Council that fined girl, 5, for running lemonade stand slaps bikeshop owners with penalty for offering a free pump

On Wed, 02 Aug 2017 23:43:44 +0100, Tony Dragon wrote:

On 02-Aug-17 10:09 PM, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Wed, 02 Aug 2017 21:43:36 +0100, Tony Dragon
wrote:

On 02-Aug-17 8:13 PM, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Wed, 02 Aug 2017 20:07:01 +0100, Tony Dragon
wrote:

On 02-Aug-17 4:25 PM, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Wed, 02 Aug 2017 16:21:53 +0100, soup
wrote:

On 02/08/2017 13:49, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Wed, 02 Aug 2017 13:23:30 +0100, soup

wrote:

On 02/08/2017 11:35, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Wed, 02 Aug 2017 10:32:08 +0100, soup wrote:
On 31/07/2017 16:01, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:

The bicycle is irrelevant. Most towns have shops with a few
goods
outside to encourage custom. And the council are blatantly
lying.
You
can see in the first photo in the article that it isn't a narrow
pavement.
Looks pretty narrow to me.
https://postimg.org/image/l9idspecv/
See where the cars are parked, then the shops display items
filling the
remaining gap.
Yes I know this is not the aspect that has the pump, but I
tend to
think
the pump was not why the council got nippy in the first
Oh those poor pedestrians having to walk round something.... For
****'s
sake people need to stop being so damn pedantic and get on with
life.
..and people with pushchairs or wheelchairs have they to stop
being "so
damn pedantic"? Hardly room to walk between those bikes and
those
cars never mind if you are carrying shopping or, heaven forbid in a
wheelchair.

If the wheelchair or pram can't get through where I can walk
through,
it's unfit for purpose.

Bull****, a wheelchair is a lot wider than a person walking.

Then it shouldn't be.

How can a wheelchair not be wider than the person sitting in it?

Because your arse is not as wide as your shoulders/arms.

And it should be able to traverse a kerb to go
round the obstruction.

So you want them to go in the road, don't forget they have to go down
the kerb perpendicular to it, get past the obstruction, and then go up
the kerb in the same way.

And the wheels should be capable of this. How do they cope with wheelie
bins?

Besides
which the pavement would be wide enough if private companies didn't
clutter it with their crap

99% of people might be interested in the bicycles. 1% of people might
be obstructed. They lose 99 to 1.

Hardly likely that 99% of people will be interested in cycles.

It will be a hell of a lot more than the number in chairs.

Why change the entire world for them instead of
just changing their wheelchairs? Your taxes are funding the
disabled
folk.

Your not changing the entire world you are just telling people they
can't clutter up what are essentially public areas with private crap

The entire world has been ****ed over by the disabled. They think
they
have the right to be able to go everywhere in their chairs.

So you want them to be second class people.

If I was disabled I'd not expect every single place in the world to be
made wheelchair friendly. I'd go to the places that were.

Just as, as a vegetarian, I don't expect every restaurant to cater
for me.

****ing
ramps everywhere, extra expense for all. Parking spaces marked
disabled
everywhere (although they're handy as they're always empty for me to
use).

Can you post a picture of you using a disabled bay without a blue
badge,
please give date, time and location.

**** off grasser.

You must be really proud of this post.

Unlike you I can think straight. Why do we have 10 disabled parking
bays at a supermarket when only 1 has a disabled person in it, and the
rest are left empty?

Must be a strange supermarket, not like any I have seen.

Doesn't have to be a supermarket. There's a law that requires something like 8% of your parking spaces to be for the disabled, yet there aren't 8% disabled. My last place of work had 10 spaces, and we had 1 disabled woman, and 1 fat woman who claimed she was disabled.

Are we expecting more invalids soon?

Who is this 'we'?

The people who make the crazy laws, do try to keep up at the back.

Why does the country spend millions making everything disabled friendly,
instead of thousands making the disabled able to cope with things as
they are?

Do please tell this group how many thousands it would take to help the
disabled to cope, and what you would suggest doing?

Upgrading a few wheelchairs is cheaper than modifying all the pavements.

What gives the government the right to take my taxes and spend them on
things I didn't authorise? You want to help the disabled, you give
money to a charity, but taking it from me is THEFT.

