If you disregard the disallowed goal, England’s display was appaulling… completely and utterly outclassed by the Germans… I know who I’ll be supporting from here on in.

These are some of the highest paid people in the country and yet to look at them… what the hell do they get paid to do? Can’t pass… can’t defend… can’t run… the list goes on! But stick them in their clubs and they all play great. What the hell went wrong?

Is it Fabio Cappello? The formation? What???

The only player worthy of a mention is David James who was superb and the one player I think who deserves an honorary raspberry is Wayne Rooney… talk about over hyped… he was pitiful. So many times over the last week or so have I sat and watched as he’s given the ball away… failed to keep up with the game… I know he’s been injured but please… if he’s not up to the job, he shouldn’t be on the pitch.

Overall, I can describe the England performance as woeful… completely and utterly woeful. Before today I would have said they were lucky not to have gone out. Now, they deserve to go out!!!

Welcome home boys!

First off, what am I playing at the moment…

Last weekend, I took great pleasure in punishing my enemies with a stake gun, a shotgun and my current favourite the multifunction circular saw with functions called ‘Pain’ and ‘Killer’. I am of course, currently playing my way through the top game ‘PainKiller’.

For those who don’t know (most likely the same people who want to see all but the tamest of games banned) you play the part of Daniel (IIRC), a guy who died in a car crash. He has one or two ghosts in his closet so he’s trapped in a world between heaven and hell, trying to stop Lucifers armies in the hope that he will be reunited with his girlfriend/wife.

Nice story. Brutal game. And you know what, I absolutely love the satisfying squelch when a stake punches its way through your enemies chest or head and pins them to the wall like a discarded ragdoll… all limp and lifeless. If you’re lucky, they explode.. body parts flying in all directions, blood splattering around the place.

Before this, I was killing my colleagues in Doom 3… well… when I say colleagues I mean the zombies/demons/aliens that WERE my colleagues… great fun pulling the shotgun out and blowing holes in them.

Before that, I was killing aliens in Quake 4 and before that, militia (I think – not really got that far into the story yet) in FarCry… great fun… sneaking through the jungle, jumping out and popping them off.

Ok, I’m sure you get the point… I’m a gamer… have been for a long time (since the introduction of home computers around 1981/82) and here’s the astonishing fact… I have NEVER once been tempted to shoot someone, beat them up, run them over, race my car around the streets of my home town or anything else that maybe depicted in games. Why? Because I know that a game is a game and reality is reality and that the difference is, in reality there are consequences… consequences you have to live with.

And why do I know this… because my parents paid attention to what I was doing on the computer… I could only play games they allowed me to until I was old enough to understand things… of course one of the main differences between then and now is the realism that can be achieved with games… Doom 3 scares me… thats why its rated 18. Notice… 18… scarey, gorey content with lots of blood… rated 18 meaning its only suitable for adults.

So, if you are a parent or guardian and you let your kids play games that are rated to old for them… you are poor parents and you are failing in your social responsibilties.

Thats where I stand… I’m an adult gamer and I know the difference between reality and a work of fiction/fantasy, so please stop trying to ban games designed by adults for adults. We like playing games too you know and I really don’t want to be playing kids games all the time.

Onto the story… the banning of Manhunt 2 by the BBFC… this is outrageous. Keith Vaz is getting on the bandwagon (as usual) and the media still haven’t got the facts straight. Every time Manhunt is mentioned, the story is linked to the 14 year old boy who was muredered by a ‘friend’ (I’ll use the term loosesly) in a manner that his mother claims was inspired by the original Manhunt. This led to it being withdrawn from most games stores in the UK. The facts of the case are that actually it wasn’t the murderer who owned the game… it was the victim (14 years old playing a game that was rated 18 – How did that come about? Did his parents not monitor what their CHILD was doing?) Furthermore, there was no evidence to suggest that the murderer had ever played it.

Its terrible that her son was murdered, but to blame an ADULT game being played by a CHILD (NOT the murderer) is absolutely absurd. Of course the media saw the equation Adult game + Kid = Murderer and thats was that… Manhunt was doomed, even though they got the facts wrong… and to this day, the correct facts are never mentioned.

So, once again… DO NOT BAN GAMES – Instead, do the following:-

• Ensure they are correctly certified
• Ensure that the people selling the games only sell them to people who (according to the classification) are allowed to play them
• If you are a parent, monitor the games/films etc. your children watch/play. Don’t expect that this responsibility can be put on someone elses shoulders
• Come to the realisation that banning something will only make some people want it more
• Don’t treat adult gamers like children – We are ADULTS afterall and are quite capable of deciding whether or not we want to play a game

Now, this (along with a story about Law and Order : Double or Nothing being dragged over the coals because it apparently includes an image that could be a still of the CCTV showing Jamie Bulger being abducted and the story about Manchester Cathedral being used without permission by Sony) has prompted some interesting comments on the BBC’s Have Your Say.

Overall, the posts are similar to what I’m saying… adult gamers want adult games to play. We aren’t children, we are generally well adjusted and we are more than capable of realising that games aren’t reality and that in the real world there are consequences.

