Police using dashcam video of a fail to remain 4 a Ped Hit & run

[Gibson99]

Yes, in the states we use "bodge"... Typically something that's bodged together was done in a hurry to beat a deadline, and usually has some problems and won't last.

So it's common to insult someone's truck by calling it a Bodge Ram.

 

[Rajagra]

Pedestrian paying attention or not we have to give them the benefit of avoidance: 5000lbs. v. 200 lbs!

Maybe I'm flogging a dead horse... but... it doesn't matter which party is controlling the 5000lb vehicle. Both parties have responsibility to stop that 5000lbs hitting the 200lb person, in whatever way is available to them.
Seriously ... I don't understand the logic, the mindset, that wants to believe that being vulnerable makes you less responsible for preventing dreadful accidents.
There is a legal phrase, "jointly and severally responsible." It isn't normally applied to road safety, but it should be. Everyone is 100% responsible for doing their bit to avoid accidents.

So yes, we have to give them the benefit of avoidance.
But they have to give us the benefit of avoidance too.

I don't understand how/why anyone would argue against this.

 

[Dashmellow]

One of my best friends from high school has the last name of Bodger. He's not going to be happy about this.

 

[Nigel]

I'm confused about @kamkar1's country being listed below Greenland.

It is part of Denmark, along with the Faroe Islands to the north of the UK.

"Greenland is an autonomous constituent country within the Kingdom of Denmark."

Yes, in the states we use "bodge"... Typically something that's bodged together was done in a hurry to beat a deadline, and usually has some problems and won't last.

So it's common to insult someone's truck by calling it a Bodge Ram.

"Bodging is a traditional woodturning craft, using green (unseasoned) wood to make chair legs and other cylindrical parts of chairs."
An occupation that seems to have become quite popular over the last few years.

Apparently you are using the word incorrectly, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodging#Cultural_references

 

[SawMaster]

Around here, if there's a hit-and-run with serious injury or death involved, the Police get the car details to the media pronto, and that usually leads them to the car very quickly Sometimes a smallish reward is offered and that too is very effective But if it's property damage only they put no effort into the job

So yes, we have to give them the benefit of avoidance.
But they have to give us the benefit of avoidance too.

I don't understand how/why anyone would argue against this.

I'm not sure that anyone was arguing against that- I certainly wasn't because arguing isn't any fun and nobody really wins in an argument
Phil

 

[Rajagra]

I was using the word in its more productive form, as in putting forward an argument. Which is a good thing and everyone wins if a rational argument is discussed openly.
But the world does seem to be filling with people who won't be rational, and do just argue (in the negative sense of the word.)

 

[SawMaster]

I like a good debate, but when that turns into an argument I'm outta here The difference between these two is when the discussed point changes from the topic at hand and becomes personal

A debate can have a winner involved , but an argument only has two losers involved Rise above the rabble and win

Phil

 

[kamkar]

I think officially we call Greenland our protectorate, and actually we bought the backing for that claim from our American friends when we sold them our little islands in the Caribbean for 25 million USD, and actually now 100 years later there is a clause in the sales contract that we can buy the virgin islands back now for the same 25 million USD price.

And i for one dont understand why we have not done that yet as its now 101 years since we sold the virgin islands.

The Faroe islands while sovereign countries still are represented in our parliament with 2 people, Iceland have been solo since 1944 as i recall.

So you could argue we are a bit like the UK, though the sun do set on the Danish empire due to lack of far eastern colonies like the British for some strange reason still have Australia.
Personally if i was a Aussie i would tell the UK to go mind their own.

So question our claim in the north Atlantic, and you will have to answer to "my little friend" too

 

[Rajagra]

Hmm. Sounds like the USA screwed up just like the UK did with Hong Kong.
I don't think they will give up the islands though. Maybe they'll sell them back, then retake them again using similar tactics to how they acquired Hawaii.

 

[Nigel]

Hmm. Sounds like the USA screwed up just like the UK did with Hong Kong.
I don't think they will give up the islands though. Maybe they'll sell them back, then retake them again using similar tactics to how they acquired Hawaii.

If it happens it will be decided by the population of the islands, not by the USA or Denmark. I don't think they would agree, even after Trump's response to the recent hurricane damage!

As for Hong Kong, the UK took that on to set up trade links and make money. Currently it is the 5th busiest container port in the world, the No 1. air cargo port and the No.4 financial centre, which makes it a big success, and one that we have all benefited from. If you included Shenzhen across the border in mainland China, where our cameras come from, then it would be the No 1. container port too. No 1. container port is actually Shanghai, also set up by the UK. No 2. is Singapore, another UK trading success. These places were set up by trading companies, which countries actually owned the land was not important and still isn't, we still do a lot of business with them and own a lot of the companies there.

