General things that Annoy you

MrLargo said:

Algarveaddick said:

MrLargo said:

Less of an issue this year due to Covid, but with the festive season approaching, there's still an opportunity to witness this irritating scenario before the year is out. I'm not sure how common this is. I first witnessed it with my dad's family (my gran and my uncle, my dad is also guilty of it), and then with my ex-girlfriend as well:

When you have guests round, or when you go to visit people, and it's time for the visitor to go home. You're all sat in the lounge or at the dining table, and someone (usually the visitor) will say something to precipitate their departure - "ooh, look at the time, I'd best be getting home" is a classic example. Normally, if I am the guest, then I'll have my coat on and be out of the door within 3 minutes of the initial announcement that it's time for me to go. However, when my dad's family or my ex-girlfriend were involved, announcing that it's time to go is merely the catalyst to a boring and awkward hour long conversation stood up in the hallway next to the front door. It's ridiculous. I once spent 45 minutes stuck in a narrow hallway making small talk with my mate's dad, because his wife and my missus had mutually agreed that it was home time, stood up, my mrs put her coat on and then started an entirely new conversation about furniture. Unbelievable.

Are they from Kent? 

Well not originally, but virtually every example of the scenario in question has taken place in Kent, which is where my parents have lived since 1987. Do you think it's a specifically Kentish issue then?

My ex was from Barnsley, so obviously it's to be expected that she would have some irritating social habits, although I must admit I was quite surprised that she knew enough words to sustain a conversation for 45 minutes.

AddickUpNorth said:

Pretty much everything at the moment. Can’t remember the last time I felt so irritable and angsty. Think I might need to go to one of those places that allow you to smash up all sorts of shit with a sledgehammer to get the tension out before I proper blow a fuse.

AddickUpNorth said:

ross1 said:

AddickUpNorth said:

Pretty much everything at the moment. Can’t remember the last time I felt so irritable and angsty. Think I might need to go to one of those places that allow you to smash up all sorts of shit with a sledgehammer to get the tension out before I proper blow a fuse.

Don't worry, we will win Saturday and you will feel a lot better 

And if we lose...........?

ross1 said:

AddickUpNorth said:

ross1 said:

AddickUpNorth said:

Pretty much everything at the moment. Can’t remember the last time I felt so irritable and angsty. Think I might need to go to one of those places that allow you to smash up all sorts of shit with a sledgehammer to get the tension out before I proper blow a fuse.

Don't worry, we will win Saturday and you will feel a lot better 

And if we lose...........?

If you find somewhere to smash up, tell me and I will join you 

ValleyGary said:

School mums in general, but special mention to those that drive 6.0 litre, 4x4 super trucks and have no idea of spacial awareness or how to control them. Stopping in all sorts of parking positions just so your fat shit bag of a child doesn’t have to walk more than 5 yards to the gate. 

Raith_C_Chattonell said:

McBobbin said:

ValleyGary said:

School mums in general, but special mention to those that drive 6.0 litre, 4x4 super trucks and have no idea of spacial awareness or how to control them. Stopping in all sorts of parking positions just so your fat shit bag of a child doesn’t have to walk more than 5 yards to the gate. 

I live near a couple of private private schools, and faith schools (where the liberal middle classes feign several years of religiousosity) and the only binding thread is the inability to see over the flipping steering wheel. I maintain that if an Addison Lee - Addison Lee - driver lived near me they would have a rear view mirror (crazy as that sounds) dripping with every religious artefact currently known to man. It's like a demolition derby most mornings.

I s'pose we all do the best we can for our children. 

I know someone who sent their kid to a highly regarded faith school.  She told me that it was a case of 'On your knees or pay the fees'.  The car she drives is large, but would most likely be smaller if school fees had to be met. Divine intervention or a contradiction in terms? 

MrOneLung said:

Raith_C_Chattonell said:

McBobbin said:

ValleyGary said:

School mums in general, but special mention to those that drive 6.0 litre, 4x4 super trucks and have no idea of spacial awareness or how to control them. Stopping in all sorts of parking positions just so your fat shit bag of a child doesn’t have to walk more than 5 yards to the gate. 

I live near a couple of private private schools, and faith schools (where the liberal middle classes feign several years of religiousosity) and the only binding thread is the inability to see over the flipping steering wheel. I maintain that if an Addison Lee - Addison Lee - driver lived near me they would have a rear view mirror (crazy as that sounds) dripping with every religious artefact currently known to man. It's like a demolition derby most mornings.