So DON’T BAN GAMES!

Story Links:-
Manhunt 2 banned by censors

Edit: Link to have your say no longer works (January 3rd 2010)
BBC Have Your Say – Have games gone too far? (http://newsforums.bbc.co.uk/nol/thread.jspa?threadID=6610&sortBy=1)

So, lets get this right… the government want to force people off the road and onto public transport (laughable since most of it is privately owned)… and now the public transport companies see this as a good excuse for a fare hike. Their reasoning is to try and make more people use off-peak services. Lets assume (reasonably so) that most people using trains at peak times are commuters going to and from work… are they expected to suddenly get flexi-time so they can start travelling at off-peak times… unlikely.

These proposals are simply another way for the private companies that now run the railway to increase their profit. Its absolutely outrageous. I want the Conservatives back in power, but they are the ones responsible for the privatisation of the railways and it has to be one of the single biggest mistakes they made. As with all private companies… they are run for one thing and one thing only… profit. And in this case, the people who suffer will be the people who rely on the train to get them to and from work… the same people that create the largest chunk of any train operators profits… the people who cough up monthly (or longer) in advance for travelcards.

The rail companies would have us believe that they are doing us a favour by selling us these tickets, but in essence, whilst the ticket is cheaper, the money the rail company can make is greatly increased, so they aren’t doing us a favour at all. I paid £560 a month for my rail ticket when I worked in London. About £28 per day if you work on the basis of 20 working days a month. So I buy my ticket on day 1 (a Monday) and I use it. The rail company effectively has £532 sitting in their bank account earning interest. On day 2 this drops to £504 and so on. Obviously over the weekend, it doesn’t drop since its unlikely I’ll be going to work. The amount they make in interest alone from travelcards is unbelievable yet as a passenger with a travelcard you have practically no rights to claim any money back if your train is delayed or cancelled. Its scandalous. Yet every day thousands of people put up with this because they realistically have very little alternative.

And now they want to screw their customers over some more. The shareholders and the directors of these companies are parasites. Put the railways back into public ownership. Reduce (slightly) the ticket prices to encourage people to use the train and then pump all the money back into the infrastructure. Reinvest to improve the system for the future. This is the only way our railways will improve.

If this kind of charging is introduced, it is only going to hurt the people who rely on the trains to get to and from work. Most tourists travel at off-peak times anyhow, so they are unlikely to notice any difference. But for those people who find themselves priced out of driving to work, the train may not be a viable alternative… what are they supposed to do then?

Story Links:-
BBC News

This story has one or two choice quotes, like this one from Trevor Phillips, chairman of the UK race watchdog.

the absence of minorities from the countryside was a form of “passive apartheid”

They don’t go to the countryside because they elect not to. There is nothing stopping them from going, just as there is nothing stopping white’s from going to the countryside. So yet again, the political correctness which we seem to hold so dear is being used as an excuse to spend £1mil on a project to try and tackle racism which doesn’t actually exist.

What about building bridges with deprived areas? With inner city areas? Places where the kids may never have been out of the city boundaries? But of course, that would not do because they are likely to be part of the majority white population of this country, who clearly count for nothing… who clearly don’t deserve to visit the country side because they are not part of a minority who are clearly kept out of the countryside by some invisible force of evil.

WHAT A CROCK!!!

National parks are currently endeavouring to comply with the Race Relations Amendment Act which came into force in April 2000.

It placed a duty on local authorities and other service providers – which includes the national parks – to ensure discrimination did not take place in their service delivery.

What??? How can the Brecon Beacons be racist??? How can the Yorkshire Dales not comply with this legislation? We are talking about areas of countryside… forests, hills, mountains, streams, footpaths… do the tree’s spring forth and harrass members of minority populations? do the insects swarm endlessly around people with darker skin? Lets get real.

We are talking about choice. An individuals choice to goto the countryside or not. Some people like the countryside… some people do not. Some people feel the need to visit areas of outstanding natural beauty… some people do not.

How can this continue? The more special treatment is doled out, the more anger and resentment is likely to be generated amongst people who may be in greater need of help, but who, because they aren’t black, get squat! And of course, let us not forget the likes of the BNP… they must love stupid spending decisions like this because they can use it to highlight how unfairly the majority population is treated in comparison to the minorities… I used to think they were just plain racist… nowadays though I find myself starting to think that maybe a good dose of the BNP would do wonders for this country… maybe Enoch Powell had a point all those years ago.

You’re probably thinking I’m getting angry… and I am. I have lived here my entire life and in that time, the amount of pandering to minorities has increased steadily. The CRE preaches equality… they want equality for the ethnic minorities of this country and yet we seem to edge ever further away from equality in the minorities favour.

Why is this money just targetting minorities? What about spending it on targetting all sections of our society? Why should the minorities get £1mil to encourage them into the countryside, while the white majority gets nothing? Based on the figures presented by the article (minorities make up 8% of the population), for every £1mil they get to spend, we should get £12.5mil. Of course, clearly thats not going to happen as it would be argued that somewhere along the line we already get more than that… but we don’t… the money spent by these places is spent for the benefit of EVERYONE.. so if the minorities are getting an extra £1mil just for them, then really, there should be an additional £12.5mil made available for encouraging the rest of us into the countryside.

