Police in Tesco's

walkingbootweather

Mr_poll - obviously not a parent then. I'm sure you would be perfect if you were.

mr_poll

walkingbootweather wrote:

Mr_poll - obviously not a parent then. I'm sure you would be perfect if you were.

I have 4 kids and I never said i was perfect nor will I claim to be. However neither would I be so indignant when I did something wrong and a copper pointed it out to me.

As much as I feel deeply sorry for the McCann's when it boils down to it they left 2 toddlers alone in a hotel room for a couple of hours so they could go off and have a meal/get pissed with some friends. When some chav buggers off and leaves their kid home alone the media decry the state of our society when 2 middle class (think one of them was a doctor) people do similar then the reaction is very different. I wished we lived in a world where we didnt have to worry about these things but we dont and when a policeman points this out he hardly needs slating for it.

kelsen

mr_poll wrote:

Not really a good point unless of course the police have suddenly became babysitters for people who find it a bit of a hassle taking a grumpy child shopping with them. I wouldnt be too happy if my 999 call was delayed as the bobby nearest to me was watching over your kid just in case which the logical conclusion of "your comeback" to a policeman who was just doing their job.
At the end of the day I am sure the McCanns made a risk assessment and checked on their kids regularly - the policeman had a point whether or not he had ever dealt with a child abduction is irrelevant.

Have to agree. I mean, what is the real issue? Whether your child was safe, or if you were being criticised (rightly or wrongly) as a parent?

davmaggs

mr_poll wrote:

walkingbootweather wrote:

Mr_poll - obviously not a parent then. I'm sure you would be perfect if you were.

I have 4 kids and I never said i was perfect nor will I claim to be. However neither would I be so indignant when I did something wrong and a copper pointed it out to me.

As much as I feel deeply sorry for the McCann's when it boils down to it they left 2 toddlers alone in a hotel room for a couple of hours so they could go off and have a meal/get pissed with some friends. When some chav buggers off and leaves their kid home alone the media decry the state of our society when 2 middle class (think one of them was a doctor) people do similar then the reaction is very different. I wished we lived in a world where we didnt have to worry about these things but we dont and when a policeman points this out he hardly needs slating for it.

I'm not that old and I remember waiting in the car at the on the odd occasion when it was a quick stop. I'm not sure how old I was, but it would have been fairly young and my mother wasn't irresponsible and ran a tight ship at home.

I wonder if we are now so child-paranoid (despite child snatching through smashing car windows being 0 each year) that you are now a bad person just by virtue of being unusual.

walkingbootweather

I'm not really wanting an argument about this, and I have thought long and hard about my particular encounter, and in all honestly would probably do exactly the same again.

I can't comment on the McCann situation or the various conspiracy theories around it as I wasn't there and don't know all the facts. I thought it inappropriate for the Policeman to mention it too.

If you have got multiple children who may be tired, or off colour and you have tasks to do, so you:
a) abandon the task - but what if it is picking up medicine, or something really necessary
b) drag the kids with you - they are likely to be crying, having tantrums etc. They may injure themselves or cause a nuisance.
c) leave them for a short while where they are happy and relatively safe while you attend to the task. If so how long is too long?

I don't really expect the police to provide a babysitting service, but neither do I expect them to stick their noses in when not required. The 'hassle factor' was not my prime motivation - I genuinely believed that on balance the risks were less in leaving the child in the car for a short period than in taking them with me.

You may recall the case of couple who allowed their young children to ride to school. While I can understand how opinion might be divided on this, surely leaving a 6 year old for a short period in a car is less risky than this?

According to family folklore, my dad lefy me outside a shop and returned home without me when I was a baby in a pram. My mum noticed I was missing an hour or so later, but was found safe and sound outside the shop. That probably explains a lot....

joelsim

DonDaddyD wrote:

Police in Tesco's' means less police officers wrongfully attacking and shooting my brethren.

Be thankful that's all you got!

Well that sort's out the mispronunctuation's that everyone's been doing.

On a lighter note, I don't think I've been on a forum where the standard of grammar is as good as this one. You should of seen the one I went on last night, every man and there dog were mispeling loads of stuff like.

joelsim

Joelsim wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Police in Tesco's' means less police officers wrongfully attacking and shooting my brethren.

Be thankful that's all you got!

Well that sort's out the mispronunctuation's that everyone's been doing.

