udderlyoffroad

Looking forward to seeing how this turns out.

2.4 kg/h of diesel is 2.82 l/h so you’re way off if it’s chewing through 5l in less than an hour.

Ok I’ll bite. Given you should be wearing hearing protection regardless of barrel length, how is this relevant let alone true for practical purposes? Or are you suggesting a shorter barrel requires more attenuation in your hearing protection? If so, how much?

Surely the problem here is they’re at least 5 years too late? Many people, myself included, have given up on broadcast television. What’s the point paying £150/yr & having to sit through interminable, unskippable adverts, only be talked as though you were some kind of simpleton. The fact that ofcom have deigned to give a broadcast licence to a channel with possible right-of-centre views is simply not relevant to large parts of the population who’ve already “checked out” or young people who never even started watching ‘linear’ television.

Channel4 is still receiving taxpayer money (as is S4C). To be fair to the BBC, correct decision, as he was employed as a newsreader. However if only it applied the rules equally to the other side of the political spectrum. Hence @hawkfanz two tier ki…uh BBC point

Nail on head. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2025/jan/06/roman-empires-use-of-lead-lowered-iq-levels-across-europe-study-finds The science behind a ban can be as questionable as you like, it matters not. The precautionary principle trumps rigorous science (see: Covid). Lead ammunition is on the way out, just depends when. Brexit means it’ll probably happen sooner in the UK than the EU as the HSE want to forge their own path. The EU parliamentarians are far more receptive* to lobbying by FACE et al than their UK counterparts. *If you think MPs are bent, etc etc

Yes it’s a fishing expedition to which the right answer is; you can read the press release at the same time as everyone else, ie after the minister has informed parliament. Regardless, of course WJ will seek judicial review, their raison d’etre is as a lawfare organisation. … Standby for the inevitable bevy of usual suspects who are going to demand BASC share their strategy of how they will respond to that particular threat in advance & will feign outrage when Conor refuses to show BASCs hand.

This; how is entering a third country with another passport even an offence in this country? By definition it is outside the UK’s jurisdiction. Back on topic, I listened to the JBP/TR podcast but had to give up an hour in. The man clearly has issues, is obviously on the spectrum & sounded to me like a liar. Nevertheless if only 1/5th of what he was saying is true it’s truly appalling, and our so called public servants truly hate us.* As for anyone welcoming him into a political party; he is a liability for whom party discipline would be a foreign concept. Farage must hold the line and avoid him like the plague. That’s not to say TR doesn’t have a ‘stopped clock’ problem, that is twice a day he is right, but he is still not to be trusted. And that’s not not to say the judiciary arent gunning for him too. *by ‘us’ I mean anyone, regardless of race, who considers drug-raping vulnerable teenagers unacceptable.

Good riddance to statist trash. Hopefully our Canucky cousins can roll back the worst of his excesses (repealing the theoretical ban on 12 bores would be a start)

Lloyd old chap. Look at literally *any* other developed nation, see how much they spend per head on healthcare, and see how much better they are than us at not killing their population prematurely. The “envy of the world’ is in fact an absolute cluster of inefficiency & waste. There is plenty of money, if only it could be spent on actual patient care.

Once again, spoiling your ballot paper, in the UK at least, *is* counted & is the official ‘none of the above’ option. Your English teacher owes me an apology.

I’d certainly agree on that; Wuhan lab leaks and all that. But as I said in my last-but-one post, just because the science is junk, doesn’t mean senior civil servants & politicians won’t leap on it in a concerted effort to cover their backsides. Eg; lockdown. As said, if they want to ban something (PFAS) where we’re only just beginning to understand its effects, why would they hesitate with something (lead) with “no safe levels”. The fact the science is disputed matters not. So, again, where is the evidence the orgs’ voluntary transition begat the lead ban? There isn’t any. What begat the HSEs consultation is their wish to remain in lockstep, if not going further than, the EU.

To be honest this whole thread is re-hashing the arguments of 5 years ago, with little to no new insights as far as I can see. The idea that the org’s voluntary transition, as poorly communicated as it was, somehow begat the HSE’s and the EU’s push to ban lead is a laughable. I’ve still not seen a shred of evidence to support this theory, only people using words like ‘they’ & ‘agenda’.

St Stephen’s/boxing day is usually the busiest day on our little DIY syndicate as the beaters & guns generally manage to drag (non-shooting) partners along too. Possibly something to do with the need to get some fresh air and exercise after all that Christmas food.

I’ve wittered on about this before, but unlike lead we are only just beginning to understand the toxicity and/or carcinogenic properties of PFAS. There is a real push to ban these where possible on the ‘precautionary principle’, but it won’t be easy as they’re everywhere. Firefighting foams are an obvious place to start, but the increased use of ethanol in fuel makes their replacement challenging as it’s difficult to make something that effectively smothers alcohol fires. The point I’m meandering towards, is that if governments are potentially prepared to ban things on the basis of ‘unknown unknowns’, then banning something with ‘no safe levels’ is by comparison easy. Nobody said the science these decisions are based on had to be anything better than junk science (or at the very least backside covering by ‘the blob’). The UK government’s response to the pandemic demonstrated this repeatedly.