Boat sunk, by Stag Party?

[Chewbacka]

57 minutes ago, Sir Nibble said:

Give him your boat then.

Talking generally, some people are too proud or untrusting to ask or even accept help and just try to get buy, maybe even living in a boat that is ultimately going to sink.  What ever is done will cost society money, wether it is emergency accommodation, or money to help with mooring and licensing.  It is sad that this case has come to this and some compassion for his situation is the decent thing to have.  Driving him off the waterways to where we no longer see him does not solve the problem, it only hides it and allows us to pretend that all is well in society.  It isn’t.

[Sir Nibble]

7 minutes ago, Chewbacka said:

Talking generally, some people are too proud or untrusting to ask or even accept help and just try to get buy, maybe even living in a boat that is ultimately going to sink.  What ever is done will cost society money, wether it is emergency accommodation, or money to help with mooring and licensing.  It is sad that this case has come to this and some compassion for his situation is the decent thing to have.  Driving him off the waterways to where we no longer see him does not solve the problem, it only hides it and allows us to pretend that all is well in society.  It isn’t.

I agree with that. It's just that as soon as anyone raises an eyebrow at an unlicensed boat, or a derelict on the verge of sinking, or a boat stationary for months on end there are always some who will Invent an unsubstantiated narrative of mental illness or other hardship and castigate everyone for not toeing that particular party line. 

[Mike Todd]

36 minutes ago, Sir Nibble said:

I agree with that. It's just that as soon as anyone raises an eyebrow at an unlicensed boat, or a derelict on the verge of sinking, or a boat stationary for months on end there are always some who will Invent an unsubstantiated narrative of mental illness or other hardship and castigate everyone for not toeing that particular party line. 

It might come as a bit of a surprise for some folk to see the kind of accommodation that is offered to those who become homeless, whether or not it is officially 'deliberate'. (It can be well below any decent standard) Despite the occasional story to the contrary, the state does not give 'hand outs' not give a helping hand lightly. I've never been in such a situation and I thank God so very often that that is thew case as the line between a comfortable life and one which is definitely not so, is often very thin and one can so easily go down the qwrong road.

[Sir Nibble]

2 minutes ago, Mike Todd said:

It might come as a bit of a surprise for some folk to see the kind of accommodation that is offered to those who become homeless, whether or not it is officially 'deliberate'. (It can be well below any decent standard) Despite the occasional story to the contrary, the state does not give 'hand outs' not give a helping hand lightly. I've never been in such a situation and I thank God so very often that that is thew case as the line between a comfortable life and one which is definitely not so, is often very thin and one can so easily go down the qwrong road.

Indeed, but that doesn't qualify anyone to make a diagnosis without any medical training of an illness in someone they have never met, just to be more tolerant and understanding than the next guy. One could equally decide the bloke is a right toerag who deserves everything he gets. Without expert first hand knowledge either viewpoint is equally unsustainable. How would you or I feel about strangers speculating about our mental health from a position of ignorance?

[mark99]

21 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

No.

I do have a 'few' (all 'live') in the collection including a WW2 sniper version, The Enfield No4T.

There were only 1000 of the L42A1 manufactured.

I also have an Enfield No7 which is one of only 2000 manufactured in .22rf for the RAF.

The most 'historical' would be the WW1 Enfield No1 MK3* version that has seen active service for over 70 years.

 

Maybe you see the relevance to the 'Forum Name' ?

I've never heard of an Alan 303.

[Mad Harold]

22 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

And still is.

It still holds the world record for bolt-action rifles for the highest number of shots, on a 24" target, at 300 yards in 1 minute. 38 rounds !!!

Achieved in 1914 by Sergeant Instructor Snoxall

 

I have a 'few' of them. My target at 82 yards (75 metres) with original 'iron sights' lying prone. 

2 warming rounds at 10 O'clock then 5 rounds sub 1 MoA.

 

I also have an L42A1 with complete CES (7.62 NATO converted from a No4T) that was in the Falkland War.

 

 

It don't look like the .303 I was taught to shoot with when I was 14 in the A.T.C. It was wood all the way along with a bayonet clip at the end.

We weren't allowed a bayonet,much too dangerous for a 14 year old. 

[Alan de Enfield]

6 minutes ago, Mad Harold said:

It don't look like the .303 I was taught to shoot with when I was 14 in the A.T.C. It was wood all the way along with a bayonet clip at the end.

We weren't allowed a bayonet,much too dangerous for a 14 year old. 

That is the sniper version (The L42A1)

Yes, both the No1 and the No4 had 'full wood'

[bizzard]

28 minutes ago, mark99 said:

I've never heard of an Alan 303.

There's an A303 road.

[roland elsdon]

1 hour ago, Sir Nibble said:

Indeed, but that doesn't qualify anyone to make a diagnosis without any medical training of an illness in someone they have never met, just to be more tolerant and understanding than the next guy. One could equally decide the bloke is a right toerag who deserves everything he gets. Without expert first hand knowledge either viewpoint is equally unsustainable. How would you or I feel about strangers speculating about our mental health from a position of ignorance?

