I
say,
I think some weird hormones are at work.

Then why did you say you were cautious?

Because I am. If there appears to be a logical conflict in what I've
said, then I've failed to express myself adequately. Again.

You said you agree with me that kids should be taught to look after
themselves, but you also say you protect them a lot. Which is it?

Oh, right. I mean I know what I should do, but am compelled to do
something else. My sense of danger has gone out of all proportion.

I see. Pessimistic only subconsciously. Or is it the SWMBO's influence?

Do you have children of your own?

No, because people should only have children if they'
1) Rich enough to buy them their first house so they never have to
have
a mortgage.
2) In perfect health so they don't pass on any inferior genes.
3) Good looking so no more ugly people are created.

Two out of three will have to do for now. I'm trying my hardest for
the
third, though one of the others may fall by the wayside in the
meantime.

Which one of the three haven't you done?

Not very rich yet (probably never will be), but good at saving. We
could buy said house, although that does conflict with the aim of
'looking after themselves'.

I think it's ridiculous that most people spend half their earnings
paying interest. Most houses are technically owned by banks! You buy
your kid's house. They buy their kids house, etc, etc, and the banks
don't steal all our money.

I agree. Borrowing is not (for most of us, at least) a good investment.

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 15:55:39 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 14:52:58 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 14:24:18 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 13:56:30 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre
wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 13:25:35 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre
wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/07/17 10:36, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 01:47:52 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre

wrote:

Huge wrote:
On 2017-07-20, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
I just got asked to sign a petition requiring everybody to
install a
lockable fence around their garden pond incase their
child (or
someone
else's) falls into it. The reason? Her own 2 year old
fell in
her
unfenced pond and drowned. So because she didn't have a
fence,
she
thinks everyone else should? Er.... so why didn't she
have
one
then?

Very sad, but it may be a case of her salving her
conscience.

Agreed, but why should I go to a deal of expense and
inconvenience
because
she's a useless moron?

I think we are compelled to do all kinds of things for no
logical
reason. All part of the nonsense that is life.

No, all part of the nonsense that is our government. **** the
law,
break the rules, do as you wish. 3 million a year caught
speeding,
yet
they continue to keep speeding as an offence?


Well, I think government can do a few useful things, as long as
they
keep a very low profile. But there's an even worse thing
called
politics, which just wrecks everything.

In this case prosecute the woman for child neglect.


When my sister brought her 2 year old to visit, she removed
anything
below a height of 3 ft, inmcluding dozens of books,because 'he
likes to
pull things over'


I've a young lad myself, and have been more cautious than I would
ever
have imagined possible. I think I'm one of those 'helicopter
parents'.
But I can't imagine how anyone could be otherwise. I guess it's
one of
those things where you have to have had children to understand.
Probably hormones kicking in :-)

Wrapping your kids in cotton wool will make them inadequate in
later
life. You're a **** parent.

I'm aware of the possibility.

Then teach them to look after themselves.

I know. I'd have said exactly the same /before/ the event. Like I
say,
I think some weird hormones are at work.

Then why did you say you were cautious?

Because I am. If there appears to be a logical conflict in what I've
said, then I've failed to express myself adequately. Again.

You said you agree with me that kids should be taught to look after
themselves, but you also say you protect them a lot. Which is it?

Oh, right. I mean I know what I should do, but am compelled to do
something else. My sense of danger has gone out of all proportion.

I see. Pessimistic only subconsciously. Or is it the SWMBO's influence?


No, she's actually quite careless.

Do you have children of your own?

No, because people should only have children if they'
1) Rich enough to buy them their first house so they never have to
have
a mortgage.
2) In perfect health so they don't pass on any inferior genes.
3) Good looking so no more ugly people are created.

Two out of three will have to do for now. I'm trying my hardest for
the
third, though one of the others may fall by the wayside in the
meantime.

Which one of the three haven't you done?

Not very rich yet (probably never will be), but good at saving. We
could buy said house, although that does conflict with the aim of
'looking after themselves'.

I think it's ridiculous that most people spend half their earnings
paying interest. Most houses are technically owned by banks! You buy
your kid's house. They buy their kids house, etc, etc, and the banks
don't steal all our money.

I agree. Borrowing is not (for most of us, at least) a good investment.

Even worse, someone owes the bank £100K on a mortgage, and the parents
have £100K of savings. Even if you don't trust your kids, a legal loan
agreement between you would save a fortune.


I'm sure it's coming one day.

Actually, not particularly good looking either, but the missus has made
sure that our son is.

I guess as long as one of you is good looking, the chances of your kids
looking good is fairly good. So what did your wife see in you? :-)

No idea. She's Italian and thinks all English people are suave and
sophisticated, so I guess I took advantage of a delusion :-)

How odd. I thought the Italians thought of themselves as such.


They feel compelled to be stylish/impressive. Bella figura.

Is it true that.... no that's rude :-)


They do like to be all kinds of rude, I think. They seem to take great
joy in swearing.

Anyway, I'm off home for the weekend.

On 21/07/2017 10:21, Huge wrote:
On 2017-07-20, Steve Walker wrote:
On 20/07/2017 09:19, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 20/07/17 02:02, Fredxxx wrote:
On 20/07/2017 00:29, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
I just got asked to sign a petition requiring everybody to install a
lockable fence around their garden pond incase their child (or someone
else's) falls into it.

Many thanks, sounds a good cause. It's got my vote.
Co9mplte;ly ****inmgh clueless.

My old house is 300 yards away from any other house, and has no childern
wandering in it.

WTF should I have to install a fence

My feelings precisely. Unfortunately, this might have something different
to say;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupi...ility_Act_1957


Tyopical 'it works for me so I will force it on every one else'
Lefty/Remoaner attitide.

It'd pretty well ruin the aesthetics of having a pond at all too.

Indeed. When we moved in here, both ponds were (badly) fenced off (with
wire stock fencing) because the previous owners had grandchildren. Since we
have none, I removed the fencing.


When my parents became Grandparents I got a phone call from my Dad
saying "I've just bought some fencing to cover the pond, can you pick it
up on your way home?"

Four sheets of this

https://www.heras.co.uk/products/dem...ncing/jupiter/

I looked a right **** as the forklift driver dumped it on top on top of
the ladders and roof bars on my Citroen Berlingo for me to drive it home
from Doncaster.

And then there was the problem of getting it off the van!

It's still there covering their pond 12 years later. And last year we
caught the youngest one doing a "David Blaine I can walk across water
trick" on top of it.





--
Adam

On 20/07/2017 09:47, GB wrote:
On 20/07/2017 08:28, Brian Gaff wrote:
Yes there does seem to be a fault in her logic there.So suggestions fro
inventive devices to stop children drowning in ponds that does not
look like
a fence which takes away from the aesthetic appeal.

How about a strong mesh over the top just below the surface that stops
them
going in.


Or maybe some kind of device that all children wear that has every
pond in
the area on it coded into a gps chip?
grin.
OK I know its very sad, and one can understand the lady, but really
its up
to parents to be aware of what their children are doing.
Brian


Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.

And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this country:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html





For some reason I thought that link was going to mention Michael Barrymore.

--
Adam

"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 13:56:30 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 13:25:35 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/07/17 10:36, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 01:47:52 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre
wrote:

Huge wrote:
On 2017-07-20, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
I just got asked to sign a petition requiring everybody to
install a
lockable fence around their garden pond incase their child (or
someone
else's) falls into it. The reason? Her own 2 year old fell in
her
unfenced pond and drowned. So because she didn't have a fence,
she
thinks everyone else should? Er.... so why didn't she have one
then?

Very sad, but it may be a case of her salving her conscience.

Agreed, but why should I go to a deal of expense and inconvenience
because
she's a useless moron?

I think we are compelled to do all kinds of things for no logical
reason. All part of the nonsense that is life.

No, all part of the nonsense that is our government. **** the law,
break the rules, do as you wish. 3 million a year caught speeding,
yet
they continue to keep speeding as an offence?


Well, I think government can do a few useful things, as long as they
keep a very low profile. But there's an even worse thing called
politics, which just wrecks everything.

In this case prosecute the woman for child neglect.


When my sister brought her 2 year old to visit, she removed anything
below a height of 3 ft, inmcluding dozens of books,because 'he likes
to
pull things over'


I've a young lad myself, and have been more cautious than I would ever
have imagined possible. I think I'm one of those 'helicopter parents'.
But I can't imagine how anyone could be otherwise. I guess it's one of
those things where you have to have had children to understand.
Probably hormones kicking in :-)

Wrapping your kids in cotton wool will make them inadequate in later
life. You're a **** parent.


I'm aware of the possibility.

Then teach them to look after themselves.

Do you have children of your own?

No, because people should only have children if they'
1) Rich enough to buy them their first house so they never have to have a
mortgage.
2) In perfect health so they don't pass on any inferior genes.
3) Good looking so no more ugly people are created.

The real reason is because no one has actually
ever been stupid enough to let him **** them and
few have a microscope handy for the microdick.

"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 14:52:58 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 14:24:18 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 13:56:30 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:

James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 13:25:35 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre
wrote:

The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 21/07/17 10:36, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Fri, 21 Jul 2017 01:47:52 +0100, Dan S. MacAbre
wrote:

Huge wrote:
On 2017-07-20, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
I just got asked to sign a petition requiring everybody to
install a
lockable fence around their garden pond incase their child
(or
someone
else's) falls into it. The reason? Her own 2 year old
fell in
her
unfenced pond and drowned. So because she didn't have a
fence,
she
thinks everyone else should? Er.... so why didn't she have
one
then?

Very sad, but it may be a case of her salving her conscience.

Agreed, but why should I go to a deal of expense and
inconvenience
because
she's a useless moron?

I think we are compelled to do all kinds of things for no
logical
reason. All part of the nonsense that is life.

No, all part of the nonsense that is our government. **** the
law,
break the rules, do as you wish. 3 million a year caught
speeding,
yet
they continue to keep speeding as an offence?


Well, I think government can do a few useful things, as long as
they
keep a very low profile. But there's an even worse thing called
politics, which just wrecks everything.

In this case prosecute the woman for child neglect.


