Quote: Billy Bunter @ 15th March 2021, 10:26 AM

I love the way the government comes up with all these restrictions - and the "opposition" endorses them - and then they all object when they are enforced. If they don't want them enforced, or if in fact they are unenforceable, they shouldn't impose them.

And why is it now safe to have a haircut in Wales but not in England? And why can you travel five miles in Wales? Why is the virus more deadly when you travel six miles? And, in the past, why was it more deadly if you had a drink in a pub but less so if you had a scotch egg with it? Should we all be given scotch eggs instead of the vaccine? Why, at one time, was it more deadly after 10pm? Why is it deadly in clothes shops & shoe shops but not in hardware shops or garden centres?

Looking forward, when it's all over, to the enquiry asking to see the envelope, on the back of which all the legislation was planned.

View original

Basically because intelligence level has a 'normal distribution', some people have high intelligence and some lowish with the bulk of the population around the 100% mark. When you need to impose restrictions for health reasons you have to make them simple enough to be understood and obeyed by that proportion of the population that have lower intelligence. Then of course the simplifications get challenged by those of higher intelligence such as BB above, who are perhaps higher in intelligence but haven't quite got the gumption to realise that the restrictions have to be understood and obeyed by those of lesser intelligence.

Quote: billwill @ 15th March 2021, 1:29 PM

Basically because intelligence level has a 'normal distribution', some people have high intelligence and some lowish with the bulk of the population around the 100% mark. When you need to impose restrictions for health reasons you have to make them simple enough to be understood and obeyed by that proportion of the population that have lower intelligence. Then of course the simplifications get challenged by those of higher intelligence such as BB above, who are perhaps higher in intelligence but haven't quite got the gumption to realise that the restrictions have to be understood and obeyed by those of lesser intelligence.

View original

None of which, gumption or no gumption, goes anywhere towards explaining the anomalies and inconsistencies I highlighted such as why some retail premises are allowed to open while others aren't or why it is safe to have a haircut in Wales but not in England. If draconian restrictions are to be applied they should be backed up by statistics (how many cases had been in a garden centre in the preceding two weeks, how many had been in a clothes shop; how many had visited a hairdresser; how many had been more than five miles away from their home) not just because it sounds right or because it's a nice round figure.

And why impose those restrictions if they apparently don't want the police to enforce them?

Interesting isn't it that the police when they're trying to control a lot of women they get violent but when it's a race thing they kneel down and watch.

What gets me is, they want to be militants and shout obscenities at the police and lash out and kick them.
But then they get rough handled and arrested and turn into tiny weak little women.

Quote: Billy Bunter @ 15th March 2021, 4:35 PM

None of which, gumption or no gumption, goes anywhere towards explaining the anomalies and inconsistencies I highlighted such as why some retail premises are allowed to open while others aren't or why it is safe to have a haircut in Wales but not in England. If draconian restrictions are to be applied they should be backed up by statistics (how many cases had been in a garden centre in the preceding two weeks, how many had been in a clothes shop; how many had visited a hairdresser; how many had been more than five miles away from their home) not just because it sounds right or because it's a nice round figure.

And why impose those restrictions if they apparently don't want the police to enforce them?

View original

Ok, oh wise one, show us your draft of how the necessary restrictions should be worded.

Quote: billwill @ 16th March 2021, 12:36 AM

Ok, oh wise one, show us your draft of how the necessary restrictions should be worded.

View original

I don't have access to the requisite statistics. The government should have.

Quote: Teddy Paddalack @ 7th March 2021, 3:48 PM

Removed by Teddy following complaints and with an apology to all those offended by it.

View original

As the slur was against me specifically, I accept your apology.

Quote: Billy Bunter @ 16th March 2021, 8:32 AM

I don't have access to the requisite statistics. The government should have.

View original

Oh I see; you are an armchair Politician, sure that the government had done it wrong, despite your acknowledged state of not knowing all the relevant facts.

