Posts by James Littlewood*
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Didn't see it. Sounds like an interesting approach. I chuckled the first time I encountered the synthetic stuff in a head shop one day. "What the hell's that?"
"Oh" the guy said. "Doesn't show up in urine tests. So guys who get sampled at work quite like it. Truckers, pilots, cops, ambulance drivers, that kind of stuff."
Blimey. How much of that's going on?
-
Am I indulging in self interest if I point out:
- that MMP is the fairest system by virtue of being the most proportional;
- that a lower electorate threshold equals greater proportionality still;
- that you can’t oppose the reduction of the electorate threshold without automatically displaying your own interest in its preservation;
- and that you can support that reduction on the grounds of supporting a fairer system?No. Unless by supporting a fairer system I’m somehow making things worse.
-
In comparison to me, at an older age.
To sound like your great uncle who smoked all his life and died of toe-nail cancer at the age of 103, I recall I rode a bike nearly every day 5 miles each way to high school and back, overtaking cars down Kepa Rd. Helmet? Never heard of it. Still here, ain't I?
Dumb luck.
Besides, the bike commute from Titirangi to Grey Lynn along Great North Rd could start soon and factor some significantly higher risk elements.
What's the more dangerous bike: peddle or motor?
-
So when my family and I do the Hendo bike trail to the Corbans Arts Centre, no helmets. It's a flat-to-gently undulating concrete path through green fields and scultpures. And my oldest kid can barely ride as it is. Falls off all the time, and always at <5km/h. Scabby knees, like any respectable 8 year old.
-
Coming in a bit late to this. So, pologies if already covered.
I believe there is evidence to suggest that an accident without a helmet is more likely to cause brain pain. But also, that the wearing of a helmet is associated with higher incidence of an accident.
Kinda like home birth vs. hostible. In the former, you're high and dry if something goes wrong. But in the latter, things are more likely to go wrong.
-
makes me wonder if anyone else could have done it.
Yeah.
-
Oh, and my "future of TV", "couch testing", JC Matthew 380 Freeview recorder!!! It changed my life. I said in these pages "I might never watch live TV again." Well, I was pretty close. If you record Coro, you get more than you can deal with: I'm down to two ep's a year now, and that's more than enough. Plus sometimes the kids like to watch musical reality game shows. Fucked if I'm going to clog up the hard drive with that.
Durn thing conked out 3 weeks ago. I lasted 2 days before running out to the nearest big box retailer to replace it. Bigger memory, yucky interface, same suh-weet ad-free time-shifting.
-
Um, coming in late to this. And, in recent years infrequently. And too mad out with grown up shit (politics! fuck!) to catch up on the thread. And slightly pissed.
So just barging in with no respect to the regulars.
But (gulp) fuck it, RB. Planet, bFM, this ... thing, the live events ... the music! You've done us proud. And that's the understatement of the year.
You helped me through the W. Bush years. You introduced me to John Daily Stewart. You ... unwittingly, no doubt ... were part of my inspiration to join the Green Party.
Here's a no-longer secret: I think of PA most times I play the ukulele. Read it 'n'weep, folks.
Shit, I dunno. It's just brilliant. I _always_ have a good time here.
-
We should maybe, (lock and load), shoot him then, as Laws would have?
Fear/ Fair enough? Eye for an eye innit?At this point in time the guy has done what our judicial system said is his penance.
I know what you mean, and I want to agree. But just because a room full of scared and angry people express themselves poorly (and even bigotedly, certainly illogically) doesn't mean the law is right. Who here hasn't tried to change a law for the better, at some point? Thought so.
If the law fails to protect the people of the Whang even from fear, then surely, it at least bears questioning.
Not that it would help in the present instance. But - as a principle - why not give the judiciary some ability to extend supervision (or a harsher penalty) in cases where the accused of serious crimes was reasonably deemed to be a danger upon release?
-
My thoughts exactly. And – wow – what a tale. And yet, for all the narrow mindedness, I can’t help but sympathise, a little bit. Like you, Russel, I’d have murderous thoughts.
That alone is enough to suggest that there’s something wrong. People shouldn’t have murderous thoughts, should they? Is it _their_ fault they have murderous thoughts?