When my sister brought her 2 year old to visit, she removed
anything
below a height of 3 ft, inmcluding dozens of books,because 'he
likes to
pull things over'


I've a young lad myself, and have been more cautious than I would
ever
have imagined possible. I think I'm one of those 'helicopter
parents'.
But I can't imagine how anyone could be otherwise. I guess it's
one of
those things where you have to have had children to understand.
Probably hormones kicking in :-)

Wrapping your kids in cotton wool will make them inadequate in later
life. You're a **** parent.

I'm aware of the possibility.

Then teach them to look after themselves.

I know. I'd have said exactly the same /before/ the event. Like I
say,
I think some weird hormones are at work.

Then why did you say you were cautious?

Because I am. If there appears to be a logical conflict in what I've
said, then I've failed to express myself adequately. Again.

You said you agree with me that kids should be taught to look after
themselves, but you also say you protect them a lot. Which is it?

Do you have children of your own?

No, because people should only have children if they'
1) Rich enough to buy them their first house so they never have to
have
a mortgage.
2) In perfect health so they don't pass on any inferior genes.
3) Good looking so no more ugly people are created.

Two out of three will have to do for now. I'm trying my hardest for
the
third, though one of the others may fall by the wayside in the
meantime.

Which one of the three haven't you done?

Not very rich yet (probably never will be), but good at saving. We
could buy said house, although that does conflict with the aim of
'looking after themselves'.

I think it's ridiculous that most people spend half their earnings paying
interest.

Beat pumping it into a landlord's pocket
and ending up with nothing at all.

Most houses are technically owned by banks! You buy your kid's house.
They buy their kids house, etc, etc, and the banks don't steal all our
money.

They don't steal that much of it now with interest rates so low.

And it makes a lot more sense with interest so low to have
a mortgage so you start paying for what you end up with
than pumping much more into a landlords pocket while
you attempt to save enough to buy the place for cash
and get paid bugger all in interest on those savings.

Actually, not particularly good looking either, but the missus has made
sure that our son is.

I guess as long as one of you is good looking, the chances of your kids
looking good is fairly good. So what did your wife see in you? :-)

Presumably she is smart enough to not care about looks.

On 21/07/2017 21:12, ARW wrote:

It's still there covering their pond 12 years later. And last year we
caught the youngest one doing a "David Blaine I can walk across water
trick" on top of it.


Brilliant! :-)

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100, wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always someone else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of care. I
would guess that many of you would take a different view if one of
your kids fell into her pool.

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely, fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of adventures.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need protection.
I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security leads to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

AB

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100, wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always someone else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would teach them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if one of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids' fault, not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely, fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just make more fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught to do so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop protecting the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security leads to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like you here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that person themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where you're going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake crawl back into your little lawyer hole.

--
Women are not served here. You have to bring your own.

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:02:09 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100, wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always someone else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would teach them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if one of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids' fault, not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely, fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just make more fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught to do so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop protecting the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security leads to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like you here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that person themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where you're going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake crawl back into your little lawyer hole.

I can sympathise with your approach.

I am of the opinion that H&S regulations mean that people who should
not soil the planet with their genes are being artificially propogated
by the actions of the HSE.

Like it or not, we do have a duty of care however. You can shout about
it and stamp your feet as much as you wish, but you also share that
duty of care to ensure that your actions are carried out in a manner
that provides reasonable care for those you or your activities impinge
upon.

I would hazard a guess that being thick wouldn't go too far legally,
so if I were you, I'd play it safe and buy the fencing.


AB

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:23:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:02:09 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100, wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always someone else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would teach them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if one of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids' fault, not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely, fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just make more fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught to do so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop protecting the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security leads to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like you here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that person themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where you're going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake crawl back into your little lawyer hole.

I can sympathise with your approach.

I am of the opinion that H&S regulations mean that people who should
not soil the planet with their genes are being artificially propogated
by the actions of the HSE.

Like it or not, we do have a duty of care however. You can shout about
it and stamp your feet as much as you wish, but you also share that
duty of care to ensure that your actions are carried out in a manner
that provides reasonable care for those you or your activities impinge
upon.

Only in your warped opinion. If you fall down a hole, you should have looked where you were putting your own two feet. Stop expecting everyone else to do everything for you. You're a pathetic waste of space.

I would hazard a guess that being thick wouldn't go too far legally,
so if I were you, I'd play it safe and buy the fencing.

If someone else's kid falls into my pond or pool, he shouldn't have been in my garden, so it's his fault.

If my own kid falls in, he'd have been taught how to swim in the first place.

Duty of care begins with YOURSELF, and ends there.

--
You can get a lot of STDs from loo seats,
but only if you sit down before the last guy's got up.

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:35:39 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:23:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:02:09 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100, wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always someone else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would teach them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if one of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids' fault, not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely, fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just make more fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught to do so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop protecting the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security leads to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like you here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that person themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where you're going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake crawl back into your little lawyer hole.

I can sympathise with your approach.

I am of the opinion that H&S regulations mean that people who should
not soil the planet with their genes are being artificially propogated
by the actions of the HSE.

Like it or not, we do have a duty of care however. You can shout about
it and stamp your feet as much as you wish, but you also share that
duty of care to ensure that your actions are carried out in a manner
that provides reasonable care for those you or your activities impinge
upon.

Only in your warped opinion. If you fall down a hole, you should have looked where you were putting your own two feet. Stop expecting everyone else to do everything for you. You're a pathetic waste of space.

I would hazard a guess that being thick wouldn't go too far legally,
so if I were you, I'd play it safe and buy the fencing.

If someone else's kid falls into my pond or pool, he shouldn't have been in my garden, so it's his fault.

If my own kid falls in, he'd have been taught how to swim in the first place.

I have little doubt that "swimming" would be entirely natural. Maybe
he'd need a bit of help crawling out though.

Duty of care begins with YOURSELF, and ends there.

The law of the land would have a differing opinion methinks.

AB

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:03:37 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:35:39 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:23:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:02:09 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100, wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always someone else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would teach them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if one of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids' fault, not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely, fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just make more fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught to do so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop protecting the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security leads to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like you here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that person themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where you're going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake crawl back into your little lawyer hole.

I can sympathise with your approach.

I am of the opinion that H&S regulations mean that people who should
not soil the planet with their genes are being artificially propogated
by the actions of the HSE.

Like it or not, we do have a duty of care however. You can shout about
it and stamp your feet as much as you wish, but you also share that
duty of care to ensure that your actions are carried out in a manner
that provides reasonable care for those you or your activities impinge
upon.

Only in your warped opinion. If you fall down a hole, you should have looked where you were putting your own two feet. Stop expecting everyone else to do everything for you. You're a pathetic waste of space.

I would hazard a guess that being thick wouldn't go too far legally,
so if I were you, I'd play it safe and buy the fencing.

If someone else's kid falls into my pond or pool, he shouldn't have been in my garden, so it's his fault.

If my own kid falls in, he'd have been taught how to swim in the first place.

I have little doubt that "swimming" would be entirely natural. Maybe
he'd need a bit of help crawling out though.

You're making absolutely no sense at all.

Duty of care begins with YOURSELF, and ends there.

The law of the land would have a differing opinion methinks.

The law of the land is wrong, and anyone who agrees with it is an idiot, or so stupid that they can't think for themselves and have to follow pathetic little rulebooks.

No wonder everything is so expensive in the UK and China is beating us hands down. They just get on with it while we just sit around checking each other is safe.

--
Capitalism: Man exploiting man.
Socialism: The reverse.

"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100, wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an emergency
telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always someone
else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of care. I
would guess that many of you would take a different view if one of
your kids fell into her pool.

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely,

Plenty still do.

fences and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of adventures.

Yeah, I lived for years just a few hundred feet from Sydney Harbour itself.

Spent quite a bit of time just shoving logs around along the waters edge
etc at the bottom end of primary school. No one ever tried to stop me
and my parents were quite happy with me doing that unsupervised.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole
in a derelict factory roof when the center asbestos panel
plummeted to the floor many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need protection.

I don't agree that they do once they get a bit older.

I currently live in an irrigation area and even the youngest
kids somehow survived most of the smaller irrigation farms
having open channel water supplys. And their parents didn't
chain them up with long chains like some do with dogs.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security
leads to a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope
that the courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

Not even possible. One of my neighbours kids managed
to fall out of one of my trees with a ruler in her mouth.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:10:00 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:03:37 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:35:39 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:23:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:02:09 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100, wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always someone else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would teach them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if one of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids' fault, not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely, fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just make more fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught to do so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop protecting the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security leads to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like you here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that person themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where you're going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake crawl back into your little lawyer hole.

I can sympathise with your approach.

I am of the opinion that H&S regulations mean that people who should
not soil the planet with their genes are being artificially propogated
by the actions of the HSE.

Like it or not, we do have a duty of care however. You can shout about
it and stamp your feet as much as you wish, but you also share that
duty of care to ensure that your actions are carried out in a manner
that provides reasonable care for those you or your activities impinge
upon.

Only in your warped opinion. If you fall down a hole, you should have looked where you were putting your own two feet. Stop expecting everyone else to do everything for you. You're a pathetic waste of space.

I would hazard a guess that being thick wouldn't go too far legally,
so if I were you, I'd play it safe and buy the fencing.

If someone else's kid falls into my pond or pool, he shouldn't have been in my garden, so it's his fault.

If my own kid falls in, he'd have been taught how to swim in the first place.

I have little doubt that "swimming" would be entirely natural. Maybe
he'd need a bit of help crawling out though.

You're making absolutely no sense at all.

Duty of care begins with YOURSELF, and ends there.

The law of the land would have a differing opinion methinks.

The law of the land is wrong, and anyone who agrees with it is an idiot, or so stupid that they can't think for themselves and have to follow pathetic little rulebooks.

No wonder everything is so expensive in the UK and China is beating us hands down. They just get on with it while we just sit around checking each other is safe.

Well I can definately see your point. They have you beaten hands down,
I'm certain.

Have you tried carrots?


AB

On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 08:11:30 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100, wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an emergency
telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always someone
else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of care. I
would guess that many of you would take a different view if one of
your kids fell into her pool.

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely,

Plenty still do.

fences and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of adventures.

Yeah, I lived for years just a few hundred feet from Sydney Harbour itself.

Spent quite a bit of time just shoving logs around along the waters edge
etc at the bottom end of primary school. No one ever tried to stop me
and my parents were quite happy with me doing that unsupervised.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole
in a derelict factory roof when the center asbestos panel
plummeted to the floor many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need protection.