On a lighter note, I don't think I've been on a forum where the standard of grammar is as good as this one. You should have seen the one I went on last night, every man and there dog were mispeling loads of stuff like.

Aha. I actually wrote 'should o f' and it changed it to 'should have' automatically.

will3

Joelsim wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Police in Tesco's' means less police officers wrongfully attacking and shooting my brethren.

Be thankful that's all you got!

Well that sort's out the mispronunctuation's that everyone's been doing.

On a lighter note, I don't think I've been on a forum where the standard of grammar is as good as this one. You should have seen the one I went on last night, every man and there dog were mispeling loads of stuff like.

Aha. I actually wrote 'should o f' and it changed it to 'should have' automatically.

So why did you leave all the other errors in your post then?

DDD fewer officers, not less.

DonDaddyD

Finally, the bait has been caught!

I've been sitting here for HOUR'S' thinking I had lost my touch.

Didn't get the whole, baby point/debate though...

As for Grammar and this website? Around the time of the student riots there was a war. We all thought Greg66 was going to lead the charge but his posturing was a bluff designed to absorb the first wave! It was CIB who went nuclear and GregT picked off the remnants.

Anyway back to Tesco.

rick_chasey

will3 wrote:

So why did you leave all the other errors in your post then?

DDD fewer officers, not less.

Ah, surely this is a question of linguistics?

The grammar came after the natural evolution of the language and things commonly done differently to the rule (such as frequently used verbs like "run" which doesn't turn into "runned" in the past tense) are exempt from the rule.

Surely the disappearance of fewer, being replaced with less, is another example of language evolution. Come 100 years, all this fewer chat will be considered hilariously archaic.

will3

Rick Chasey wrote:

will3 wrote:

So why did you leave all the other errors in your post then?

DDD fewer officers, not less.

Ah, surely this is a question of linguistics?

The grammar came after the natural evolution of the language and things commonly done differently to the rule (such as frequently used verbs like "run" which doesn't turn into "runned" in the past tense) are exempt from the rule.

Surely the disappearance of fewer, being replaced with less, is another example of language evolution. Come 100 years, all this fewer chat will be considered hilariously archaic.

.................until the nuances of all language reverts to single guttural grunt.

cornerblock

Sod Tesco and their s. Good Food Cost Lesser at Sainsbury's.

kelsen

davmaggs wrote:

I wonder if we are now so child-paranoid

Presume you meant child-safety paranoid Unfortunately I think it has come to this. I was allowed to play outside freely as a kid, but I would think twice about letting my son do the same.

davmaggs wrote:

(despite child snatching through smashing car windows being 0 each year) that you are now a bad person just by virtue of being unusual.

Only has to happen once though, and I don't think anyone would want to be the first statistic.

@WBW It's a moral issue more than anything else. How long can you leave a child of a given age alone in a car, and everyone will have a different answer. In the grand scheme of things, the consequence of your actions is pretty insignificant. It's not like, I don't know, you allowed your child to go out on an all night free shopping spree and attend a few bonfire parties!

Paulie W

mudcow007 wrote:

but McD's is on a hill so my poor legs would have been sore, plus my Tricross has been taken away to be mended so i have lost all my leg muscles too.....

Tescos do sell ice cream but not of the strawberry cornetto variety that Mc does mmmmm

You, sir, are a liar: http://www.tesco.com/groceries/Product/ ... =251312961

rick_chasey

will3 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

will3 wrote:

So why did you leave all the other errors in your post then?

DDD fewer officers, not less.

Ah, surely this is a question of linguistics?

The grammar came after the natural evolution of the language and things commonly done differently to the rule (such as frequently used verbs like "run" which doesn't turn into "runned" in the past tense) are exempt from the rule.

Surely the disappearance of fewer, being replaced with less, is another example of language evolution. Come 100 years, all this fewer chat will be considered hilariously archaic.

.................until the nuances of all language reverts to single guttural grunt

Not really.

If you're a stickler for old grammar and don't move with the times you get those irritating French habits. The "not" grammar construction in French, has two parts; "ne" and"pas". From what I remember from the little linguistics I did do, every other European language had the same construction, but over time, dropped their 'ne' equivalent, apart from the French.

Now they're stuck with an irritating and unnecessary construction in their language which is commonly used.