 

Quite so, spent a great deal of my life with policemen, probation officers ,solicitors ,  social workers, teachers etc saying the words ' look what he's done/ doing/ saying- he must be mad'

following a  mental state assessment the report usually concluded , " no psychotic illness, personality structure driving belief system, and  activity ; orientated , aware of right and wrong. Making lifestyle choices , no treatment options.

[Arthur Marshall]

1 hour ago, roland elsdon said:

 

Quite so, spent a great deal of my life with policemen, probation officers ,solicitors ,  social workers, teachers etc saying the words ' look what he's done/ doing/ saying- he must be mad'

following a  mental state assessment the report usually concluded , " no psychotic illness, personality structure driving belief system, and  activity ; orientated , aware of right and wrong. Making lifestyle choices , no treatment options.

Antisocial doesn't mean ill, nor does aggressive behaviour, deliberately breaking the law or, in fact, generally acting like a pratt. Nor does refusing to buy a licence or making the place look untidy. Doesn't stop it being antisocial though, in that it just doesn't fit with our social norms. Those who refuse to comply with those norms can't really complain about how society reacts unless they do, in fact, have good reasons for such behaviour - such as illness. 

 

[DandV]

There are two issues here. The first a reletively minor one, An antisocial act bought forward by probably, not much, the inevitable sinking, of a totally unsatisfactory dwelling, but the fact that this was probably the best housing available to a vulnerable person is the real issue.

 How a society treats it's vulnerable people is a measure of it's civilisation.

Logically, pursuing  pure economic performance requires discarding those with no potential to make an economic contribution. Euthanasia by neglect. The fact that life expectancy in the US is falling and that in the UK it has now plateued, both from not very flash positions, to me indicates that both the US and UK governments are too far down this path. More compassion is required in our world.

 

[Sir Nibble]

5 hours ago, DandV said:

There are two issues here. The first a reletively minor one, An antisocial act bought forward by probably, not much, the inevitable sinking, of a totally unsatisfactory dwelling, but the fact that this was probably the best housing available to a vulnerable person is the real issue.

 How a society treats it's vulnerable people is a measure of it's civilisation.

Logically, pursuing  pure economic performance requires discarding those with no potential to make an economic contribution. Euthanasia by neglect. The fact that life expectancy in the US is falling and that in the UK it has now plateued, both from not very flash positions, to me indicates that both the US and UK governments are too far down this path. More compassion is required in our world.

 

How do you come to the conclusion that this is a vulnerable person? How do you work out that this was the best housing available? Have you got access to the guy's medical and financial records?

[howardang]

1 hour ago, Sir Nibble said:

How do you come to the conclusion that this is a vulnerable person? How do you work out that this was the best housing available? Have you got access to the guy's medical and financial records?

I agree, and I think it is totally irrelevant. Like many discussions on here, the original reason for raising the point was to point out some alleged unacceptable behaviour by a couple of boats. Very quickly, this has changed emphasis to a disection of someones lifestyle, which I would suggest is of no concern to us. By forensically analysing the innocent victim we are in danger of losing the main point, which in my mind is trying to stop hire companies hiring out boats to unsuitable groups. 

 

Howard

Edited September 28, 2018 by howardang

[Naughty Cal]

4 minutes ago, howardang said:

I agree, and I think it is totally irrelevant. Like many discussions on here, the original reason for raising the point was to point out some alled unacceptable behaviour by a couple of boats. Very quickly, this has changed emphasis to a disection of someones lifestyle, which I would suggest is of no concern to us. By forensically analysing the innocent victim we are in danger of losing the main point, which in my mind is trying to stop hire companies hiring out boats to unsuitable groups. 

 

Howard

Indeed.

 

It is totally unacceptable to let your boat get into such a state that a passing boat sinks it.

[Athy]

3 minutes ago, howardang said:

. By forensically analysing the innocent victim we are in danger of losing the main point, which in my mind is trying to stop hire companies hiring out boats to unsuitable groups. 

 

Howard

Many, if not most, hire companies used to have a "no same-sex groups" policy, as they felt that such groups would be prone to excessive and anti-social behaviour. It has just occurred to me that, under the modern equality laws, this may now be illegal. Is it?

[Arthur Marshall]

42 minutes ago, Sir Nibble said:

How do you come to the conclusion that this is a vulnerable person? How do you work out that this was the best housing available? Have you got access to the guy's medical and financial records?

Those are daft questions, and reflect more on the questioner than anything else.

If you're living in something that's about to sink, you are vulnerable to becoming homeless.  You are therefore a vulnerable person.  Absolutely nothing to do with anything of a medical nature.

People tend to live in the nicest dwelling they can afford to be in.  Ergo, your residence is a rotting hulk held together by plastic and tarps, it's the best they have available.  If somone is sleeping in a hedge, that's the best they can find for the night.  If in a tent in the middle of winter, ditto.  In a mansion on the South Downs, much the same.

If you really don't think there is a housing problem in this country, you are either extremely rich, in your sixties with no children or simply keep your eyes and mind firmly shut against reality.