 

[Rajagra]

If it happens it will be decided by the population of the islands, not by the USA or Denmark. I don't think they would agree, even after Trump's response to the recent hurricane damage!

As for Hong Kong, the UK took that on to set up trade links and make money. Currently it is the 5th busiest container port in the world, the No 1. air cargo port and the No.4 financial centre, which makes it a big success, and one that we have all benefited from. If you included Shenzhen across the border in mainland China, where our cameras come from, then it would be the No 1. container port too. No 1. container port is actually Shanghai, also set up by the UK. No 2. is Singapore, another UK trading success. These places were set up by trading companies, which countries actually owned the land was not important and still isn't, we still do a lot of business with them and own a lot of the companies there.

Yes, Hong Kong has done great. It's the UK that lost out by handing it back. Not that we had much choice by the time it happened.

Hawaii became a USA state with the population's support, but it did not start that way when it was annexed, much earlier on.

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk

 

[Nigel]

Yes, Hong Kong has done great. It's the UK that lost out by handing it back. Not that we had much choice by the time it happened.

Hawaii became a USA state with the population's support, but it did not start that way when it was annexed, much earlier on.

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk

What do you think we lost by transferring Hong Kong back to China?

Companies like HSBC (The Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation) are still British, Hongkong itself seems to be doing very well from the point of view of finance and trade.

Note that the original agreement with China gave us Hongkong in perpetuity, it was only when we extended the area that it was done on a 99 year lease, I don't think we actually had to give the original part back, but with a good agreement to ensure continued, and expanding trade and access it made a lot of sense. Its future success was not guaranteed with China developing around it, at some point they were not going to need us!

 

[Rajagra]

What do you think we lost by transferring Hong Kong back to China?

That's a bit like saying what did we lose by allowing the USA to become independent.
On a different scale, of course.

 

[Dashmellow]

That's a bit like saying what did we lose by allowing the USA to become independent.
On a different scale, of course.

Thanks so much for "allowing" it.

 

[kuoh]

I think it was just a little bit of tea, nothing to be concerned about really.

KuoH

That's a bit like saying what did we lose by allowing the USA to become independent.

 

[Nigel]

That's a bit like saying what did we lose by allowing the USA to become independent.
On a different scale, of course.

A lot of trouble! Not sure why there was a fight over it.
It was never going to make much difference to trade and it was a dispute about trade, tea included.

 

[Dashmellow]

A lot of trouble! Not sure why there was a fight over it.
It was never going to make much difference to trade and it was a dispute about trade, tea included.

It was a dispute about taxes. "No taxation without representation".

"A slogan that summarized a primary grievance of the American colonists in the Thirteen Colonies, which was one of the major causes of the American Revolution. In short, many in those colonies believed that, as they were not directly represented in the distant British Parliament, any laws it passed affecting the colonists (such as the Sugar Act and the Stamp Act) were illegal under the Bill of Rights 1689, and were a denial of their rights as Englishmen."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_taxation_without_representation

 

[kamkar]

That buy back clause was also just a local April 1 joke from a few years back
But even if it was true i am sure Danes and the people they have elected are too stupid to see that it would be a good idea, and would probably use those 25 millon USD to buy one more F35 fighter that are too noisy to fly here it seem.

At least the people around the airfields where they will be stationed will have to be expropriated out of their houses as a F35 are 2 X as loud as our current F16 fighters.
Something that seemingly was left out until the deal was signed
Now the big ? is will lying heads roll, or will it be the usual tax payer funded slap on the wrist

 

[Nigel]

It was a dispute about taxes. "No taxation without representation".

"A slogan that summarized a primary grievance of the American colonists in the Thirteen Colonies, which was one of the major causes of the American Revolution. In short, many in those colonies believed that, as they were not directly represented in the distant British Parliament, any laws it passed affecting the colonists (such as the Sugar Act and the Stamp Act) were illegal under the Bill of Rights 1689, and were a denial of their rights as Englishmen."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_taxation_without_representation

The Sugar Act was about controlling trade, same as import taxes today, Stamp Act was also to raise revenue, but things started long before that and a lot of people here were very happy to end it.

 

[Dashmellow]

The Sugar Act was about controlling trade, same as import taxes today, Stamp Act was also to raise revenue, but things started long before that and a lot of people here were very happy to end it.

Nothing like a bit of revisionist history from the Brits about the causes of the Revolutionary War. The war was primarily about unfair taxation. But sure, taxes certainly have a relationship with trade.