What Are They Going To Ban Next???? - Page 10

chav1 · 18-05-2005, 22:04

a no smoking section and smoking section in a pub is about as effective as having a peeing and non peeing section in the swimming baths

forget where i heard that one but thought it appropiate :-)

staggeringman · 19-05-2005, 01:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bazf

A good senario....... ban all cars ..done.... now we have a problem how are you smokers going to get to hospital when you have chronic bronchitis, atherosclerosis, Blockage to the vascular supply to the legs, etc... do you expect to be carried? you should be light enough an average weight loss of about 5st when you get cancer.

obviousley you go running in the park!like all yanks do,its keep fit year (yo jethro you are right man)so lets cut down on the smoking and the illicet rye we drink and get fit for AMERICA!

Mik Dickinson · 19-05-2005, 07:56

Looking at it in a normal way, i would think that any resort would have a park and walk facility.You park up outside the resort and then get on free transport to the centre.Thus keeping all the pollution away from the centre.Free transport would be subsidised by the money earnt on the parking spaces.Keeping the centre of the resort vehicle free.

Billcat · 19-05-2005, 21:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by staggeringman

obviousley you go running in the park!like all yanks do,its keep fit year (yo jethro you are right man)so lets cut down on the smoking and the illicet rye we drink and get fit for AMERICA!

Go running in the park? Let's not an just say that we did.

I'd prefer to get my exercise strolling to the pub, lifting pints, holding up the bar, and staggering home after. The only running I'd care to do is runing up a tab.:engsmil: Love those UK pubs.

staggeringman · 20-05-2005, 00:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billcat

Go running in the park? Let's not an just say that we did.

I'd prefer to get my exercise strolling to the pub, lifting pints, holding up the bar, and staggering home after. The only running I'd care to do is runing up a tab.:engsmil: Love those UK pubs.

is there nowt like this over there billcat?

pendy · 23-05-2005, 17:01

Okay, here's the latest lunacy. The Nanny State is going to introduce legislation to make all bath taps thermostatically controlled at a lowish temperature, starting with newly built homes and eventually extending it to all homes. Why? Because out of 55 million of us, 600 people a year manage to scald themselves in baths! Fine to do this for elderly and confused folk, who may forget that they have run a very hot bath - but for the rest of us? Also, they don't have to pay for it, we apparently do.

Do we ban road traffic next because some idiots jaywalk?

yerself · 23-05-2005, 18:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by pendy

Because out of 55 million of us, 600 people a year manage to scald themselves in baths!

It's like closing the stable door after the horse has bolted. If we'd had this legislation a few years ago we might still have Princess Margaret. That's a thought. Will it become known as Maggie's Law?

Acrylic-bob · 23-05-2005, 18:58

Errm Nanny State has already been here. We have just taken over a new industrial unit in Blackpool and not only does it have a specially kitted out disabled loo, but there is also a little pump attached to the hot water system which mixes cold water with the hot before it comes out of the tap. This surely is taking Health and Safety far too far. What next, every employee to be swathed in bubble wrap before they start work?

lindsay ormerod · 23-05-2005, 19:14

Harumph! Not amused at all; I like my baths HOT and when the water cools down I put more hot in! It hasn't done me any harm in the last 37 years!

staggeringman · 24-05-2005, 02:46

havent had a bath in years!i am building up my anti-bodies for when i need them!...lol

pendy · 24-05-2005, 14:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Acrylic-bob

Errm Nanny State has already been here. We have just taken over a new industrial unit in Blackpool and not only does it have a specially kitted out disabled loo, but there is also a little pump attached to the hot water system which mixes cold water with the hot before it comes out of the tap. This surely is taking Health and Safety far too far. What next, every employee to be swathed in bubble wrap before they start work?

Love the bit about bubble wrap - can we do that, please!!

Billcat · 24-05-2005, 16:10

What adults do about their baths in their own homes in, frankly, their business, at least for as long as they own that home. If they wish to sell, then the home ought to meet the standard. Public facilities, however, should be required to meet the standard.

There are many people who need to be protected from overly hot water. Young children are much more prone to scalding (and at far lower temperatures) than adults, and the smaller ones can do little but scream if the water becomes too hot - at least until they grow big enough to control the water themselves. While most scalding incidents are minor, there are still many cases of scarring and death can even result

Also, there are many adults who suffer from neuropathy and cannot tell if the water is too hot. I speak from personal experience as my wife, having had diabetes for many years, has had neuropathy coming on for a long time. There is very little remaining feeling in her feet and legs, which makes the risk of serious injury very real indeed. It's not exactly a rare problem. Systems that either limit the water temperature and/or cut off the flow if there is a sudden spike in temperature are a wise precaution, both for our home and in public places. The cost of doing this is not exactly a major burden.

Also, while we all depend on the water pressure remaining as set, in homes with older plumbing the flush of a toilet elsewhere in the house can cause a sudden dip in cold water pressure, causing the temperature in the shower to quickly spike to scalding temperatures. I'm not sure how the liability laws work in the UK, but I'm sure that building owners (and their insurers) in the USA would prefer to take reasonable measures to prevent scalding, and reduce the risk of injuring people - especially if the result is favorable to their insurance premiums!

I got to wondering if people complained about the cost of having to install indoor plumbing and sewage treatment, rather than the inexpensive and ever-so-picturesque backyard loo, not to mention those quaint, frequent, and exciting cholera epidemics that were the result of old fashioned neighborhood wells and those loos.

Not quite sure why Acrylic-Bob wishes to take issue with having diabled loos available. The simple addition of these facilities in our workplaces and public facilities make it possible for many disabled folks to continue to support themselves and continue to have a life, instead of becoming a burden on their families and the taxpaying public. They don't make things any less convenient for ordinary folks, as they can also use the accessible loo if they need to. The additional cost is much more reasonable when done as part of new construction, especially when compared with the cost of retrofitting handicapped facilities in existing buildings.

chav1 · 24-05-2005, 17:28

what are they going to ban next..?

driller

Billcat · 24-05-2005, 20:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by chav1

what are they going to ban next..?

driller

LOL! Good one, chav1!

staggeringman · 25-05-2005, 00:06

here we go now they have banned hunting with dogs,the do gooders are now aiming(pun) at shooting! the do gooders claim that the people who run the shoots are laying down snares and other traps to protect there livestock ...ie pheasants ...etc so when do the burglars put a complaint into the government saying that people are over protecting there houses and possesions? its only the same inn-it?