Over the last few weeks/months there has been a definite change of tone on SFN, have no fear I shall re-double my efforts to inject some humour into the forum and will ‘call out’ the miserable gits who are darkening the mood.
3 Likes
IMO everyone needs a little fun…
Surely it depends upon the intention behind it.
1 Like
Jane… I take on board what someone writes…
If the info is interesting/useful/funny or whatever… I take it at face-value… if not, I sweep on by…
a person’s intention can be to inform, to advise, to amuse… whatever… if there is no harm in it… what’s the harm 
Jane, your capacity for being implacably hostile is impressive, almost an art-form in its relentless grouchiness towards me, and occasionally towards others.
If you think you typify SFN friendliness, I think you might do well to think again.
1 Like
Peter your posts can sometimes be a little over the top but are always well constructed - you always provoke lively and sometimes meaningful debate. I often disagree with what you say but would defend your right to say it, providing it does not contain inflammatory language which sometimes it does. I think some on this site would like to see you gone or silenced. I sense a pattern developing. I for one would miss you.
The comments made to Kent Shelley that he might be the exception and not be violent we t too far for me.
Jane, I’ve just re-read that post.
How many times has one of us written of our own experience and almost immediately had someone refute what we write… “no, no… that’s not how it goes” sort of thing…
Peter talks about what he has encountered… he calls upon his own experiences… and quite rightly allows that this is not “gospel” that there is and will always be the Exception… that’s life…
4 Likes
The idea that “some (political) faces are very punchable” is too far for me, Jane.
No society or rule of law worthy of the description will sanction punching someone in the face, other than competitive pugilism which is refereed and governed by sporting rules.
1 Like
I have finally found 5 minutes to catch up on this post and quite frankly I am gobsmacked.
Peter - please remove your comment to Jane - it violates our T&C.
NO PERSONAL ATTACKS OR COMMENTS
Apologies for shouting but I am slightly exasperated.
I would miss him too. James and I do not have the time or inclination for endless moderating.
Please everyone - think before you post!!
@cat, well I’m shocked and very disappointed that you and James don’t spend every waking minute moderating comments from alleged grown-ups on your own forum, I’m almost tempted to withdraw my membership in protest!
3 Likes
And I’m shocked and disappointed that nobody has checked my nappy in the last half-an-hour and my dummy is still under the cot where I threw it, and it’s covered in dust!!!
If I don’t get moderated by Cat or James PDQ I am going to pull Teddy’s other arm off…
I agree Jane, I can’t remember the number of offices I knew around the world that had the bosses face as a dartboard on the walls. As others have pointed out these are young guys, very often being pushed into threatening positions by politicians of all stripes - so I wouldbe surprised if only one politician’s face was involved in the games.
Graham Lees You sound inordinately upset that the Military should have guns at all? What should we issue them with - water pistols? This is their role in life - and you can argue all you like about militarism, but in today’s world and evenyesterday’s these are the guys your life might depend on one day, and some juvenile high jinks where NO-ONE is getting hurt does indeed sound unimportant to me.
3 Likes
Totally agree Paul, I do think that some people’s ideas are based on experiences going back quite a long time and the current picture is very different. One thing I like to say is ‘You and your family are being attacked ,you know that if you survive you will be very seriously hurt .You get a few seconds where you can call for help,who will you ring? It will be the same police service that you happily spend so much time criticising ‘
Interesting photograph you have there for someone who’s attended the appropriate courses.
1 Like
I agree but also believe that freedom of speech is important and being able to criticise any public body is a right we should protect.
1 Like
The police have always been and always will be criticised ,damned if you do damned if you don’t . It’s the nature of the job and I agree they should be open to scrutiny
1 Like
In the spirit of open scrutiny and freedom to comment, may I suggest that to criticise is not to damn. To equate the two is itself prejudicial and unreasonably defensive IMO. It betrays an attitude that belies openness to scrutiny, and strangles freedom to comment at birth.
Not at all, I was basically saying that whatever the police do there will ,nearly always ,be someone not happy with them . I am all for close scrutiny, body worn cameras, van cameras etc as it leaves the police less open to spurious accusations and complaints and people may begin to understand the reality of police work and what they have to face in todays society.
I find a lot of people who are quick to be critical of the police are people who have little knowledge or experience of policing and have their own version of what it is /should be