Thursday, 11 January 2018

Regulation revisited?...


My Grandmother - Child Safety Entrepreneur

In the 1960's after a spate of child deaths from nighties catching fire my Grandmother setup a business making and selling non-flamable nighties - she did this because she was horrified at the accidents, she was skilled as a seamstress and she wanted to make a living.

Government Intervention

In the mid 60s the UK parliament caught up with what was happening and introduced laws on the flammability of children's nighties.

http://hansard.millbanksystems.com/commons/1964/mar/05/flammable-nightwear-regulations

Laws relating to fire retardant fabrics for clothes and furnishings have been updated many times since, here are some of the more recent.

https://www.firesafe.org.uk/furniture-and-furnishings-fire-safety-regulations-19881989-and-1993/

But it is not cost free

However this is not a zero cost issue - flame retardant treatment is expensive and significantly puts up the price of treated fabrics, here is a mumsnet discussion on the horrendous price of childrens cotton nighties...

https://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/style_and_beauty/2762428-Girls-COTTON-nighties

And there is health and the environment

Also it has now been found that some of the flame retardant treatments use chemicals that  may be damaging to people health and to the environment.

http://greensciencepolicy.org/topics/flame-retardants/

Times change, homes have few naked flames today

Another consideration since the start of this issue is that houses now have far fewer naked flames and sources of ignition than they did back in the 1960's. Houses tend not to have open fires (unless for display), they are not lit by gas, candles are not used for lighting to bed etc. In fact, in a modern house apart from gas hobs (and for a cup of tea a kettle is more likely to be used anyway) the only naked flames are likely to be from scented candles and old-school cigarettes/lighters.

So the question should be whether the legislation is still appropriate and could it actually be cut. If course there is a knee-jerk reaction against removing something that supposedly makes children safer, but in a science based, evidence driven world it really should be looked at from scratch...

Finally

I started on this subject because an EUphile was giving the EU credit for making childrens nighties in the UK safe. Which is clearly not true as the UK had already started on this in the 1960's before we joined, but I also found a comment in the Mumsnet discussion (linked to above) which says...


Northanter Sat 22-Oct-16 20:26:33
Europe has different flame retardency regulations for nightwear. It is possible you could buy some from an online retailer in, say, France, and get them sent.

But sometimes you come up against regulations against importing them altogether.
If you or any acquaintance are planning a trip to Europe, you can ask them to get you one (or several, in lots of sizes!) - you can usually get them pretty cheaply in H&M or C&A in France and Belgium at least, probably elsewhere too.

So suggesting that the UK laws have been stricter than the EU laws all along!



ps. And they have similar discussions  in the USA... http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/289057.page

Friday, 15 December 2017

Take the Brexiteers Pledge!

The Brexiteers Pledge

No later than 11pm 29th March 2019 I will not recognise any EU derived authority in the UK, anyone who seeks to enforce such authority is a usurper and a tyrant, I declare them my enemy.



And here is an unsigned one - print off some copies, get people signing, make it into badges, armbands, t-shirts, put it in your hat band!- spread the word!



ps. The wording is inspired by a quote from Pierre Joseph Proudhon (see more of his quotes here http://www.azquotes.com/author/11910-Pierre_Joseph_Proudhon) that was hung on my 4th  year form room wall, and I always remembered - along side 'Desiderata' https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desiderata -- I'd have gone with 'If', but Mr Farrah my form tutor was the boss!


Wednesday, 13 December 2017

Police - criticised for lack of arrests, so will now arrest just about anybody - they don't care who!

There was a report not so long ago criticising the police for arresting far fewer people now that they used to...


But also that in some areas arrests were going up!


And then I saw this report on a 'drugs bust'...


Notice - eight people were arrested... but two were 'released on bail' and six were 'released under investigation'.

What is the significance of this?

Well if you are 'released on bail' the police have 28 days to make a case and either charge you or let you go - they do this if they actually think they have a case and can do the paperwork in the next four weeks (if they need more time they have to satisfy a judge in court that there is in a case and it really does need more time).

But if you are 'released under investigation'  there is no time limit! the police need never actually make a case against you - you could be left under their supervision for the rest of your life with no charge, no discharge without judicial/court intervention and no right to judicial/court intervention - all this on the whim of one investigating officer!

'Released under investigation' is quite a new device, created by the nasty and stupid current prime minister Theresa May when she was Home Secretary - and while it is good she no longer has that role, she appointed Amber Rudd an even nastier and stupider person to replace her.

This came about because of a few high profile cases (such as Cliff Richard) where very slow police progress meant they were left 'on bail' for very, very long periods of time (years) - all the time having to be renewed by a judge/court every 28 days.

The 28 day limit was an excellent safeguard against our ever more officious and unreliable police services -- because a judge was regularly called in to decide if the police were actually working properly, or just persecuting an innocent individual. This ties in well with traditional English justice, from Magna Carta and before, where no man could be subject to legal/state action without a fair hearing and due process.

Theresa May, being a very stupid person, has no understanding of such issues and sees no need for the public to be safeguarded against the likes of her and her kind. So she simply ripped the courts out of the process and gave the police discretion to judge themselves - amazingly enough the police always think they are doing the right thing... something we know to be false as their faults are proven by every case and bail hearing that has ever gone against them!!

Theresa May's 'Released under Investigation' is an absolute step towards a police state - which the police have seized with gusto.

Every decent Englishman (male and female) should be very, very concerned. Theresa May cannot be trusted, and if we lose the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) before we have a proper replacement there will be nothing stopping the government, state and police becoming the tyrants they so want to be.

Friday, 8 December 2017

Sussex Police given a good kick in the nuts...





I win, I beat the bastards.

It took six months, but even with out their huge resources I ran rings around them and made the look like the twats they are.