Bah Humbug!

Quote: billwill @ 16th March 2021, 2:49 PM

Oh I see; you are an armchair Politician, sure that the government had done it wrong, despite your acknowledged state of not knowing all the relevant facts.

Bah Humbug!

View original

Aren't we all? Otherwise this thread in particular, with all its pontifications, would be pretty much redundant.

And, although I may not have access to the relevant statistics (how would I?), I would have liked to think that the government does - and would use them determine appropriate action rather than merely coming up with the aforementioned anomalies, inconsistencies and round figures.

Quote: billwill @ 16th March 2021, 2:49 PM

Oh I see; you are an armchair Politician

View original

Is there any other type?

Yesterday, the policeman charged with the kidnapping and murder of Sarah Everard appeared in court with a new facial injury to add to all the others he didn't receive from his captors because the cops haven't laid a violent hand on anybody since the 1950s.

If he's reading this thread, I'd like to tell him what's done is done. You can't turn back the clock. Stop beating yourself up about it.

Quote: Billy Bunter @ 16th March 2021, 8:18 PM

Aren't we all? Otherwise this thread in particular, with all its pontifications, would be pretty much redundant.

And, although I may not have access to the relevant statistics (how would I?), I would have liked to think that the government does - and would use them determine appropriate action rather than merely coming up with the aforementioned anomalies, inconsistencies and round figures.

View original

Round figures are used on regulations all the time & you never notice them. Fishing Limits 12 miles around the shores, Speed limits 20, 30, 50, 70 MPH. You could ask is it really more dangerous to drive at 31 mph rather than 30 mph. Ate the fish swimming around at 12.1 miles really foreigners, in fact you desparately need the statistic about how far different species of fish roam in a day. Oh dear that statistic is not available and it would cost £2,000,000 to do such a survey and it would take 5 years, so lets just take a round figure of 12 miles and hope BB doesn't notice.

Its done to SIMPLIFY rules, like it or lump it.

The Speed limit in the UK in built-up areas is 42.28 Km/Hour. Yup that has a nice ring to it. Or should it perhaps be phrased to suit BB i.e something like: You must restrict your speed in built-up areas to one that is not likely to damage pedestrians if you hit them with your car. Matronly mothers of three would probably not exceed 20mph, but teenage flash-kids who believe they are such skillful drivers that they would never hit anyone, would possibly limit their speed to around 80mph. Arrests for dangerous driving would become a matter of individual policepersons' opinions; very bad for public relations and most cases would possibly be thrown out of court.

Eating 5-a-day vegetables is very good for you... {actually I'm told, the real figure is about 7 vegetables a day, but the powers that be that wrote that buzz phrase thought they would never get people to eat 7 vegetables per day so they settled on 5. )

It amazes me when people complain that they were caught on a speed camera? It's like a shoplifter complaining about being caught on CCTV . All either had to do was drive in side the posted legal limit or pay for the tin of salmon that they have under their hat . But I fear that's too easy , bedsides in stories its's better to come across as the victim rather than the perpetrator.

Where's Biden? Has he nodded off?
The president of the United States is nowhere to be seen and hasn't done any press conferences or 'the state of the nation speech.'

Yesterday, there was a video of him walking towards the press and and TV cameras for a short interview but it's fake news lol.
If you watch it - there is definitely some CGI going on and they f**ked it up.

Video experts say there was either a 'green screen' being used or microphones were super imposed on the screen.
Either way, he mysteriously moves his hand right through the microphones.

It does nothing to allay the thoughts that he is suffering from the onset age related dementia.

If that is the truth then it's sad.
However thankfully for the USA they have Kamala Harris waiting in the wings who is very competent and it would be nice to see the first black female president as well so lets hope if Mr Biden is sidelined though poor health that her transition to the most powerful black woman in the world is confirmed without delay and to the cheers of the free world .