I don't agree that they do once they get a bit older.

I currently live in an irrigation area and even the youngest
kids somehow survived most of the smaller irrigation farms
having open channel water supplys. And their parents didn't
chain them up with long chains like some do with dogs.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security
leads to a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope
that the courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

Not even possible. One of my neighbours kids managed
to fall out of one of my trees with a ruler in her mouth.


Slightly different. A tree might be considered a problem if you built
a Wendy house at the top, or provided access specifically suited for
or targeted toward children. A bog standard unmodified tree couldn't
realistically be seen as a problem.



The only problem is, in the UK it's the words "reasonable care" that
everything revolves around.

I am continually informed that following the 17th edition is no
guarantee of immunity from prosecution if an injury occurs as a result
of a piece of my equipment. Even if One follows the book to the
letter, the "reasonable care" bit is there in the background just
waiting to help a few lawyers along the path to their next Merc.

AB

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:24:35 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:10:00 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:03:37 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:35:39 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:23:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:02:09 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100, wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always someone else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would teach them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if one of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids' fault, not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely, fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just make more fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught to do so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop protecting the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security leads to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like you here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that person themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where you're going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake crawl back into your little lawyer hole.

I can sympathise with your approach.

I am of the opinion that H&S regulations mean that people who should
not soil the planet with their genes are being artificially propogated
by the actions of the HSE.

Like it or not, we do have a duty of care however. You can shout about
it and stamp your feet as much as you wish, but you also share that
duty of care to ensure that your actions are carried out in a manner
that provides reasonable care for those you or your activities impinge
upon.

Only in your warped opinion. If you fall down a hole, you should have looked where you were putting your own two feet. Stop expecting everyone else to do everything for you. You're a pathetic waste of space.

I would hazard a guess that being thick wouldn't go too far legally,
so if I were you, I'd play it safe and buy the fencing.

If someone else's kid falls into my pond or pool, he shouldn't have been in my garden, so it's his fault.

If my own kid falls in, he'd have been taught how to swim in the first place.

I have little doubt that "swimming" would be entirely natural. Maybe
he'd need a bit of help crawling out though.

You're making absolutely no sense at all.

Duty of care begins with YOURSELF, and ends there.

The law of the land would have a differing opinion methinks.

The law of the land is wrong, and anyone who agrees with it is an idiot, or so stupid that they can't think for themselves and have to follow pathetic little rulebooks.

No wonder everything is so expensive in the UK and China is beating us hands down. They just get on with it while we just sit around checking each other is safe.

Well I can definately see your point. They have you beaten hands down,
I'm certain.

Have you tried carrots?

No they haven't, only about 5% of people believe in health and softy, it's less common than religion.

--
Which sexual position produces the ugliest children?
Ask your mum.

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:42:04 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:24:35 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:10:00 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:03:37 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:35:39 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:23:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:02:09 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100, wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always someone else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would teach them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if one of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids' fault, not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely, fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just make more fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught to do so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop protecting the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security leads to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like you here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that person themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where you're going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake crawl back into your little lawyer hole.

I can sympathise with your approach.

I am of the opinion that H&S regulations mean that people who should
not soil the planet with their genes are being artificially propogated
by the actions of the HSE.

Like it or not, we do have a duty of care however. You can shout about
it and stamp your feet as much as you wish, but you also share that
duty of care to ensure that your actions are carried out in a manner
that provides reasonable care for those you or your activities impinge
upon.

Only in your warped opinion. If you fall down a hole, you should have looked where you were putting your own two feet. Stop expecting everyone else to do everything for you. You're a pathetic waste of space.

I would hazard a guess that being thick wouldn't go too far legally,
so if I were you, I'd play it safe and buy the fencing.

If someone else's kid falls into my pond or pool, he shouldn't have been in my garden, so it's his fault.

If my own kid falls in, he'd have been taught how to swim in the first place.

I have little doubt that "swimming" would be entirely natural. Maybe
he'd need a bit of help crawling out though.

You're making absolutely no sense at all.

Duty of care begins with YOURSELF, and ends there.

The law of the land would have a differing opinion methinks.

The law of the land is wrong, and anyone who agrees with it is an idiot, or so stupid that they can't think for themselves and have to follow pathetic little rulebooks.

No wonder everything is so expensive in the UK and China is beating us hands down. They just get on with it while we just sit around checking each other is safe.

Well I can definately see your point. They have you beaten hands down,
I'm certain.

Have you tried carrots?

No they haven't, only about 5% of people believe in health and softy, it's less common than religion.

No you didn't read the question. They don't need them. Have you
yourself, or indeed your semi amphibious son tried carrots?

You may actually be an afficionado of H&S procedures without even
realising it.

AB

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:59:30 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:42:04 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:24:35 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:10:00 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:03:37 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:35:39 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:23:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:02:09 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100, wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always someone else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would teach them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if one of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids' fault, not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely, fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just make more fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught to do so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop protecting the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security leads to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like you here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that person themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where you're going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake crawl back into your little lawyer hole.

I can sympathise with your approach.

I am of the opinion that H&S regulations mean that people who should
not soil the planet with their genes are being artificially propogated
by the actions of the HSE.

Like it or not, we do have a duty of care however. You can shout about
it and stamp your feet as much as you wish, but you also share that
duty of care to ensure that your actions are carried out in a manner
that provides reasonable care for those you or your activities impinge
upon.

Only in your warped opinion. If you fall down a hole, you should have looked where you were putting your own two feet. Stop expecting everyone else to do everything for you. You're a pathetic waste of space.

I would hazard a guess that being thick wouldn't go too far legally,
so if I were you, I'd play it safe and buy the fencing.

If someone else's kid falls into my pond or pool, he shouldn't have been in my garden, so it's his fault.

If my own kid falls in, he'd have been taught how to swim in the first place.

I have little doubt that "swimming" would be entirely natural. Maybe
he'd need a bit of help crawling out though.

You're making absolutely no sense at all.

Duty of care begins with YOURSELF, and ends there.

The law of the land would have a differing opinion methinks.

The law of the land is wrong, and anyone who agrees with it is an idiot, or so stupid that they can't think for themselves and have to follow pathetic little rulebooks.

No wonder everything is so expensive in the UK and China is beating us hands down. They just get on with it while we just sit around checking each other is safe.

Well I can definately see your point. They have you beaten hands down,
I'm certain.

Have you tried carrots?

No they haven't, only about 5% of people believe in health and softy, it's less common than religion.

No you didn't read the question. They don't need them.

Who doesn't need who? I wasn't talking about carrots. I was answering the line above it. If you persist in waffling, expect people to interrupt you a bit late.

Have you yourself, or indeed your semi amphibious son

99% of people can swim.

tried carrots?

Irrelevant to health and softy.

You may actually be an afficionado of H&S procedures without even
realising it.

Yeah right, that's like saying I believe in god without realising it.

--
Health and Safety Officer required to start ASAP, circa £35K:
Your main duties will include:
Hampering other staff and preventing them from carrying on with their duties.
Handing out huge quantities of pointless paperwork consuming approx 1 rainforest per year.

On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 00:11:51 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:59:30 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:42:04 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:24:35 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:10:00 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:03:37 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:35:39 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:23:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:02:09 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100, wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always someone else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would teach them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if one of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids' fault, not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely, fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just make more fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught to do so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop protecting the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security leads to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like you here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that person themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where you're going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake crawl back into your little lawyer hole.

I can sympathise with your approach.

I am of the opinion that H&S regulations mean that people who should
not soil the planet with their genes are being artificially propogated
by the actions of the HSE.

Like it or not, we do have a duty of care however. You can shout about
it and stamp your feet as much as you wish, but you also share that
duty of care to ensure that your actions are carried out in a manner
that provides reasonable care for those you or your activities impinge
upon.

Only in your warped opinion. If you fall down a hole, you should have looked where you were putting your own two feet. Stop expecting everyone else to do everything for you. You're a pathetic waste of space.

I would hazard a guess that being thick wouldn't go too far legally,
so if I were you, I'd play it safe and buy the fencing.

If someone else's kid falls into my pond or pool, he shouldn't have been in my garden, so it's his fault.

If my own kid falls in, he'd have been taught how to swim in the first place.

I have little doubt that "swimming" would be entirely natural. Maybe
he'd need a bit of help crawling out though.

You're making absolutely no sense at all.

Duty of care begins with YOURSELF, and ends there.

The law of the land would have a differing opinion methinks.

The law of the land is wrong, and anyone who agrees with it is an idiot, or so stupid that they can't think for themselves and have to follow pathetic little rulebooks.

No wonder everything is so expensive in the UK and China is beating us hands down. They just get on with it while we just sit around checking each other is safe.

Well I can definately see your point. They have you beaten hands down,
I'm certain.

Have you tried carrots?

No they haven't, only about 5% of people believe in health and softy, it's less common than religion.

No you didn't read the question. They don't need them.

Who doesn't need who? I wasn't talking about carrots. I was answering the line above it. If you persist in waffling, expect people to interrupt you a bit late.

Have you yourself, or indeed your semi amphibious son

99% of people can swim.

tried carrots?

Irrelevant to health and softy.

You may actually be an afficionado of H&S procedures without even
realising it.

Yeah right, that's like saying I believe in god without realising it.

Funny you should say that, but I think you do.

I can tell from your posts that your personal deity is looking out for
your interests.

You are obviously benefitting from some divine guidance, far more
astute individuals than your good self would be at the mercy of every
hole in Christendom, yet you are living proof that some form of
spiritual intercession is being carried out in order to keep you safe.

When you are in Lidl, do you sometimes find yourself at the carrot
stand, as if drawn there subconciously?

AB

On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 00:39:20 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 00:11:51 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:59:30 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:42:04 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:24:35 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:10:00 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:03:37 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:35:39 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:23:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:02:09 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100, wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always someone else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would teach them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if one of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids' fault, not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely, fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just make more fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught to do so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop protecting the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security leads to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like you here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that person themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where you're going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake crawl back into your little lawyer hole.

I can sympathise with your approach.

I am of the opinion that H&S regulations mean that people who should
not soil the planet with their genes are being artificially propogated
by the actions of the HSE.