I s'pose we all do the best we can for our children. 

I know someone who sent their kid to a highly regarded faith school.  She told me that it was a case of 'On your knees or pay the fees'.  The car she drives is large, but would most likely be smaller if school fees had to be met. Divine intervention or a contradiction in terms? 

A line from my favourite porno

Algarveaddick said:

MrOneLung said:

Raith_C_Chattonell said:

McBobbin said:

ValleyGary said:

School mums in general, but special mention to those that drive 6.0 litre, 4x4 super trucks and have no idea of spacial awareness or how to control them. Stopping in all sorts of parking positions just so your fat shit bag of a child doesn’t have to walk more than 5 yards to the gate. 

I live near a couple of private private schools, and faith schools (where the liberal middle classes feign several years of religiousosity) and the only binding thread is the inability to see over the flipping steering wheel. I maintain that if an Addison Lee - Addison Lee - driver lived near me they would have a rear view mirror (crazy as that sounds) dripping with every religious artefact currently known to man. It's like a demolition derby most mornings.

I s'pose we all do the best we can for our children. 

I know someone who sent their kid to a highly regarded faith school.  She told me that it was a case of 'On your knees or pay the fees'.  The car she drives is large, but would most likely be smaller if school fees had to be met. Divine intervention or a contradiction in terms? 

A line from my favourite porno

I read that as "favourite panto" first... 

StigThundercock said:

Annoyed isn't the word:
Driver kills other motorist through admitted neglect and gets a 2 year driving ban plus 2 year suspended sentence.  Has spent no time in custody and will spend no time in custody.  The culprit's admission to the court that she was distracted by her mobile phone, "saw brake lights ahead but thought the traffic was still moving" will have been the most favourable wording possible without actually telling a lie.  She claimed "I couldn't have been doing more than 70" - accident investigators estimate her speed at impact between 35 and 45 mph so she clearly had no mind on what she was doing at all.
Utter disgrace Judge has cast the value of the slain motorcyclist at zero.
Of course there is no suggestion the killer intended to harm anybody but to get off scot free essentially absolves her of responsibility for her actions.
Accidentally killing someone is still manslaughter.
Getting behind the wheel of a motorcar puts the driver in charge of a ton of metal and unequivocally responsible for everything that happens from that point forward.  Ploughing into the back of stationery traffic on a dual carriageway because you admit to not paying sufficient attention to notice the traffic has stopped is exactly the same as jumping a red light on a pedestrian crossing.  This reckless moron is a danger to society and her punishment should reflect that.
If she'd carelessly kicked a brick off some scaffolding and killed a passer by she'd be done for manslaughter and serve a minimum 5 years - the death was accidental but the cause was wanton negligence rooted in reckless self-absorbed irresponsibility - do that at the wheel of a car and judges lose all grip on reason and responsibility.
This particular blight on the judiciary and stain on humanity has to be defrocked immediately - he simply has no actual regard for human life at all.  Were the fatality someone he knew, let alone a member of his family would he think differently - or at all?  He's robbing our taxes to let negligent killers off scot free.

You can find the names of the culprit and the moron in the wig in today's tabloid press.

StigThundercock said:

ross1 said:

StigThundercock said:

Annoyed isn't the word:
Driver kills other motorist through admitted neglect and gets a 2 year driving ban plus 2 year suspended sentence.  Has spent no time in custody and will spend no time in custody.  The culprit's admission to the court that she was distracted by her mobile phone, "saw brake lights ahead but thought the traffic was still moving" will have been the most favourable wording possible without actually telling a lie.  She claimed "I couldn't have been doing more than 70" - accident investigators estimate her speed at impact between 35 and 45 mph so she clearly had no mind on what she was doing at all.
Utter disgrace Judge has cast the value of the slain motorcyclist at zero.
Of course there is no suggestion the killer intended to harm anybody but to get off scot free essentially absolves her of responsibility for her actions.
Accidentally killing someone is still manslaughter.
Getting behind the wheel of a motorcar puts the driver in charge of a ton of metal and unequivocally responsible for everything that happens from that point forward.  Ploughing into the back of stationery traffic on a dual carriageway because you admit to not paying sufficient attention to notice the traffic has stopped is exactly the same as jumping a red light on a pedestrian crossing.  This reckless moron is a danger to society and her punishment should reflect that.
If she'd carelessly kicked a brick off some scaffolding and killed a passer by she'd be done for manslaughter and serve a minimum 5 years - the death was accidental but the cause was wanton negligence rooted in reckless self-absorbed irresponsibility - do that at the wheel of a car and judges lose all grip on reason and responsibility.
This particular blight on the judiciary and stain on humanity has to be defrocked immediately - he simply has no actual regard for human life at all.  Were the fatality someone he knew, let alone a member of his family would he think differently - or at all?  He's robbing our taxes to let negligent killers off scot free.

