OT: Peaked cap brigade clamp down on T-shirts

formatting link
Give someone a peaked cap and this is the result;

"Forklift driver David Pratt was told by street wardens in Peterborough he could cause offence or incite violence."

"In what was an amicable conversation, the street warden advised the gentleman concerned that his T-shirt could cause offence and if he was to wear it again he could run the risk of being issued an £80 on-the-spot fine from the police."

The slogan on the garment read: "Don't piss me off! I am running out of places to hide the bodies."

Reply to
Ian Rawlings
Loading thread data ...

Ok, I'll stick my neck out. I would have found that T-shirt vaguely offensive, as I do with any public expressions (clothing, car stickers, tattoos etc) which contains words like piss, shit, and so on. I'm not one of those who believes that I have a right not to be offended, but I do have the right to regard people who do that kind of thing as crass wankers, whose sense of civic engagement stretches as far as "I can swear in public and you can't stop me cos I'm big and I'm not at school any more, nyah nyah". Plus he's a septic with a mullet, which compounds the offence.

If I read the story right, the warden quietly and amicably warned him about the possibility of a fine - hardly heavy-handed policing. Now the septic is complaining it's all "insane" and asking for a written apology. He's worried that if he gets a fine, he can kiss his application for UK citizenship goodbye. Fine by me.

-- Rich B

Reply to
Rich B

Well, I find chav clothing offensive, any religious symbolism, sticker-infested 4x4s, and an ENORMOUS list of other things, yes I am a grumpy old-before-his-time s**te.. If you gave me a peaked cap and some minor power over people, there would be riots I tell you!

It's absurd that a word like "piss" can be regarded as offensive, especially when you see it on the BBC news website right now, and it's used in regular english in phrases like "pissed off", "pissed as a newt" and so on.

Fine, and I have a right to regard the religious as borderline lunatics, but dishing out fines for such a minor thing is too close for getting fined for wearing colours that clash.

Well yes, he's not much of a figure of sympathy, but neither are 4x4 drivers and we got banned from half our lanes because peaked-cappers found us an easy target. Ditto smokers, people can whine "what about the children" and no officials can stand up to it even when the danger is, in practical terms, fictional. Do-gooders can stamp on people without any real grounds to complain just by picking their targets carefully. Often, those who voluntarily don the peaked cap are those who shouldn't be allowed a voice.

The heavy-handedness is that he was stopped and threatened with a fine for such a stupid "offense", an iron fist in a velvet glove is still an iron fist.

Reply to
Ian Rawlings

"Don't p*ss me off", I'd class as slang or argot, not swearing. After all, how many people do you know that say "I'm going to micturate"?

It's even used by Shakespeare

formatting link
The mullet... Dubious taste, maybe, but all the go when I was in my twenties.

The attitude of the peaked cap is one that I'd classify as a sense of humour failure, similar to one I experienced a while ago wearing a t-shirt that said "I'm a perfect European because..."

I drive like a Frenchman (Picture of a nutter in a 2CV) I'm as available as a Belgian (Picture of an empty desk) I cook like the British (Picture of a typical greasy spoon chef) I'm as sober as an Irishman. (Picture of a well lubricated bloke) (As well as 8 others)

One person got quite offended, saying she knew plenty of Irishmen & "none of them drink"

It's supposed to be a joke.... Against me, if you actually read it the way I do;-)

Of course, as the shirt was bought in the States, the original intention may well have been a polite warning;-)

Tciao for Now!

John.

Reply to
John Williamson

Ding

Very true, and I don't disagree. Perhaps I am of an older generation that sees the coarsening of society something to be regretted, though.

Ding

Not for me (see above). 'Snot a massive deal, just a slight feeling of regret that things seem to be getting less respectful and orderly - drunk girls puking in the street, car stickers that say "if you don't like it you can f*ck off" OWTTE, loud music in public spaces. All that stuff.

Ding

That's not within my understanding of "amicably", but ...

Nah, I think he was asked nicely and decided to be all aggrieved and Daily Mail about it. I have my rights, and all that.

I agree with most of what you say - perhaps I am just too old to appreciate that a child (seen in town at the weekend) wearing a T- shirt with a cartoon of a hand with an upraised middle finger and the words "spin on that, asshole" (or similar) is really a symbol of liberation and a fun, modern approach to life and society, and not just a nasty, aggressive in-your-face attempt to provoke a reaction, so that the parents can claim their right to do whatever they want has been inhibited. Chav culture has now become the mainstream.

-- Rich B

Reply to
Rich B

... a load of rubbish about declining standards ...

Or this ...

formatting link
They can keep him.

--

Reply to
Rich B

He was threatened with a fine, you can threaten someone with a fine in a polite manner, it just means that you tell them they will get a fine if they don't do what they're told, that is a threat. "Threatened" doesn't automatically mean that someone has been rudely, obnoxiously or physically threatened.