Like it or not, we do have a duty of care however. You can shout about
it and stamp your feet as much as you wish, but you also share that
duty of care to ensure that your actions are carried out in a manner
that provides reasonable care for those you or your activities impinge
upon.

Only in your warped opinion. If you fall down a hole, you should have looked where you were putting your own two feet. Stop expecting everyone else to do everything for you. You're a pathetic waste of space.

I would hazard a guess that being thick wouldn't go too far legally,
so if I were you, I'd play it safe and buy the fencing.

If someone else's kid falls into my pond or pool, he shouldn't have been in my garden, so it's his fault.

If my own kid falls in, he'd have been taught how to swim in the first place.

I have little doubt that "swimming" would be entirely natural. Maybe
he'd need a bit of help crawling out though.

You're making absolutely no sense at all.

Duty of care begins with YOURSELF, and ends there.

The law of the land would have a differing opinion methinks.

The law of the land is wrong, and anyone who agrees with it is an idiot, or so stupid that they can't think for themselves and have to follow pathetic little rulebooks.

No wonder everything is so expensive in the UK and China is beating us hands down. They just get on with it while we just sit around checking each other is safe.

Well I can definately see your point. They have you beaten hands down,
I'm certain.

Have you tried carrots?

No they haven't, only about 5% of people believe in health and softy, it's less common than religion.

No you didn't read the question. They don't need them.

Who doesn't need who? I wasn't talking about carrots. I was answering the line above it. If you persist in waffling, expect people to interrupt you a bit late.

Have you yourself, or indeed your semi amphibious son

99% of people can swim.

tried carrots?

Irrelevant to health and softy.

You may actually be an afficionado of H&S procedures without even
realising it.

Yeah right, that's like saying I believe in god without realising it.

Funny you should say that, but I think you do.

I can tell from your posts that your personal deity is looking out for
your interests.

I don't have one. People like me with more intelligence than you can look after themselves.

You are obviously benefitting from some divine guidance, far more
astute individuals than your good self would be at the mercy of every
hole in Christendom, yet you are living proof that some form of
spiritual intercession is being carried out in order to keep you safe.

You're not right in the head. Go join the backwards Americans and dance in a church.

When you are in Lidl, do you sometimes find yourself at the carrot
stand, as if drawn there subconciously?

No. Now **** off and find someone else to bother with your inane drivel.

--
"Sir, your daughter says she loves me, she can't live without me, and wants to marry me."
"And you're asking my permission to marry her?"
"No, I'm asking you to make her leave me the hell alone!!"

On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 00:44:04 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 00:39:20 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 00:11:51 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:59:30 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:42:04 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:24:35 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:10:00 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 23:03:37 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:35:39 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:23:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:02:09 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100, wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always someone else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would teach them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if one of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids' fault, not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely, fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just make more fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught to do so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop protecting the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security leads to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like you here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that person themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where you're going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake crawl back into your little lawyer hole.

I can sympathise with your approach.

I am of the opinion that H&S regulations mean that people who should
not soil the planet with their genes are being artificially propogated
by the actions of the HSE.

Like it or not, we do have a duty of care however. You can shout about
it and stamp your feet as much as you wish, but you also share that
duty of care to ensure that your actions are carried out in a manner
that provides reasonable care for those you or your activities impinge
upon.

Only in your warped opinion. If you fall down a hole, you should have looked where you were putting your own two feet. Stop expecting everyone else to do everything for you. You're a pathetic waste of space.

I would hazard a guess that being thick wouldn't go too far legally,
so if I were you, I'd play it safe and buy the fencing.

If someone else's kid falls into my pond or pool, he shouldn't have been in my garden, so it's his fault.

If my own kid falls in, he'd have been taught how to swim in the first place.

I have little doubt that "swimming" would be entirely natural. Maybe
he'd need a bit of help crawling out though.

You're making absolutely no sense at all.

Duty of care begins with YOURSELF, and ends there.

The law of the land would have a differing opinion methinks.

The law of the land is wrong, and anyone who agrees with it is an idiot, or so stupid that they can't think for themselves and have to follow pathetic little rulebooks.

No wonder everything is so expensive in the UK and China is beating us hands down. They just get on with it while we just sit around checking each other is safe.

Well I can definately see your point. They have you beaten hands down,
I'm certain.

Have you tried carrots?

No they haven't, only about 5% of people believe in health and softy, it's less common than religion.

No you didn't read the question. They don't need them.

Who doesn't need who? I wasn't talking about carrots. I was answering the line above it. If you persist in waffling, expect people to interrupt you a bit late.

Have you yourself, or indeed your semi amphibious son

99% of people can swim.

tried carrots?

Irrelevant to health and softy.

You may actually be an afficionado of H&S procedures without even
realising it.

Yeah right, that's like saying I believe in god without realising it.

Funny you should say that, but I think you do.

I can tell from your posts that your personal deity is looking out for
your interests.

I don't have one. People like me with more intelligence than you can look after themselves.

You are obviously benefitting from some divine guidance, far more
astute individuals than your good self would be at the mercy of every
hole in Christendom, yet you are living proof that some form of
spiritual intercession is being carried out in order to keep you safe.

You're not right in the head. Go join the backwards Americans and dance in a church.

When you are in Lidl, do you sometimes find yourself at the carrot
stand, as if drawn there subconciously?

No. Now **** off and find someone else to bother with your inane drivel.

I really do not advise you to use such profanity. I am rapidly coming
to the conclusion that the only reason your deity, guardian angel,
guiding shepherd, or whatever else you call it, is only looking out
for your interests here on earth, so that you don't soil the sanctity
of Valhalla or wherever else the chosen ones congregate.

If you take my advice, you will moderate your language and get a bit
of humility, otherwise you will spend eternity in the fiery furnace
having your naughty bits prodded with pitchforks. There will be no
accident book, no hi vis and no carrots.

I'm afraid your deficiencies in the brain cell department would cut
about as much ice with Beelzebub, as it does with the HSE.

AB

"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message news
On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:35:39 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:23:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:02:09 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100,
wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this
country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an
emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always someone
else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would teach
them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if one of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids' fault,
not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely, fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just make more
fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught to do
so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop protecting
the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security leads to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like you
here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that person
themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where you're
going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake crawl
back into your little lawyer hole.

I can sympathise with your approach.

I am of the opinion that H&S regulations mean that people who should
not soil the planet with their genes are being artificially propogated
by the actions of the HSE.

Like it or not, we do have a duty of care however. You can shout about
it and stamp your feet as much as you wish, but you also share that
duty of care to ensure that your actions are carried out in a manner
that provides reasonable care for those you or your activities impinge
upon.

Only in your warped opinion. If you fall down a hole, you should have
looked where you were putting your own two feet. Stop expecting everyone
else to do everything for you. You're a pathetic waste of space.

I would hazard a guess that being thick wouldn't go too far legally,
so if I were you, I'd play it safe and buy the fencing.

If someone else's kid falls into my pond or pool, he shouldn't have been
in my garden, so it's his fault.

If my own kid falls in, he'd have been taught how to swim in the first
place.

I have little doubt that "swimming" would be entirely natural.

It isnt for all of them, some just sink to the bottom.

Maybe he'd need a bit of help crawling out though.

Duty of care begins with YOURSELF, and ends there.

The law of the land would have a differing opinion methinks.

Not with common stuff like garden pools.

On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 11:25:07 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message news
On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:35:39 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:23:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:02:09 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100,
wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this
country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an
emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always someone
else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would teach
them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if one of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids' fault,
not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely, fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just make more
fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught to do
so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop protecting
the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security leads to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like you
here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that person
themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where you're
going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake crawl
back into your little lawyer hole.

I can sympathise with your approach.

I am of the opinion that H&S regulations mean that people who should
not soil the planet with their genes are being artificially propogated
by the actions of the HSE.

Like it or not, we do have a duty of care however. You can shout about
it and stamp your feet as much as you wish, but you also share that
duty of care to ensure that your actions are carried out in a manner
that provides reasonable care for those you or your activities impinge
upon.

Only in your warped opinion. If you fall down a hole, you should have
looked where you were putting your own two feet. Stop expecting everyone
else to do everything for you. You're a pathetic waste of space.

I would hazard a guess that being thick wouldn't go too far legally,
so if I were you, I'd play it safe and buy the fencing.

If someone else's kid falls into my pond or pool, he shouldn't have been
in my garden, so it's his fault.

If my own kid falls in, he'd have been taught how to swim in the first
place.

I have little doubt that "swimming" would be entirely natural.

It isnt for all of them, some just sink to the bottom.

We were discussing one individual who's genetic makeup didn't
facillitate progress to much more than slithering out of the
primordial soup.

Maybe he'd need a bit of help crawling out though.

Duty of care begins with YOURSELF, and ends there.

The law of the land would have a differing opinion methinks.

Not with common stuff like garden pools.
I'm afraid it depends on the circumstances.

"common stuff" wouldn't stand up in court at all.

Basically the questions are, was it a danger and was every reasonable
care taken to prevent injury.

The injured party could be a child an adult, even a thief with no
right to be on the premises anyway.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/pe...s-1581241.html

AB

"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 11:25:07 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message news
On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:35:39 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:23:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:02:09 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100,
wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this
country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an
emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always
someone
else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a
pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would teach
them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if one of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids'
fault,
not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely,
fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just make
more
fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need
protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught to do
so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop
protecting
the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security leads
to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings
incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around
supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like you
here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that person
themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where you're
going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake crawl
back into your little lawyer hole.

I can sympathise with your approach.

I am of the opinion that H&S regulations mean that people who should
not soil the planet with their genes are being artificially propogated
by the actions of the HSE.

Like it or not, we do have a duty of care however. You can shout about
it and stamp your feet as much as you wish, but you also share that
duty of care to ensure that your actions are carried out in a manner
that provides reasonable care for those you or your activities impinge
upon.

Only in your warped opinion. If you fall down a hole, you should have
looked where you were putting your own two feet. Stop expecting
everyone
else to do everything for you. You're a pathetic waste of space.

I would hazard a guess that being thick wouldn't go too far legally,
so if I were you, I'd play it safe and buy the fencing.

If someone else's kid falls into my pond or pool, he shouldn't have been
in my garden, so it's his fault.

If my own kid falls in, he'd have been taught how to swim in the first
place.

