Things that piss you off Page 1,451

Weather men / Weather Girls. What is the actual point of letting them have a slot on the news?

Newsreaders serve a function, they supply audio to go with the video and explain what is happening, but why do we need some twunt stood in front of a map of Britain telling us what rain is? We know what rain is, water from the sky or God's tears, everyone knows that, even a child.

By all means, if there is extreme weather coming up, bring them in as an occasional guest but don't give them two valuable minutes of news time every single day, just throw up a graphic.

And don't get me started on the weird ageist / sexist gender divide. Being a woman who does the weather is worse then Logan's Run in terms of life expectancy. As a society, are we naturally distrustful of old women predicting the weather? Are we worried they might stagger on with a walking stick and say: 'It will rain tomorrow, I saw a cow lying down and it always rains on St. Wurzel's Day'?

Bah!

Quote: Renegade Carpark @ 11th April 2014, 1:39 PM BST

Weather men / Weather Girls. What is the actual point of letting them have a slot on the news?

Newsreaders serve a function, they supply audio to go with the video and explain what is happening, but why do we need some twunt stood in front of a map of Britain telling us what rain is?

View original

https://www.comedy.co.uk/forums/post/948547/

Quote: Nogget @ 15th January 2013, 5:53 PM GMT

Take the BBC TV weather forecast, for example. You might expect it to be about the weather, but it's really just an excuse to have an attractive weather presenter say comforting things to us. S/he (usually she) will occupy about a third of the screen for a start; is that really necessary? Do we really need to see her at all?

View original

Ah ya miserable sods, there's some right bonny lasses do the weather report.

Quote: Stephen Goodlad @ 11th April 2014, 3:40 PM BST

Ah ya miserable sods, there's some right bonny lasses do the weather report.

View original

Then we shouldn't even pretend it's necessary and drop this charade altogether - weather girls in bikinis on the BBC.

Phwoooar, moisture is building up in the south area...

I find watching the weather forecast strangely comforting but better still is the shipping news on the radio.

Quote: Renegade Carpark @ 11th April 2014, 1:39 PM BST

Weather men / Weather Girls. What is the actual point of letting them have a slot on the news?

Newsreaders serve a function, they supply audio to go with the video and explain what is happening, but why do we need some twunt stood in front of a map of Britain telling us what rain is? We know what rain is, water from the sky or God's tears, everyone knows that, even a child.

By all means, if there is extreme weather coming up, bring them in as an occasional guest but don't give them two valuable minutes of news time every single day, just throw up a graphic.

And don't get me started on the weird ageist / sexist gender divide. Being a woman who does the weather is worse then Logan's Run in terms of life expectancy. As a society, are we naturally distrustful of old women predicting the weather? Are we worried they might stagger on with a walking stick and say: 'It will rain tomorrow, I saw a cow lying down and it always rains on St. Wurzel's Day'?

Bah!

View original

Haha! What a magnificent rant! RP should be on TV, in miniature in the corner of the screen like the person signing for deaf people, providing a bilious commentary.

Get rid of weather girls? I think not . .

Concurrent sentences.

Jennie may have a view.

Quote: beaky @ 12th April 2014, 1:00 PM BST

Haha! What a magnificent rant! RP should be on TV, in miniature in the corner of the screen like the person signing for deaf people, providing a bilious commentary.

View original

I would happily do it.

Quote: Oldrocker @ 12th April 2014, 10:01 PM BST

Concurrent sentences.

Jennie may have a view.

View original

I have a view on everything

Concurrent sentences are good things.

The are used in circumstances where two offences are committed simultaneously - e.g. someone is fleeing the police in a vehicle. They drive badly and are charged with dangerous driving and failing to stop for police.

These are two offences, but took place as part of the same action. So it is equitable that the sentences should be served at the same time.

It also allows for the principle of "totality" - which is that the overall length of the sentence should be just and proportionate in all the circumstances.

In reality, judges have a fair idea what they want to give your client in total, then just use the offences to make up that amount.

For example, client A sexually assaulted his wife then threw her phone against the wall. On any view it was 18 months immediate imprisonment. Judge can either give 18 months for the sexual assault and three months concurrent for the criminal damage, or 15 months for sexual assault and three months consec for the criminal damage. The outcome is the same.

If you don't have concurrent sentences, won't we lose paragraphs?

Is the European Union trying to take away our parragraphs?

Up yours Louis XIV!

Quote: Jennie @ 12th April 2014, 10:07 PM BST

In reality, judges have a fair idea what they want to give your client in total, then just use the offences to make up that amount.

View original

From what I understand, it also allows the police to clear up their investigations as well. If a serial criminal is caught, he can admit to his other offences without incurring separate incarcerations - it's why you hear stuff like 'he also admitted to 64 other offences of burglary'.

Of course, it must be down to the judge, otherwise spree or serial killers could try and only get done for the one murder.

I prefer the term spree killers, sounds much more cheerful.

Now serial killer, sounds like someone just going through the motions or killing people with Windows 7.

That is slightly different, that is called TICing (Taken Into Consideration). But yes, a client (usually a burglar) can admit a string of other offences.

That is then Taken Into Consideration for his sentence on the basis that he will never be prosecuted for those offences. He won't actually receive a separate sentence for those offences, just a higher one for the offence for which he is before the court.

My record is 324 separate TIC offences.