What charity would be able to provide closer access to facilities that
the disabled might want to use?

Who cares? The point is money should not be taken from someone if they don't wish it to be.

--
5 Brits were injured last year in accidents involving out of control Scalextric cars.

On 02/08/2017 21:01, TMS320 wrote:
On 02/08/17 11:22, JNugent wrote:
On 01/08/2017 18:07, TMS320 wrote:
On 01/08/17 14:38, JNugent wrote:
On 01/08/2017 10:32, TMS320 wrote:
On 01/08/17 00:23, JNugent wrote:
On 31/07/2017 21:55, TMS320 wrote:
On 31/07/17 15:34, Bod wrote:

Such pettiness!

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/londo...-a3600461.html


I wonder whether the driver stopped on the double yellows caught
in Streetview was fined.

It isn't necessary to go far to find bollards (reducing the
pavement width) that are necessary to dissuade drivers from
thinking that the pavement is somewhere for them to park.

It is lawful to stop on double yellow lines in some circumstances.
Do you have any evidence that this "stop" was unlawful?

The sentence in my post was not a question but since you decided to
answer your response should have been yes or no. We can follow on
from that if the answer is no: either the driver took a chance that
it wouldn't be noticed (making officialdom look incompetent) or
officialdom must have had good reason.

It is even lawful to stop on double reds at certain times.

According to the story, the shop owner could legally place the pump
on the pavement if a payment was made.

The story does not say that. And that is probably because it would
not be correct. Space on the footway (which many people term "the
pavement") is not for sale. The £100 is a penalty for breaking the
law on obstruction.

The previous business had chairs and tables outside. Precedent exists.
£100 would be for getting an official out of bed to put a mark on a
piece of paper.

A lot of supposition (not to say asserted and untested history) there.

The view of the previous business is still on Streetview, if you
bothered to look. You have a very strange imagination if you think a
pump takes up more space.

I'm fairly sure that Streetview is where the view of the bicycle
business was sourced.

Obviously nothing is going to shake you out of your position.

My position is based upon the provisions of adminsitrative legislation.
And a fair amount of professional experience of it.

Oh, I accept that the bureacratic mind has nothing to do with rocket
science. Rocket science is considerably less complicated.

If you don't understand administrative law (nothing necessarily anything
to be ashamed of), the best advice is: don't try to comment on it.

On 02/08/2017 13:23, soup wrote:
On 02/08/2017 11:35, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Wed, 02 Aug 2017 10:32:08 +0100, soup wrote:
On 31/07/2017 16:01, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:

The bicycle is irrelevant. Most towns have shops with a few goods
outside to encourage custom. And the council are blatantly lying. You
can see in the first photo in the article that it isn't a narrow
pavement.
Looks pretty narrow to me.
https://postimg.org/image/l9idspecv/
See where the cars are parked, then the shops display items filling the
remaining gap.
Yes I know this is not the aspect that has the pump, but I tend to think
the pump was not why the council got nippy in the first
Oh those poor pedestrians having to walk round something.... For
****'s sake people need to stop being so damn pedantic and get on with
life.

..and people with pushchairs or wheelchairs have they to stop being "so
damn pedantic"? Hardly room to walk between those bikes and those
cars never mind if you are carrying shopping or, heaven forbid in a
wheelchair.

+1.

The footway, no matter how wide or narrow it may be, should be available
in its entirety for legitimate pedestrian uses, including the pushing of
prams and similar items.

On Thu, 03 Aug 2017 00:14:39 +0100, JNugent wrote:

On 02/08/2017 13:23, soup wrote:
On 02/08/2017 11:35, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Wed, 02 Aug 2017 10:32:08 +0100, soup wrote:
On 31/07/2017 16:01, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:

The bicycle is irrelevant. Most towns have shops with a few goods
outside to encourage custom. And the council are blatantly lying. You
can see in the first photo in the article that it isn't a narrow
pavement.
Looks pretty narrow to me.
https://postimg.org/image/l9idspecv/
See where the cars are parked, then the shops display items filling the
remaining gap.
Yes I know this is not the aspect that has the pump, but I tend to think
the pump was not why the council got nippy in the first
Oh those poor pedestrians having to walk round something.... For
****'s sake people need to stop being so damn pedantic and get on with
life.