Perfectly justifiable too, while it's not something that I'd think is to be condoned, it's not something that people should be penalised for by the state, that's far too much micromanagement and too dictatorial. It's bordering on the lifestyle police.

Not saying that it is, just that it's not something that justifies the involvement of the state in dishing out punishments. Besides "piss me off" isn't as bad as the above.

We already have the blue-rinse brigade stopping us from smoking, off-roading, hunting, driving around in our own choice of car etc etc, it's the march of the grey goo, swamping us, and this is just another example of enforced compliance with other people's picky double standard morality.

Reply to
Ian Rawlings

Who? The yank or the wee lad from Donegal trying to help in the developing world?

Reply to
GbH

And apparently one is no longer allowed to hunt them down and kill them. It's PC gone mad I tell you.

Actually, I reckon (getting back to the OP) that there are two issues

- the first being whether someone does something in order to cause offence, or whether others take offence too easily. The second issue is whether people give any form of flying f*ck whether they're causing offence or not - such as loud music blaring from cars parked outside the house at 3am or wearing socks with sandals (re-read first paragraph)...

Reply to
.mother

In news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com, .mother wibbled :

What are the possible offences here? Behaviour Liklely to cause a breach of the peace? Not sure we've yet actually got to the repressive police state that 'causing offence' is an offence per sé. Similarly 'Walking with intent,' 'Wearing an offensive hat/shirt/uniform?' Wearing a dodgy haircut?

Reply to
GbH

Anything that has little chance of getting anywhere in a Court of Law will be subject to a Fixed Penalty.

Reply to
.mother

I was most frustrated to find that video had been pulled by the poster, I was going to forward it to a friend of mine in the hunting/fishing/shooting crowd.

In this case, I reckon the latter as it seems way too underdone for an excuse to get legal on someone, perhaps he was *really* fined for being a fat merkin with a mullet?

Or old folk who barge past you in silence after you've just held the door open for them or got out of their way --- and not because they're 'old' but just because you're polite.... Bang 'em all up I say!

Reply to
Ian Rawlings

Only if the fixed penalties are counted on a spreadsheet somewhere..

Reply to
Ian Rawlings

As Not the Nine O'Clock News suggested.

"Possessing an Offensive Wife"

Reply to
Steve Taylor

In news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com, .mother wibbled :

Doesn't a fixed penalty offer the option of court for one to oppose?

Reply to
GbH

Indeed it does - in actual fact it has to by law as by accepting the penalty (fine) you are admitting guilt and in English Law, you can only admit guilt if you have also had the option to protest innocence.

If, for just ONE DAY, everyone refused to pay their fixed penalty fines and opted to go to Court, the entire legal system in the UK would grind to a halt for over 18 months. This is why everyone (apart from those given them, obviously) 'likes' fixed penalties.

Revenue from fixed penalties is pretty much all clean profit. No assessment by CPS, no Court paperwork, no Court time, no Magistrates, no Clerks...

Reply to
.mother

The muppet who thought he could drop his trousers and show his arse to a Govt official in a foreign country for a dare. He assumed he could get away with disrespecting another culture and he's finding out the hard way that not everyone thinks this kind of thing is a giggle. It reminds me of that American lad a few years ago who vandalised some cars in Singapore and was sentenced to a flogging. Suddenly, he's a nice young man and all foreigners are barbarians. If you can't do the time, don't do the crime.

Reply to
Rich B

On or around Mon, 13 Aug 2007 22:24:49 +0100, "Rich B" enlightened us thusly:

now, there I agree with you 100%. You[1] take the risk, you take the consequences, and don't come to me whinging when you get sentenced to death for drug-smuggling in Thailand or your arse whipped in Singapore.

in the same way, I have a cavalier attitude to the speed limits in this country on occasion, but as Nige said up there a bit, if caught I'd pay the fine and be done with it.

Reply to
Austin Shackles

On or around Mon, 13 Aug 2007 17:09:02 +0100, .mother enlightened us thusly:

Oi. I wear socks with sandals...

but as for offence... it's impossible to cause offence, only to take it. At best (worst?) you can act in such a manner as might be likely to cause others to take offence, but if they decline to do so, then you fail in your attempt.

What annoys me these days is the plethora of people willing to judge on behalf of others - the case in point about the t-shirt is a classic: the bloke is quite entitled to say "I find your t-shirt offensive". I don't think anyone has the right to say "Others will find your t-shirt offensive"

- that presumes a knowledge of what others think which he can in no way posesss.

Personally, if I saw the t-shirt mentioned, I'd probably laugh.

Reply to
Austin Shackles

On or around Mon, 13 Aug 2007 21:42:03 +0100, .mother enlightened us thusly:

oooh, now there's a plan...

Reply to
Austin Shackles

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.