[Naughty Cal]

1 minute ago, Athy said:

Many, if not most, hire companies used to have a "no same-sex groups" policy, as they felt that such groups would be prone to excessive and anti-social behaviour. It has just occurred to me that, under the modern equality laws, this may now be illegal. Is it?

I have no idea but certainly the yards that do hire to same sex groups on the Broads attach much larger damage deposits to these groups. Not that that seems to discourage them.

[Clodi]

 And when you climb into your bed tonight And when you lock and bolt the door Just think of those out in the cold and dark 'Cause there's not enough love to go 'round  And sympathy is what we need my friend And sympathy is what we need And sympathy is what we need my friend 'Cause there's not enough love to go 'round No, there's not enough love to go 'round  Now half the world hates the other half And half the world has all the food And half the world lies down and quietly starves 'Cause there's not enough love to go 'round  And sympathy is what we need my friend And sympathy is what we need And sympathy is what we need my friend 'Cause there's not enough love to go 'round No, there's not enough love to go 'round...

[David Mack]

21 minutes ago, Athy said:

Many, if not most, hire companies used to have a "no same-sex groups" policy, as they felt that such groups would be prone to excessive and anti-social behaviour. It has just occurred to me that, under the modern equality laws, this may now be illegal. Is it?

No. But "no all-male groups" would be.

[Athy]

32 minutes ago, Clodi said:

 And when you climb into your bed tonight And when you lock and bolt the door Just think of those out in the cold and dark 'Cause there's not enough love to go 'round  And sympathy is what we need my friend And sympathy is what we need And sympathy is what we need my friend 'Cause there's not enough love to go 'round No, there's not enough love to go 'round  Now half the world hates the other half And half the world has all the food And half the world lies down and quietly starves 'Cause there's not enough love to go 'round  And sympathy is what we need my friend And sympathy is what we need And sympathy is what we need my friend 'Cause there's not enough love to go 'round No, there's not enough love to go 'round...

That's a rare bird these days.

[DandV]

35 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Those are daft questions, and reflect more on the questioner than anything else.

If you're living in something that's about to sink, you are vulnerable to becoming homeless.  You are therefore a vulnerable person.  Absolutely nothing to do with anything of a medical nature.

People tend to live in the nicest dwelling they can afford to be in.  Ergo, your residence is a rotting hulk held together by plastic and tarps, it's the best they have available.  If somone is sleeping in a hedge, that's the best they can find for the night.  If in a tent in the middle of winter, ditto.  In a mansion on the South Downs, much the same.

If you really don't think there is a housing problem in this country, you are either extremely rich, in your sixties with no children or simply keep your eyes and mind firmly shut against reality.

Something has gone wrong when after years of increasing life expectancy male life expectancy shows a slight decline whereas other comparable countries who already have longer life expectancies are drawing yet further ahead. It ain't the well off that are dying younger in spite of medical advances, it is the vulnerable passing simply because of diminishing care.

[howardang]

39 minutes ago, Naughty Cal said:

Indeed.

 

It is totally unacceptable to let your boat get into such a state that a passing boat sinks it.

That is undoubtedly true and I would be among the first to say so,  but surely, in the context of the news item under discussion, you can see that that should be the subject of a separate discussion  aimed at CRT, and that the emphasis for this thread should  on efforts to reduce unacceptable behaviour by such groups,  and as such should be aimed squarely at hire companies and CRT?

 

Howard

 

 

[Sir Nibble]

39 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

Those are daft questions, and reflect more on the questioner than anything else.

If you're living in something that's about to sink, you are vulnerable to becoming homeless.  You are therefore a vulnerable person.  Absolutely nothing to do with anything of a medical nature.

People tend to live in the nicest dwelling they can afford to be in.  Ergo, your residence is a rotting hulk held together by plastic and tarps, it's the best they have available.  If somone is sleeping in a hedge, that's the best they can find for the night.  If in a tent in the middle of winter, ditto.  In a mansion on the South Downs, much the same.

If you really don't think there is a housing problem in this country, you are either extremely rich, in your sixties with no children or simply keep your eyes and mind firmly shut against reality.

I fully accept the housing crisis but look at it this way. The guy was about to lose his two boats to section 8 because of no licence so he sold them and bought 2 more. At that point he could have put a deposit on rented accommodation instead and claimed housing benefit. Buying a derelict boat was what he chose to do instead.

[MtB]

43 minutes ago, Arthur Marshall said:

People tend to live in the nicest dwelling they can afford to be in. 

 

I gave to say this is complete bobbins. I can afford to live in far nicer accommodation than a canal boat but choose the boat because I like it. I suspect a lot of posters here and boat dwellers in general are in the same position. I was even evicted from my first boat home by a council saying our boats must be hovels and we should not be allowed to live in them. Same high handed arrogance. It is not for you to dictate where someone else may or may not choose to live. 

[Athy]

Just now, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

I gave to say this is complete bobbins. I can afford to live in far nicer accommodation than a canal boat but choose the boat because I like it. 

Therefore to you, it/they is/are the "nicest". Arthur's adjective is open to interpretation, of course.