I have little doubt that "swimming" would be entirely natural.

It isnt for all of them, some just sink to the bottom.

We were discussing one individual who's genetic makeup didn't
facillitate progress to much more than s out of the
primordial soup.

We were discussing ponds and pools and young kids.

Maybe he'd need a bit of help crawling out though.

Duty of care begins with YOURSELF, and ends there.

The law of the land would have a differing opinion methinks.

Not with common stuff like garden pools.

I'm afraid it depends on the circumstances.

Nope.

"common stuff" wouldn't stand up in court at all.

Bull**** it wouldn't with ponds.

Basically the questions are, was it a danger and
was every reasonable care taken to prevent injury.

Bull**** with ponds.

The injured party could be a child an adult, even
a thief with no right to be on the premises anyway.

More pig ignorant drivel.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/pe...s-1581241.html

Just because some fool journo claims something...

On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 15:01:05 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 11:25:07 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message news On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:35:39 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:23:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:02:09 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100,
wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this
country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an
emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always
someone
else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a
pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would teach
them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if one of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids'
fault,
not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely,
fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just make
more
fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need
protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught to do
so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop
protecting
the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security leads
to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings
incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around
supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like you
here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that person
themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where you're
going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake crawl
back into your little lawyer hole.

I can sympathise with your approach.

I am of the opinion that H&S regulations mean that people who should
not soil the planet with their genes are being artificially propogated
by the actions of the HSE.

Like it or not, we do have a duty of care however. You can shout about
it and stamp your feet as much as you wish, but you also share that
duty of care to ensure that your actions are carried out in a manner
that provides reasonable care for those you or your activities impinge
upon.

Only in your warped opinion. If you fall down a hole, you should have
looked where you were putting your own two feet. Stop expecting
everyone
else to do everything for you. You're a pathetic waste of space.

I would hazard a guess that being thick wouldn't go too far legally,
so if I were you, I'd play it safe and buy the fencing.

If someone else's kid falls into my pond or pool, he shouldn't have been
in my garden, so it's his fault.

If my own kid falls in, he'd have been taught how to swim in the first
place.

I have little doubt that "swimming" would be entirely natural.

It isnt for all of them, some just sink to the bottom.

We were discussing one individual who's genetic makeup didn't
facillitate progress to much more than s out of the
primordial soup.

We were discussing ponds and pools and young kids.

Maybe he'd need a bit of help crawling out though.

Duty of care begins with YOURSELF, and ends there.

The law of the land would have a differing opinion methinks.

Not with common stuff like garden pools.

I'm afraid it depends on the circumstances.

Nope.

"common stuff" wouldn't stand up in court at all.

Bull**** it wouldn't with ponds.

Basically the questions are, was it a danger and
was every reasonable care taken to prevent injury.

Bull**** with ponds.

The injured party could be a child an adult, even
a thief with no right to be on the premises anyway.

More pig ignorant drivel.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/pe...s-1581241.html

Just because some fool journo claims something...
Suit yourself.

If you care to apply logic though, a pond is nothing more than an
extremely soggy hole.

If you look at the lengths the utility companies go to to ensure that
public and holes are separated, you then have to wonder how the
addition of water makes them so much more safe if a pond is so immune
from any responsibility on the part of the owner.

I remember dealing with a couple of people like yourself when
designing a guard for a pump once. When it came to the installation
the fitter wanted to take short cuts, his words were "no one would be
daft enough to put their hand there".

Basically that's why my pay grade considerably exceeds that of the
fitter.

AB

On 22/07/17 21:42, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

I find that gurning at them behind mums back reduces them to tears and
satisfies my urge for vengeance.

"Whatever is the matter ?" mum says looking around for the source of the
distress while I look noncchalantly into the middle distance.


I mena the kind cant say 'well that man over there made a horrid face at
me' can he?

--
The New Left are the people they warned you about.

On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 10:56:05 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

On 22/07/17 21:42, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp wrote:
The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

I find that gurning at them behind mums back reduces them to tears and
satisfies my urge for vengeance.

"Whatever is the matter ?" mum says looking around for the source of the
distress while I look noncchalantly into the middle distance.



Welcome, you are back on my Xmas card list,

Telling the little monsters that there's no Santa Claus can be a very
satisfying, rewarding experience also.

As a finale I usually offer a tissue to mop the ensuing tears away,
along with providing looks of sympathetic concern. I just ensure that
it comes from the pocket I keep my freshly minced chillies in.

AB

I mena the kind cant say 'well that man over there made a horrid face at
me' can he?

"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 15:01:05 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 11:25:07 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message news On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:35:39 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:23:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:02:09 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100,
wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this
country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an
emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always
someone
else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a
pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of
care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would
teach
them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if one
of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids'
fault,
not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear
and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely,
fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just make
more
fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a
derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need
protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught to
do
so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop
protecting
the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security leads
to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings
incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around
supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like you
here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that person
themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where
you're
going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake crawl
back into your little lawyer hole.

I can sympathise with your approach.

I am of the opinion that H&S regulations mean that people who should
not soil the planet with their genes are being artificially
propogated
by the actions of the HSE.

Like it or not, we do have a duty of care however. You can shout
about
it and stamp your feet as much as you wish, but you also share that
duty of care to ensure that your actions are carried out in a manner
that provides reasonable care for those you or your activities
impinge
upon.

Only in your warped opinion. If you fall down a hole, you should have
looked where you were putting your own two feet. Stop expecting
everyone
else to do everything for you. You're a pathetic waste of space.

I would hazard a guess that being thick wouldn't go too far legally,
so if I were you, I'd play it safe and buy the fencing.

If someone else's kid falls into my pond or pool, he shouldn't have
been
in my garden, so it's his fault.

If my own kid falls in, he'd have been taught how to swim in the first
place.

I have little doubt that "swimming" would be entirely natural.

It isnt for all of them, some just sink to the bottom.

We were discussing one individual who's genetic makeup didn't
facillitate progress to much more than s out of the
primordial soup.

We were discussing ponds and pools and young kids.

Maybe he'd need a bit of help crawling out though.

Duty of care begins with YOURSELF, and ends there.

The law of the land would have a differing opinion methinks.

Not with common stuff like garden pools.

I'm afraid it depends on the circumstances.

Nope.

"common stuff" wouldn't stand up in court at all.

Bull**** it wouldn't with ponds.

Basically the questions are, was it a danger and
was every reasonable care taken to prevent injury.

Bull**** with ponds.

The injured party could be a child an adult, even
a thief with no right to be on the premises anyway.

More pig ignorant drivel.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/pe...s-1581241.html

Just because some fool journo claims something...

Suit yourself.

I havent worn a suit for more than 45 years.

If you care to apply logic though, a pond is
nothing more than an extremely soggy hole.

Nothing logical about the law.

If you look at the lengths the utility companies go to to ensure that
public and holes are separated, you then have to wonder how the
addition of water makes them so much more safe if a pond is so
immune from any responsibility on the part of the owner.

Those are mostly short term holes.

I happen to live in an irrigation area and it uses entirely open
supply channels, and entirely open ****ing great drains that
anyone can trivially drown in. One of them quite literally
passes right thru the center of town with nothing to stop any
kid falling into the main supply channel. The most there are is
a few signs telling you that you arent allowed to swim in them.

And not one of our rivers has any fences
stopping people from falling in either.

I remember dealing with a couple of people like yourself when
designing a guard for a pump once. When it came to the
installation the fitter wanted to take short cuts, his words
were "no one would be daft enough to put their hand there".

We have ****ing great pumps as big as a ****ing great bus.

Basically that's why my pay grade
considerably exceeds that of the fitter.

Like hell it does.

On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 02:45:11 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 15:01:05 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 11:25:07 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message news On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:35:39 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:23:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:02:09 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100,
wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this
country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an
emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always
someone
else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a
pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of
care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would
teach
them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if one
of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids'
fault,
not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear
and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely,
fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just make
more
fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a
derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need
protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught to
do
so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop
protecting
the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security leads
to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings
incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around
supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like you
here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that person
themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where
you're
going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake crawl
back into your little lawyer hole.

I can sympathise with your approach.

I am of the opinion that H&S regulations mean that people who should
not soil the planet with their genes are being artificially
propogated
by the actions of the HSE.

Like it or not, we do have a duty of care however. You can shout
about
it and stamp your feet as much as you wish, but you also share that
duty of care to ensure that your actions are carried out in a manner
that provides reasonable care for those you or your activities
impinge
upon.

Only in your warped opinion. If you fall down a hole, you should have
looked where you were putting your own two feet. Stop expecting
everyone
else to do everything for you. You're a pathetic waste of space.

I would hazard a guess that being thick wouldn't go too far legally,
so if I were you, I'd play it safe and buy the fencing.

If someone else's kid falls into my pond or pool, he shouldn't have
been
in my garden, so it's his fault.

If my own kid falls in, he'd have been taught how to swim in the first
place.

I have little doubt that "swimming" would be entirely natural.

It isnt for all of them, some just sink to the bottom.

We were discussing one individual who's genetic makeup didn't
facillitate progress to much more than s out of the
primordial soup.

We were discussing ponds and pools and young kids.

Maybe he'd need a bit of help crawling out though.

Duty of care begins with YOURSELF, and ends there.

The law of the land would have a differing opinion methinks.

Not with common stuff like garden pools.

I'm afraid it depends on the circumstances.

Nope.

"common stuff" wouldn't stand up in court at all.

Bull**** it wouldn't with ponds.

Basically the questions are, was it a danger and
was every reasonable care taken to prevent injury.

Bull**** with ponds.

The injured party could be a child an adult, even
a thief with no right to be on the premises anyway.

More pig ignorant drivel.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/pe...s-1581241.html

Just because some fool journo claims something...

Suit yourself.

I havent worn a suit for more than 45 years.

If you care to apply logic though, a pond is
nothing more than an extremely soggy hole.

Nothing logical about the law.

If you look at the lengths the utility companies go to to ensure that
public and holes are separated, you then have to wonder how the
addition of water makes them so much more safe if a pond is so
immune from any responsibility on the part of the owner.

Those are mostly short term holes.

I happen to live in an irrigation area and it uses entirely open
supply channels, and entirely open ****ing great drains that
anyone can trivially drown in. One of them quite literally
passes right thru the center of town with nothing to stop any
kid falling into the main supply channel. The most there are is
a few signs telling you that you arent allowed to swim in them.