It's the same with less and fewer. EVERYONE knows what you mean when you say less instead of fewer so why have fewer? It's used so often that there clearly can't be a confusion of meanings - I doubt there are many instances where the differentiation between a discreet amount less and a continuous amount less is crucial to the sentence meaning.

will3

But then you lose all the beautiful subtleties of the English language. I suppose you're in favour of amalgamating shan't and won't are you?

Since I'm a man of few words, I won't go on.


PS
Lets eat grandma [punctuation - a matter of life and death]

walkingbootweather

DonDaddyD wrote:

Didn't get the whole, baby point/debate though...

Just you wait until someone criticises your parenting skills…..

Even it its your parents, and even if they are right it will sting.

SimonAH

Time flies we cannot so erratic is their flight

Punctuation puzzler set in English class when I was about eight or nine.

joelsim

will3 wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

Joelsim wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Police in Tesco's' means less police officers wrongfully attacking and shooting my brethren.

Be thankful that's all you got!

Well that sort's out the mispronunctuation's that everyone's been doing.

On a lighter note, I don't think I've been on a forum where the standard of grammar is as good as this one. You should have seen the one I went on last night, every man and there dog were mispeling loads of stuff like.

Aha. I actually wrote 'should o f' and it changed it to 'should have' automatically.

So why did you leave all the other errors in your post then?

DDD fewer officers, not less.

May be they were their on purpose fella.

Redhog14

mudcow007 wrote:

he then gets in his little Police transit connect van, opens the window as he drives past an says "an your parking is diabolical too" an tears off out of the carpark

quite an angry bloke really

Maybe an attempt to lighten the mood?

Also maybe when the Police tell you, you have done something wrong (which you did technically) a wee "sorry officer" is a bit better than arguing back. I have much and varied dealings with the Police, all legitimate, and most people get done on the basis of the "attitude test" fail it and you are pretty much guaranteed to get done.

allen.coulson

I've noticed that policemen seem to be getting younger these days.

rick_chasey

will3 wrote:

But then you lose all the beautiful subtleties of the English language. I suppose you're in favour of amalgamating shan't and won't are you?

Since I'm a man of few words, I won't go on.


PS
Lets eat grandma [punctuation - a matter of life and death]

Pfft. If the differentiation needs to be made, then use fewer, but don't let "less" be incorrect, since it doesn't actually affect the meaning on the sentence for almost all situations. People are doing it already, and that's how language forms and changes.

Your grandma example does change the meaning; to anyone.

DonDaddyD

walkingbootweather wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Didn't get the whole, baby point/debate though...

Just you wait until someone criticises your parenting skills…..

Even it its your parents, and even if they are right it will sting.

Yeah I'd lose my cool as well.

I already draw the line about parenting with my friends, family etc. I would also have probably left the child out of the story simply because my experience of this place is that there are a few who would jump at any opportunity to criticise. Wouldn't bother giving them the ammunition.

Redhog14

allen.coulson wrote:

I've noticed that policemen seem to be getting younger these days.

I think you may have strayed from the "Mundane Observations Thread"

king_jeffers

allen.coulson wrote:

I've noticed that policemen seem to be getting younger these days.

And more attractive, I had a date sometime ago with a very hot police women... the possibilities could have been endless....

On a side note I do wonder how effective an attractive police women would be in certain situations. I imagine it would be more of a hindrance than a help.

rick_chasey

King Jeffers wrote:

allen.coulson wrote:

I've noticed that policemen seem to be getting younger these days.

And more attractive, I had a date sometime ago with a very hot police women... the possibilities could have been endless....

On a side note I do wonder how effective an attractive police women would be in certain situations. I imagine it would be more of a hindrance than a help.

*cough* uniform fetish*cough*

t4tomo

SimonAH wrote:

Time flies we cannot so erratic is their flight

Punctuation puzzler set in English class when I was about eight or nine.

Time flies? We cannot, so erratic is their flight.

I think, but then I only got a C in O-level English

t4tomo

SimonAH wrote:

Time flies we cannot so erratic is their flight

Punctuation puzzler set in English class when I was about eight or nine.

Time flies? We cannot, so erratic is their flight.

I think, but then I only got a C in O-level English

notsoblue

Redhog14 wrote:

allen.coulson wrote:

I've noticed that policemen seem to be getting younger these days.

I think you may have strayed from the "Mundane Observations Thread"

I looked. And was disappointed.

Jay dubbleU

Time flies like an arrow

Fruit flies like a banana