Having arrested me six months ago and strung me along ever since, they the couldn't find anything to charge me with with.

This is no surprise - unlike Sussex Police Officers, I am an honest, decent person, so of course there is nothing I can be charged with!!

The letter saying they failed to stitch me up, so have to let me go was interesting in several ways -- apart from being dated the 24th November but postmarked the 1st December (why the delay?) - it says the Crown Prosecution Service told them that my tweets were *not* grossly offensive (of course they aren't only a Sussex Police Officer retard, or a Labour councillor could be such a moron to think otherwise).

But... I wasn't arrested (or interrogated) 'on suspicion of posting grossly offensive tweets' - but on 'suspicion of posting tweets likely to stir up religious or racial hatred'... So clearly they knew the original arrest couldn't be justified, so changed what they were trying to fit me up with by switching to a whole new charge... bastards.

In my interview under caution - which I will get a copy of and post on-line - I said I believed the whole thing was politically motivated (it was Labour councillors who attacked me), clearly the police were part of this politically motivated action, or they would have investigated my complaint...

As I was 'released under investigation' I was banned from communicating with the councillors at risk of 'interfering with witnesses' (a very serious criminal offence), but now I can do what ever I please as a free English man. So suing the arse off the police and council are right up there near the top of my list... But I have to get my details removed from the PNC, local arrest records etc... it the mean time I am bringing hell down on them.


Sunday, 12 November 2017

Three Cards for Remembrance #LestWeForget #RedPoppiesMatter

If you find a use for any of them - put a couple of quid in the next British Legion collection tin you see.




Friday, 10 November 2017

Replace the Bobby on the Beat? Easy! do it privately for 30p per home per day! #Agorism #Shruggers

Ok, its is not really a replacement - because the police have deserted the streets already - is is recreating the Bobby on the Beat - but without the state police being involved.

The withdrawal of the bobby is a nationwide thing, one of the huge examples of its effect is that  London is now more dangerous than New York(!)  [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/20/london-now-dangerous-new-york-crime-stats-suggest/], and as that report notes this is just as UK plod are moving from officer in place towards 'intelligence' led policing, exactly what New York moved away from to bring their huge crime levels massively down to today's levels.

Anyway - agorists don't go begging to the state, because the state is never the solution to anything, and we need to shrug off every influence the state has over us, so...

Drones are are a big thing now - the power, computer control, electronics for video etc are amazing, this particular one is what inspired this post



[https://www.banggood.com/Hubsan-H301S-SPY-HAWK-5_8G-FPV-4CH-RC-Airplane-RTF-With-GPS-Module-p-962832.html?gmcCountry=GB&currency=GBP&createTmp=1&value_ids[]=33&value_ids[]=2481&utm_source=googleshopping&utm_medium=cpc_ods&utm_content=heath&utm_campaign=pla-fpv-gb-pc&gclid=Cj0KCQiAlpDQBRDmARIsAAW6-DNuCwjXEW3ws1kD3h6jqL7Z_KtHgA0vIHgbW2imiq4YB9026lwRvEwaAi2wEALw_wcB&ID=42481233&cur_warehouse=CN]

For £260 - a spy in the sky - 1m wingspan, 30-40 minutes flight time, live video feed, and a 1km range(!) with GPS for full telemetrics - location, height, time - and a 'return to base' at the flick of a switch (or if radio contact is lost) and as a lightweight 'powered glider' rather than 'copter even in the most unfortunate circumstances is unlikely to ever inflict any harm in an accident.

A few of these on rotation, could keep a very wide area under surveillance - and the deterrent effect is likely to be huge. They cannot physically intervene but they will have location information and pictures live for live assistance to be deployed -- and should have little problem keeping tabs on any suspect.

How to run such a monitoring service cheaply? Well my initial idea would be to run it as a 'game' subscribers leave 'beacons' around their property, pilots spend their shift flying and finding beacons and get paid for each one they find - a game that pays. And while they are seeking the beacons with the live video feed they will be alert for anything untoward that is happening...

A 40 minute shift, cover an area, clock 8 beacons, get £8 - to have your property included in the service you'd be paying for full time coverage within 1 square km with hourly passes.

Average property = 1000 sq meters = 1000 properties per sq kilometer

So 24hours*60(mins)/40(mins) = 36 shifts * £8 = £288 / 1000 properties = £0.29 per day per property.

So for 30p a day you get 24 hour security surveillance of your property, 100% belonging to you (not state snooping for goodness knows what) with no state intervention, physical crime likely reduced to zero. And you create a load of 'enjoyable' relatively low skill jobs for locals.

Yes this is not really a business plan, there may be better devices, there are some other costs (maybe four drones needed as backup for each patch, how long will they last?), but in principle we can scrap a large part of the police force and do better without them - simply by using tech. The problem with the state/public sector is their vested interest in keeping their hands in you wallet, and never letting go...

Friday, 3 November 2017

Referenda? UK has them all the time - never before reversed or re-run...

I was getting a bit tired of the EU Remainers attack on referenda, they keep pretending that they are very rare and never really return a worthwhile result. This particularly came to a head with the Catelonian independence referenda in Spain. Where the remainers are torn between their public support for 'the people' pronouncements, and their true 'control the people at any cost' core beliefs.

I knew of a few referenda run by the UK government on independence issues - The Falklands, Gibraltar and Scoltand - but thought I'd do a quick check for more... and turned all these up (people would have known about them at the time - but memory quickly fades, thank goodness for the internet!).


To this we must add:

2002 - Gibraltar - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gibraltar_sovereignty_referendum,_2002
2013 - Falklands - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_Islands_sovereignty_referendum,_2013

So don't be fooled by the remainers - the UK has honoured every referendum in the past, if brexit is not completed it will be a massive change and betrayal of the British people by the established politicians.