One can only assume that the solicitors in you neck of the woods are
making enough on PPI insurance and traffic offences. Hence the lack of
need for the ambulance chasing philosophy imported from the US and
honed to a pinnacle of greed and triviality by our bunch of solicitors
on this side of the pond.

And not one of our rivers has any fences
stopping people from falling in either.

A river is a natural feature, it hasn't been placed there overnight.

There is of course plenty of opportunity to take the Canal and River
Trust in the UK to court, should One have a grievance. No One would
stop a court case.


I remember dealing with a couple of people like yourself when
designing a guard for a pump once. When it came to the
installation the fitter wanted to take short cuts, his words
were "no one would be daft enough to put their hand there".

We have ****ing great pumps as big as a ****ing great bus.

So?

Are you suggesting you are all big macho boys that dont need silly
girly type things like guards?

Basically that's why my pay grade
considerably exceeds that of the fitter.

Like hell it does.

It does actually. But there again my work covers a wide field and even
includes duties such as explaining the obvious to idiots.


AB

In article , Archibald
Tarquin Blenkinsopp writes
On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:35:39 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:23:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:02:09 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100, wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this country:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...oner-calls-new
-law-fence-garden-swimming-pools-adventurous-boy-drowned-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an
emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always
someone else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would
teach them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if one of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids'
fault, not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely, fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just make
more fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught to
do so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop
protecting the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security leads to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like you
here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that person
themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where
you're going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake
crawl back into your little lawyer hole.

I can sympathise with your approach.

I am of the opinion that H&S regulations mean that people who should
not soil the planet with their genes are being artificially propogated
by the actions of the HSE.

Like it or not, we do have a duty of care however. You can shout about
it and stamp your feet as much as you wish, but you also share that
duty of care to ensure that your actions are carried out in a manner
that provides reasonable care for those you or your activities impinge
upon.

Only in your warped opinion. If you fall down a hole, you should have
looked where you were putting your own two feet. Stop expecting
everyone else to do everything for you. You're a pathetic waste of
space.

I would hazard a guess that being thick wouldn't go too far legally,
so if I were you, I'd play it safe and buy the fencing.

If someone else's kid falls into my pond or pool, he shouldn't have
been in my garden, so it's his fault.

If my own kid falls in, he'd have been taught how to swim in the first place.

I have little doubt that "swimming" would be entirely natural. Maybe
he'd need a bit of help crawling out though.

Duty of care begins with YOURSELF, and ends there.

The law of the land would have a differing opinion methinks.

AB
Presumably not and that's why this moronic woman wants it changed.
--
bert

On 21/07/2017 21:12, ARW wrote:
It's still there covering their pond 12 years later. And last year we
caught the youngest one doing a "David Blaine I can walk across water
trick" on top of it.

When I was little I got stuck under the safety cover on my grandparent's
pond. Luckily not under the water.

But there's been a pond in my garden since time immemorial (at least 300
years). Next they'll want to fence all the streams, rivers and the coast...

Andy

On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 22:01:57 +0100, Vir Campestris wrote:

On 21/07/2017 21:12, ARW wrote:
It's still there covering their pond 12 years later. And last year we
caught the youngest one doing a "David Blaine I can walk across water
trick" on top of it.

When I was little I got stuck under the safety cover on my grandparent's
pond. Luckily not under the water.

But there's been a pond in my garden since time immemorial (at least 300
years). Next they'll want to fence all the streams, rivers and the coast...

https://d3ltpfxjzvda6e.cloudfront.ne...n_a_Bubble.jpg

It's dangerous outside. You must never go outside. You could get wet, cold, fall over, all sorts of nasty things could happen. Best you stay inside and protected from mother nature. Humans can't handle nature.

--
We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked, but not compromised. We are associated, but not absorbed.
And should a European statesman address us and say "Shall we speak for thee?", we should reply "nay sir, for we dwell among our own people".
-- Winston Churchill 1953

In article , James Wilkinson Sword
wrote:
On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 22:01:57 +0100, Vir Campestris
wrote:

On 21/07/2017 21:12, ARW wrote:
It's still there covering their pond 12 years later. And last year we
caught the youngest one doing a "David Blaine I can walk across water
trick" on top of it.

When I was little I got stuck under the safety cover on my
grandparent's pond. Luckily not under the water.

But there's been a pond in my garden since time immemorial (at least
300 years). Next they'll want to fence all the streams, rivers and the
coast...

https://d3ltpfxjzvda6e.cloudfront.ne...n_a_Bubble.jpg

It's dangerous outside. You must never go outside. You could get wet,
cold, fall over, all sorts of nasty things could happen. Best you stay
inside and protected from mother nature. Humans can't handle nature.

There might be an earthquake and the house collapses on top of you

--
from KT24 in Surrey, England

"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 02:45:11 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 15:01:05 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 11:25:07 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote
in
message news On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:35:39 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:23:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:02:09 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100,

wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this
country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an
emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always
someone
else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a
pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of
care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would
teach
them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if
one
of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids'
fault,
not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear
and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely,
fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of
adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just
make
more
fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a
derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the
floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need
protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught
to
do
so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop
protecting
the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security
leads
to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that
the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings
incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around
supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few
pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like
you
here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that person
themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where
you're
going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake
crawl
back into your little lawyer hole.

I can sympathise with your approach.

I am of the opinion that H&S regulations mean that people who
should
not soil the planet with their genes are being artificially
propogated
by the actions of the HSE.

Like it or not, we do have a duty of care however. You can shout
about
it and stamp your feet as much as you wish, but you also share
that
duty of care to ensure that your actions are carried out in a
manner
that provides reasonable care for those you or your activities
impinge
upon.

Only in your warped opinion. If you fall down a hole, you should
have
looked where you were putting your own two feet. Stop expecting
everyone
else to do everything for you. You're a pathetic waste of space.

I would hazard a guess that being thick wouldn't go too far
legally,
so if I were you, I'd play it safe and buy the fencing.

If someone else's kid falls into my pond or pool, he shouldn't have
been
in my garden, so it's his fault.

If my own kid falls in, he'd have been taught how to swim in the
first
place.

I have little doubt that "swimming" would be entirely natural.

It isnt for all of them, some just sink to the bottom.

We were discussing one individual who's genetic makeup didn't
facillitate progress to much more than s out of the
primordial soup.

We were discussing ponds and pools and young kids.

Maybe he'd need a bit of help crawling out though.

Duty of care begins with YOURSELF, and ends there.

The law of the land would have a differing opinion methinks.

Not with common stuff like garden pools.

I'm afraid it depends on the circumstances.

Nope.

"common stuff" wouldn't stand up in court at all.

Bull**** it wouldn't with ponds.

Basically the questions are, was it a danger and
was every reasonable care taken to prevent injury.

Bull**** with ponds.

The injured party could be a child an adult, even
a thief with no right to be on the premises anyway.

More pig ignorant drivel.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/pe...s-1581241.html

Just because some fool journo claims something...

Suit yourself.

I havent worn a suit for more than 45 years.

If you care to apply logic though, a pond is
nothing more than an extremely soggy hole.

Nothing logical about the law.

If you look at the lengths the utility companies go to to ensure that
public and holes are separated, you then have to wonder how the
addition of water makes them so much more safe if a pond is so
immune from any responsibility on the part of the owner.

Those are mostly short term holes.

I happen to live in an irrigation area and it uses entirely open
supply channels, and entirely open ****ing great drains that
anyone can trivially drown in. One of them quite literally
passes right thru the center of town with nothing to stop any
kid falling into the main supply channel. The most there are is
a few signs telling you that you arent allowed to swim in them.

One can only assume that the solicitors in you neck of the
woods are making enough on PPI insurance and traffic offences.

Nothing to do with that, no one would actually be stupid
enough to **** their money against the wall using some
legal parasite to take any legal action about those.

I don't recall even a single example of any kid ever drowning
in either. There have been a few in backyard swimming pools
which do legally have to have an allegedly child proof fence
and gate around them. But we have just had one person post
a video of one little monkey who must have been about 2,
still wearing just a nappy, get past that in a flash with his
dad videoing it. In that case they just had the fence and
with no pool yet in a new build. That fence is 5' high with
just verticals over the entire 5' and the little bugger shinnied
up the fence with the vertical between his big toe and next toe.

There was a new big public park built right in the center of
the town, with the main supply channel along one side of
it and one kid did manage to end up in the channel, but didn't
drown or anything. They can be very hard to get out of because
the 100 year old concrete is very slimy and slippery now. They
did fence the border between the park and the channel but
only where that part of the park is. The rest of the channel thru
the town is still the way it has always been for 100 years now.

Hence the lack of need for the ambulance chasing philosophy
imported from the US and honed to a pinnacle of greed and
triviality by our bunch of solicitors on this side of the pond.

I just don't believe that every pond on that soggy little frigid
island can never have any child fall in it. Indeed the one that
the PHucker mentioned clearly did have one drown in it for
that silly cow to have petitioned for a change on that.

And not one of our rivers has any fences
stopping people from falling in either.

A river is a natural feature, it hasn't been placed there overnight.

But your canals were. And they arent all fenced so non one can ever fall in.

There is of course plenty of opportunity to take the Canal and
River Trust in the UK to court, should One have a grievance.

And no one bothers and they stay unfenced.

No One would stop a court case.

It would be toss in the bin by the judge.

I remember dealing with a couple of people like yourself
when designing a guard for a pump once. When it came to
the installation the fitter wanted to take short cuts, his words
were "no one would be daft enough to put their hand there".

We have ****ing great pumps as big as a ****ing great bus.

So?

Are you suggesting you are all big macho boys
that dont need silly girly type things like guards?

Nope, that they are designed properly.

Basically that's why my pay grade
considerably exceeds that of the fitter.

Like hell it does.

It does actually.

Like hell it does. You don't have a ****ing clue about canals alone.

Let alone ponds. Or even whets in public places like Trafalgar either.