You can find the names of the culprit and the moron in the wig in today's tabloid press.

I am sure about a year or so ago, I read that the government was going to change the law for cases like this to manslaughter, but I have not heard anything since, whether anyone can update this

I think the maximum term for death by dangerous driving was to be raised from the derisory 5 years to 10 years bringing it more into line with manslaughter - although 15 years or more can be handed down to reckless killers (not driving a car).

The wanton killer at the wheel is most at fault obviously.  The judge in this case has debased his profession in practically absolving the culprit of the life taking.  But I also have a major problem with why manslaughter charges are never brought when the negligent killer is at the wheel of a motorised vehicle.  There is an easily comprehensible crime on the statute books describing the unwitting/accidental taking of human life.  There's no charge of 'being reckless on a building site causing death' * - it's always manslaughter.
The homicide is the offense, surely?  Quite what one was doing when one was careless enough to cause the death is very much secondary isn't it?  Plod and CPS seem paralysed by this mickey mouse charge of "...by dangerous driving" A person is dead - charge the culprit with that - not some technical breach of the Highway Code FFS!!
*Half a lifetime ago I sat in on a court case around the death of a worker during the 2nd Dartford Tunnel construction.  Lots of the workforce were French or French speaking, including the deceased, and a mate of mine was working as an interpreter.  It was ages after the event cos obvs the HSE had stuck its nose in and held things up while it vainly sought to justify its existence and rack up plenty of expenses.  The poor chap expired under some piece of heavy plant that overbalanced on sodden ground.  A company was charged with corporate manslaughter.  Nobody did anything deliberately, it was obvious to all it was a most unfortunate sequence of events but a bloke was killed as the demonstrable result of someone not doing what they should - ergo he was killed and somebody's responsible and the charge is manslaughter.  Most galling of all, I was chatting with my interpreter mate and a French brief he'd got to know over the many months of the process.  M. solicitor francais couldn't understand all the rigmarole over one life lost, and I quote "Il n'était qu'un Belge"

StigThundercock said:

Annoyed isn't the word:
Driver kills other motorist through admitted neglect and gets a 2 year driving ban plus 2 year suspended sentence.  Has spent no time in custody and will spend no time in custody.  The culprit's admission to the court that she was distracted by her mobile phone, "saw brake lights ahead but thought the traffic was still moving" will have been the most favourable wording possible without actually telling a lie.  She claimed "I couldn't have been doing more than 70" - accident investigators estimate her speed at impact between 35 and 45 mph so she clearly had no mind on what she was doing at all.
Utter disgrace Judge has cast the value of the slain motorcyclist at zero.
Of course there is no suggestion the killer intended to harm anybody but to get off scot free essentially absolves her of responsibility for her actions.
Accidentally killing someone is still manslaughter.
Getting behind the wheel of a motorcar puts the driver in charge of a ton of metal and unequivocally responsible for everything that happens from that point forward.  Ploughing into the back of stationery traffic on a dual carriageway because you admit to not paying sufficient attention to notice the traffic has stopped is exactly the same as jumping a red light on a pedestrian crossing.  This reckless moron is a danger to society and her punishment should reflect that.
If she'd carelessly kicked a brick off some scaffolding and killed a passer by she'd be done for manslaughter and serve a minimum 5 years - the death was accidental but the cause was wanton negligence rooted in reckless self-absorbed irresponsibility - do that at the wheel of a car and judges lose all grip on reason and responsibility.
This particular blight on the judiciary and stain on humanity has to be defrocked immediately - he simply has no actual regard for human life at all.  Were the fatality someone he knew, let alone a member of his family would he think differently - or at all?  He's robbing our taxes to let negligent killers off scot free.

You can find the names of the culprit and the moron in the wig in today's tabloid press.