..and people with pushchairs or wheelchairs have they to stop being "so
damn pedantic"? Hardly room to walk between those bikes and those
cars never mind if you are carrying shopping or, heaven forbid in a
wheelchair.

+1.

The footway, no matter how wide or narrow it may be, should be available
in its entirety for legitimate pedestrian uses, including the pushing of
prams and similar items.

My taxes should not pay for benefit scrounging baby makers.

--
Shotgun wedding: A case of wife or death.

On Thu, 03 Aug 2017 00:14:39 +0100, JNugent wrote:

On 02/08/2017 13:23, soup wrote:
On 02/08/2017 11:35, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:
On Wed, 02 Aug 2017 10:32:08 +0100, soup wrote:
On 31/07/2017 16:01, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:

The bicycle is irrelevant. Most towns have shops with a few goods
outside to encourage custom. And the council are blatantly lying. You
can see in the first photo in the article that it isn't a narrow
pavement.
Looks pretty narrow to me.
https://postimg.org/image/l9idspecv/
See where the cars are parked, then the shops display items filling the
remaining gap.
Yes I know this is not the aspect that has the pump, but I tend to think
the pump was not why the council got nippy in the first
Oh those poor pedestrians having to walk round something.... For
****'s sake people need to stop being so damn pedantic and get on with
life.

..and people with pushchairs or wheelchairs have they to stop being "so
damn pedantic"? Hardly room to walk between those bikes and those
cars never mind if you are carrying shopping or, heaven forbid in a
wheelchair.

+1.

The footway, no matter how wide or narrow it may be, should be available
in its entirety for legitimate pedestrian uses, including the pushing of
prams and similar items.

I take it you've not seen any recent (last 5 to 10 years) housing estates? They don't make pavements anymore. Dunno if it's meant to be artistic or to save space, but coupled with the ridiculous amount of bends and all the speedbumps, it's ****ing dangerous.

--
Shotgun wedding: A case of wife or death.

On Wed, 02 Aug 2017 23:49:09 +0100, Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson"),
the pathological attention whore of all the uk ngs, blathered again:

FLUSH the never-ending idiotic drivel

--
More from Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) strange sociopathic
mind:
"Apparently a HUMAN head can continue to see for 20 seconds after losing the
body."
MID:

On Thu, 03 Aug 2017 00:20:11 +0100, Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson"),
the pathological attention whore of all the uk ngs, blathered again:


My taxes should not pay for benefit scrounging baby makers.

YOU don't pay any taxes, you unemployable mentally and emotionally
handicapped social misfit. You live off OTHER people's taxes!

--
Unemployable, mentally handicapped Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson"
LOL) about his life as a dole and welfare who
"I used to be a computer tech until I became permanently ill."
MID:

On Thu, 03 Aug 2017 00:22:02 +0100, Birdbrain Macaw (now "James Wilkinson"),
the pathological attention whore of all the uk ngs, blathered again:

..and people with pushchairs or wheelchairs have they to stop being "so
damn pedantic"? Hardly room to walk between those bikes and those
cars never mind if you are carrying shopping or, heaven forbid in a
wheelchair.

+1.

The footway, no matter how wide or narrow it may be, should be available
in its entirety for legitimate pedestrian uses, including the pushing of
prams and similar items.

I take it you've not seen any recent (last 5 to 10 years) housing
estates? They don't make pavements anymore.

Blithering idiot! LOL

--
More of Birdbrain Macaw's (now "James Wilkinson" LOL) life as a ******:
"When I was 14, there were places in forests where people would leave
magazines for anyone to use."
MID:

In many states fuel stations are required by law to turn on the vehicle air compressor for cyclists.

For free.

Is this the case anywhere in the UK?

On 03/08/17 00:13, JNugent wrote:
On 02/08/2017 21:01, TMS320 wrote:

Oh, I accept that the bureacratic mind has nothing to do with
rocket science. Rocket science is considerably less complicated.

If you don't understand administrative law (nothing necessarily
anything to be ashamed of), the best advice is: don't try to comment
on it.

Have you ever seen anything of mine that attempts to inform or explain
an issue of human manufactured law?

If most people don't understand the way of the bureaucrat, anybody can
damn well comment on it.