On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 09:39:13 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 02:45:11 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 15:01:05 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 11:25:07 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote
in
message news On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:35:39 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:23:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:02:09 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100,

wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this
country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an
emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always
someone
else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have a
pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of
care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would
teach
them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if
one
of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids'
fault,
not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading fear
and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely,
fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of
adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just
make
more
fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a
derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the
floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need
protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught
to
do
so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop
protecting
the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security
leads
to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that
the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings
incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around
supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few
pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like
you
here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that person
themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where
you're
going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake
crawl
back into your little lawyer hole.

I can sympathise with your approach.

I am of the opinion that H&S regulations mean that people who
should
not soil the planet with their genes are being artificially
propogated
by the actions of the HSE.

Like it or not, we do have a duty of care however. You can shout
about
it and stamp your feet as much as you wish, but you also share
that
duty of care to ensure that your actions are carried out in a
manner
that provides reasonable care for those you or your activities
impinge
upon.

Only in your warped opinion. If you fall down a hole, you should
have
looked where you were putting your own two feet. Stop expecting
everyone
else to do everything for you. You're a pathetic waste of space.

I would hazard a guess that being thick wouldn't go too far
legally,
so if I were you, I'd play it safe and buy the fencing.

If someone else's kid falls into my pond or pool, he shouldn't have
been
in my garden, so it's his fault.

If my own kid falls in, he'd have been taught how to swim in the
first
place.

I have little doubt that "swimming" would be entirely natural.

It isnt for all of them, some just sink to the bottom.

We were discussing one individual who's genetic makeup didn't
facillitate progress to much more than s out of the
primordial soup.

We were discussing ponds and pools and young kids.

Maybe he'd need a bit of help crawling out though.

Duty of care begins with YOURSELF, and ends there.

The law of the land would have a differing opinion methinks.

Not with common stuff like garden pools.

I'm afraid it depends on the circumstances.

Nope.

"common stuff" wouldn't stand up in court at all.

Bull**** it wouldn't with ponds.

Basically the questions are, was it a danger and
was every reasonable care taken to prevent injury.

Bull**** with ponds.

The injured party could be a child an adult, even
a thief with no right to be on the premises anyway.

More pig ignorant drivel.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/pe...s-1581241.html

Just because some fool journo claims something...

Suit yourself.

I havent worn a suit for more than 45 years.

If you care to apply logic though, a pond is
nothing more than an extremely soggy hole.

Nothing logical about the law.

If you look at the lengths the utility companies go to to ensure that
public and holes are separated, you then have to wonder how the
addition of water makes them so much more safe if a pond is so
immune from any responsibility on the part of the owner.

Those are mostly short term holes.

I happen to live in an irrigation area and it uses entirely open
supply channels, and entirely open ****ing great drains that
anyone can trivially drown in. One of them quite literally
passes right thru the center of town with nothing to stop any
kid falling into the main supply channel. The most there are is
a few signs telling you that you arent allowed to swim in them.

One can only assume that the solicitors in you neck of the
woods are making enough on PPI insurance and traffic offences.

Nothing to do with that, no one would actually be stupid
enough to **** their money against the wall using some
legal parasite to take any legal action about those.

I don't recall even a single example of any kid ever drowning
in either. There have been a few in backyard swimming pools
which do legally have to have an allegedly child proof fence
and gate around them. But we have just had one person post
a video of one little monkey who must have been about 2,
still wearing just a nappy, get past that in a flash with his
dad videoing it. In that case they just had the fence and
with no pool yet in a new build. That fence is 5' high with
just verticals over the entire 5' and the little bugger shinnied
up the fence with the vertical between his big toe and next toe.

There was a new big public park built right in the center of
the town, with the main supply channel along one side of
it and one kid did manage to end up in the channel, but didn't
drown or anything. They can be very hard to get out of because
the 100 year old concrete is very slimy and slippery now. They
did fence the border between the park and the channel but
only where that part of the park is. The rest of the channel thru
the town is still the way it has always been for 100 years now.

Hence the lack of need for the ambulance chasing philosophy
imported from the US and honed to a pinnacle of greed and
triviality by our bunch of solicitors on this side of the pond.

I just don't believe that every pond on that soggy little frigid
island can never have any child fall in it. Indeed the one that
the PHucker mentioned clearly did have one drown in it for
that silly cow to have petitioned for a change on that.

And not one of our rivers has any fences
stopping people from falling in either.

A river is a natural feature, it hasn't been placed there overnight.

But your canals were. And they arent all fenced so non one can ever fall in.

There is of course plenty of opportunity to take the Canal and
River Trust in the UK to court, should One have a grievance.

And no one bothers and they stay unfenced.

No One would stop a court case.

It would be toss in the bin by the judge.

I remember dealing with a couple of people like yourself
when designing a guard for a pump once. When it came to
the installation the fitter wanted to take short cuts, his words
were "no one would be daft enough to put their hand there".

We have ****ing great pumps as big as a ****ing great bus.

So?

Are you suggesting you are all big macho boys
that dont need silly girly type things like guards?

Nope, that they are designed properly.

Basically that's why my pay grade
considerably exceeds that of the fitter.

Like hell it does.

It does actually.

Like hell it does. You don't have a ****ing clue about canals alone.

Oh yes I do.

I actually do a lot of work for the water authourities. Canals are no
longer under direct public ownership and privatisation has brought in
many improvements.

The fluid in canals in the UK is still primarily water, but the
quality and overall level of wetness has improved no end.

As one of our European visitors remarked last week while scrubbing the
barnacles off her bottom, "Blenkinsopp", She Said, "I'm tremendously
chuffed with the quality of the water that surrounds my bottom", "and
the water is so wet, even the dry bits are wet"

Such complements do bring a lump to Ones throat, and I feel proud that
my input into the waterway helped provide such valueand positive
feedback.

Methinks you will find that Trafalgar is over. It wasn't public
either, One had to have an invite. It came at a cost of minus one
shilling.

It wasn't really a good example of HSE involvement incidentally.



Let alone ponds. Or even whets in public places like Trafalgar either.


AB

"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 09:39:13 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 02:45:11 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 15:01:05 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote
in
message ...
On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 11:25:07 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote
in
message news On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:35:39 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:23:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:02:09 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin
Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100,

wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this
country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an
emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always
someone
else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have
a
pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of
care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would
teach
them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if
one
of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids'
fault,
not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading
fear
and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely,
fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of
adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just
make
more
fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a
derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the
floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need
protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught
to
do
so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop
protecting
the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security
leads
to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that
the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings
incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around
supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few
pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like
you
here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that
person
themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where
you're
going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake
crawl
back into your little lawyer hole.

I can sympathise with your approach.

I am of the opinion that H&S regulations mean that people who
should
not soil the planet with their genes are being artificially
propogated
by the actions of the HSE.

Like it or not, we do have a duty of care however. You can shout
about
it and stamp your feet as much as you wish, but you also share
that
duty of care to ensure that your actions are carried out in a
manner
that provides reasonable care for those you or your activities
impinge
upon.

Only in your warped opinion. If you fall down a hole, you should
have
looked where you were putting your own two feet. Stop expecting
everyone
else to do everything for you. You're a pathetic waste of space.

I would hazard a guess that being thick wouldn't go too far
legally,
so if I were you, I'd play it safe and buy the fencing.

If someone else's kid falls into my pond or pool, he shouldn't
have
been
in my garden, so it's his fault.

If my own kid falls in, he'd have been taught how to swim in the
first
place.

I have little doubt that "swimming" would be entirely natural.

It isnt for all of them, some just sink to the bottom.

We were discussing one individual who's genetic makeup didn't
facillitate progress to much more than s out of the
primordial soup.

We were discussing ponds and pools and young kids.

Maybe he'd need a bit of help crawling out though.

Duty of care begins with YOURSELF, and ends there.

The law of the land would have a differing opinion methinks.

Not with common stuff like garden pools.

I'm afraid it depends on the circumstances.

Nope.

"common stuff" wouldn't stand up in court at all.

Bull**** it wouldn't with ponds.

Basically the questions are, was it a danger and
was every reasonable care taken to prevent injury.

Bull**** with ponds.

The injured party could be a child an adult, even
a thief with no right to be on the premises anyway.

More pig ignorant drivel.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/pe...s-1581241.html

Just because some fool journo claims something...

Suit yourself.

I havent worn a suit for more than 45 years.

If you care to apply logic though, a pond is
nothing more than an extremely soggy hole.

Nothing logical about the law.

If you look at the lengths the utility companies go to to ensure that
public and holes are separated, you then have to wonder how the
addition of water makes them so much more safe if a pond is so
immune from any responsibility on the part of the owner.

Those are mostly short term holes.

I happen to live in an irrigation area and it uses entirely open
supply channels, and entirely open ****ing great drains that
anyone can trivially drown in. One of them quite literally
passes right thru the center of town with nothing to stop any
kid falling into the main supply channel. The most there are is
a few signs telling you that you arent allowed to swim in them.

One can only assume that the solicitors in you neck of the
woods are making enough on PPI insurance and traffic offences.

Nothing to do with that, no one would actually be stupid
enough to **** their money against the wall using some
legal parasite to take any legal action about those.

I don't recall even a single example of any kid ever drowning
in either. There have been a few in backyard swimming pools
which do legally have to have an allegedly child proof fence
and gate around them. But we have just had one person post
a video of one little monkey who must have been about 2,
still wearing just a nappy, get past that in a flash with his
dad videoing it. In that case they just had the fence and
with no pool yet in a new build. That fence is 5' high with
just verticals over the entire 5' and the little bugger shinnied
up the fence with the vertical between his big toe and next toe.

There was a new big public park built right in the center of
the town, with the main supply channel along one side of
it and one kid did manage to end up in the channel, but didn't
drown or anything. They can be very hard to get out of because
the 100 year old concrete is very slimy and slippery now. They
did fence the border between the park and the channel but
only where that part of the park is. The rest of the channel thru
the town is still the way it has always been for 100 years now.

Hence the lack of need for the ambulance chasing philosophy
imported from the US and honed to a pinnacle of greed and
triviality by our bunch of solicitors on this side of the pond.

I just don't believe that every pond on that soggy little frigid
island can never have any child fall in it. Indeed the one that
the PHucker mentioned clearly did have one drown in it for
that silly cow to have petitioned for a change on that.

And not one of our rivers has any fences
stopping people from falling in either.

A river is a natural feature, it hasn't been placed there overnight.

But your canals were. And they arent all fenced so non one can ever fall
in.

There is of course plenty of opportunity to take the Canal and
River Trust in the UK to court, should One have a grievance.

And no one bothers and they stay unfenced.

No One would stop a court case.

It would be toss in the bin by the judge.

I remember dealing with a couple of people like yourself
when designing a guard for a pump once. When it came to
the installation the fitter wanted to take short cuts, his words
were "no one would be daft enough to put their hand there".

We have ****ing great pumps as big as a ****ing great bus.

So?

Are you suggesting you are all big macho boys
that dont need silly girly type things like guards?

Nope, that they are designed properly.

Basically that's why my pay grade
considerably exceeds that of the fitter.

Like hell it does.

It does actually.

Like hell it does. You don't have a ****ing clue about canals alone.

Oh yes I do.

Oh no you don't. NOT ONE of those is fenced.

I actually do a lot of work for the water authourities.

And even spell wank.

Canals are no longer under direct public ownership
and privatisation has brought in many improvements.

And NOT ONE of those is fenced.

The fluid in canals in the UK is still primarily water, but the
quality and overall level of wetness has improved no end.

Irrelevant to whether they are fenced to stop people falling in.

As one of our European visitors remarked last week while scrubbing
the barnacles off her bottom, "Blenkinsopp", She Said, "I'm tremendously
chuffed with the quality of the water that surrounds my bottom", "and
the water is so wet, even the dry bits are wet"

Such complements do bring a lump to Ones throat,

You don't qualify to be a One, you're just another one, boy.

and I feel proud that my input into the waterway
helped provide such valueand positive feedback.

And yet anyone can still fall in.

Methinks you will find that Trafalgar is over.

Nope, still not fenced to stop anyone falling in.

It wasn't public either, One had to have an invite.
It came at a cost of minus one shilling.

It wasn't really a good example of HSE involvement incidentally.

Still not fenced to stop anyone falling in.

Let alone ponds. Or even whets in public places like Trafalgar either.

On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 10:43:17 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 09:39:13 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Mon, 24 Jul 2017 02:45:11 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote in
message ...
On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 15:01:05 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote
in
message ...
On Sun, 23 Jul 2017 11:25:07 +1000, "Rod Speed"
wrote:



"Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp" wrote
in
message news On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:35:39 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:23:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 22:02:09 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Jul 2017 21:42:13 +0100, Archibald Tarquin
Blenkinsopp
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 11:56:22 +0100, "James Wilkinson Sword"
wrote:

On Thu, 20 Jul 2017 10:15:20 +0100,

wrote:

On Thursday, 20 July 2017 09:47:19 UTC+1, GB wrote:
Many countries require swimming pools to be fenced.
And here's a coroner calling for it to be mandatory in this
country:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...-birthday.html

Many states in the USA not only require a fence but also an
emergency telephone.

The USA is over the top in everything. Everything is always
someone
else's fault.

I do not have kids, I hate the little monsters. I do not have
a
pool,
but if I did then I can fully appreciate that I have a duty of
care.

No you don't. They're not your kids. If they were, you would
teach
them to swim.

I would guess that many of you would take a different view if
one
of
your kids fell into her pool.

If my kids fell into her pool, it would be my fault or my kids'
fault,
not hers. Take responsibility for your own actions!

When I were a lad, we didn't have child molesters spreading
fear
and
horror amongst tabloid readers, so we wandered around freely,
fences
and water in particular was fair game for all kinds of
adventures.

There are no more molesters now than there were then, we just
make
more
fuss about it, and morons like you believe the tabloids.

I still remember a friend suspended over a gaping hole in a
derelict
factory roof when the center asbestos panel plummeted to the
floor
many meters below.

Children dont play by the same rules as adults, they need
protection.

Do they ****. They need to look after themselves, or be taught
to
do
so. Survival of the fittest and/or most intelligent. Stop
protecting
the morons, or the next generation will have more of them.

I sincerely hope that no one's negligence regarding security
leads
to
a death or injury, but if it did, I would certainly hope that
the
courts provide a suitable deterrant for further episodes.

I am referring only to accidental injuries and drownings
incidentally.

The nasty little morons that scream, shout and run around
supermarkets
and the like could be thrown into the nearest pool. A few
pirhana
would help make the episode a little more satisfying.

Go live in America, we don't want childish little ****wits like
you
here any more. The only person to blame for dying is that
person
themselves. Fall over something, you should have looked where
you're
going, don't blame the person who made the path. ****'s sake
crawl
back into your little lawyer hole.

I can sympathise with your approach.

I am of the opinion that H&S regulations mean that people who
should
not soil the planet with their genes are being artificially
propogated
by the actions of the HSE.

Like it or not, we do have a duty of care however. You can shout
about
it and stamp your feet as much as you wish, but you also share
that
duty of care to ensure that your actions are carried out in a
manner
that provides reasonable care for those you or your activities
impinge
upon.

Only in your warped opinion. If you fall down a hole, you should
have
looked where you were putting your own two feet. Stop expecting
everyone
else to do everything for you. You're a pathetic waste of space.

I would hazard a guess that being thick wouldn't go too far
legally,
so if I were you, I'd play it safe and buy the fencing.

If someone else's kid falls into my pond or pool, he shouldn't
have
been
in my garden, so it's his fault.

If my own kid falls in, he'd have been taught how to swim in the
first
place.

I have little doubt that "swimming" would be entirely natural.

It isnt for all of them, some just sink to the bottom.

We were discussing one individual who's genetic makeup didn't
facillitate progress to much more than s out of the
primordial soup.

We were discussing ponds and pools and young kids.

Maybe he'd need a bit of help crawling out though.

Duty of care begins with YOURSELF, and ends there.

The law of the land would have a differing opinion methinks.

Not with common stuff like garden pools.

I'm afraid it depends on the circumstances.

Nope.

"common stuff" wouldn't stand up in court at all.

Bull**** it wouldn't with ponds.

Basically the questions are, was it a danger and
was every reasonable care taken to prevent injury.

Bull**** with ponds.

The injured party could be a child an adult, even
a thief with no right to be on the premises anyway.

More pig ignorant drivel.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/pe...s-1581241.html

Just because some fool journo claims something...

Suit yourself.

I havent worn a suit for more than 45 years.

If you care to apply logic though, a pond is
nothing more than an extremely soggy hole.

Nothing logical about the law.

If you look at the lengths the utility companies go to to ensure that
public and holes are separated, you then have to wonder how the
addition of water makes them so much more safe if a pond is so
immune from any responsibility on the part of the owner.

Those are mostly short term holes.

I happen to live in an irrigation area and it uses entirely open
supply channels, and entirely open ****ing great drains that
anyone can trivially drown in. One of them quite literally
passes right thru the center of town with nothing to stop any
kid falling into the main supply channel. The most there are is
a few signs telling you that you arent allowed to swim in them.

One can only assume that the solicitors in you neck of the
woods are making enough on PPI insurance and traffic offences.

Nothing to do with that, no one would actually be stupid
enough to **** their money against the wall using some
legal parasite to take any legal action about those.

I don't recall even a single example of any kid ever drowning
in either. There have been a few in backyard swimming pools
which do legally have to have an allegedly child proof fence
and gate around them. But we have just had one person post
a video of one little monkey who must have been about 2,
still wearing just a nappy, get past that in a flash with his
dad videoing it. In that case they just had the fence and
with no pool yet in a new build. That fence is 5' high with
just verticals over the entire 5' and the little bugger shinnied
up the fence with the vertical between his big toe and next toe.

There was a new big public park built right in the center of
the town, with the main supply channel along one side of
it and one kid did manage to end up in the channel, but didn't
drown or anything. They can be very hard to get out of because
the 100 year old concrete is very slimy and slippery now. They
did fence the border between the park and the channel but
only where that part of the park is. The rest of the channel thru
the town is still the way it has always been for 100 years now.

Hence the lack of need for the ambulance chasing philosophy
imported from the US and honed to a pinnacle of greed and
triviality by our bunch of solicitors on this side of the pond.

I just don't believe that every pond on that soggy little frigid
island can never have any child fall in it. Indeed the one that
the PHucker mentioned clearly did have one drown in it for
that silly cow to have petitioned for a change on that.

And not one of our rivers has any fences
stopping people from falling in either.

A river is a natural feature, it hasn't been placed there overnight.

But your canals were. And they arent all fenced so non one can ever fall
in.

There is of course plenty of opportunity to take the Canal and
River Trust in the UK to court, should One have a grievance.

And no one bothers and they stay unfenced.

No One would stop a court case.

It would be toss in the bin by the judge.

I remember dealing with a couple of people like yourself
when designing a guard for a pump once. When it came to
the installation the fitter wanted to take short cuts, his words
were "no one would be daft enough to put their hand there".

We have ****ing great pumps as big as a ****ing great bus.

So?

Are you suggesting you are all big macho boys
that dont need silly girly type things like guards?

Nope, that they are designed properly.

Basically that's why my pay grade
considerably exceeds that of the fitter.

Like hell it does.

It does actually.

Like hell it does. You don't have a ****ing clue about canals alone.

Oh yes I do.

Oh no you don't. NOT ONE of those is fenced.

I actually do a lot of work for the water authourities.

And even spell wank.

Canals are no longer under direct public ownership
and privatisation has brought in many improvements.

And NOT ONE of those is fenced.

The fluid in canals in the UK is still primarily water, but the
quality and overall level of wetness has improved no end.

Irrelevant to whether they are fenced to stop people falling in.

As one of our European visitors remarked last week while scrubbing
the barnacles off her bottom, "Blenkinsopp", She Said, "I'm tremendously
chuffed with the quality of the water that surrounds my bottom", "and
the water is so wet, even the dry bits are wet"

Such complements do bring a lump to Ones throat,

You don't qualify to be a One, you're just another one, boy.

and I feel proud that my input into the waterway
helped provide such valueand positive feedback.

And yet anyone can still fall in.

Methinks you will find that Trafalgar is over.

Nope, still not fenced to stop anyone falling in.

It wasn't public either, One had to have an invite.
It came at a cost of minus one shilling.

It wasn't really a good example of HSE involvement incidentally.

Still not fenced to stop anyone falling in.

Let alone ponds. Or even whets in public places like Trafalgar either.

It wouldn't be fenced you pillock. It's over, finished, it's no more.

You dont mean Trafalgar Square do you?

You should maybe read a book or something :-(


AB