The article also mentions that to fund this encouragement of ethnic minorities in one area of the UK, it was proposed that guided walks be stopped. Guided walks that are quoted as being “popular”… so why should they be stopped??? Because they are mainly used by (and I quote) the “white middle class”. So f’kin what??? ANYONE CAN GO ON ONE OF THESE WALKS!!! You don’t have to be white and bank at Coutts to be allowed on them.

I’m sure I’m not alone in my concerns about where the UK is heading. I have grave concerns for the safety and security of my friends and family. With the passing of time, the tension is building. Those on the side of the minorities would probably argue that people like me, posting stuff like this are the cause… statement like ‘you’re racist’ spring to mind… but show me where in this article I propose unfair treatment/discrimination of ethnic minorities? All I want is fair treatment for EVERYONE. Not special treatment for a small percentage of the population because of the colour of their skin… or the religion they chose to follow… fair treatment for EVERYONE… and if that means removing some of the benefits from minorities, so be it. I want the right to go and buy a gollywog… to sing ‘Bah Bah Blacksheep’… and I want to live in a society where the human race understands that its ok to have different views… its ok to have black skin, yellow skin, brown skin… its ok to be disabled… because underneath we are one.

As we venture forth in the 21st century, it should become abundantly clear to everyone that unless we start working together as a planet, that the human race will die out one way or another… we’ve been around for centuries and we still don’t really know whats outside our own solar system. In the last 200 years, we have pushed our planet to the brink of death and now its starting to exact its revenge. If we are to survive, we have to all cast aside our difference… accept that we are not all alike… accept we are individuals… entitled to our own views… but at the same time… we must learn to accept everyone else as equals… learn not to discriminate because someone is gay, blind, paralysed, black, mixed-race… We have to unite as ‘The Humans’ and we have to start sooner rather than later if we are to survive our first huge challenge… the end of fossil fuels.

Story Links:-
BBC News

We don’t yet have full pricing plans, but as an indication, I’ve calculated the cost of my journey to work based on the two prices that do appear in the media (£1.30/mile on motorway and £0.02/mile on country lanes). I have about a 70 mile round trip to get to work and back. Most of this is country lanes and I estimated its probably 2/3 miles a day on the M4 between junctions 28 and 26. So, I’ve worked this out saying 4 miles on the motorway and the other 70 miles on the country lane rate.

This works out to be (£1.30 x 4) + (£0.02 x 70), giving a grand total of £6.60 A DAY!

Lets multiply that up and it becomes £33.00 a week. Taking it to the next stage, there are 52 weeks a year, meaning a total of 260 work days less the 28 days holiday I get. This gives a grand total of 232 days meaning that without any other journeys I will end up being charged £1531.20 just to get to work and back.

Now lets compare that with what I currently pay. £180/year (or there abouts) car tax and then about £25/week in fuel. If we assume that I work for 45 weeks a year, and that 75% of what I pay in fuel costs is tax, thats £843.75. Making a grand total of £1023.75.

So under this new scheme, I believe I will end up paying over £500 more, and that doesn’t include other journeys. For example, I visit my parents. A round trip of about 240 miles, mostly on the motorway. So lets assume its not £1.30/mile but half that because I’m not travelling at peak time. That makes £0.65/mile bringing the cost of the journey up to £156. Nearly the same as road tax costs for a full year.

Sorry for the language, how the f’ can this scheme be fair? Even if I didn’t have to pay car insurance, it still would work out more expensive. Chuck into the equation other trips and well… the average joe will be totally screwed over.

The claim is that public transport will be better as a result of this change, but will public transport collect me from my door in the cold and rain, then transport me and my baggage (I have filled my car with computers and stuff for a long stint at my parents) to my destination without delay, without lots of hanging around. I DOUBT IT! Will I be able to get up and think… oooh, go into work early this morning… 5:30am roll out the door and straight into a waiting public transport vehicle… I DOUBT IT!

This proposal has got to be one of the dumbest ideas this government has ever had. Its right up there with the compulsory ID card that we have to pay for.

What we should really be doing is looking at clamping down on unnecessary car journeys… the kind where mum takes 1 child the 1 mile journey from home to school in a whacking great 3.5L 4WD off roader. For those who think the school rush is a myth… LOL. I used to work in Gloucester. During the school holidays I could practically guarantee when I would get into work. But during term time it was hideous. No two days were the same and the volume of traffic was immense. Not just a minor increase, but an increase capable of producing 2-3 mile tailbacks on areas of road that were ordinarily clear. Ok, I admit, that if they live in the sticks, then driving the kids to school is a viable option, but when each of these monsterous vehicles has mother and a child, it becomes a massive waste. How about taking your friends kids? You could take it in turns… This is the kind of vehicle use that we should be addressing.

Forcing this kind of charging scheme on the average driver is wholey unfair. The car will no longer be viable for those of us who have any distance to drive to/from work. We could be faced with the possiblity that we will simply have to find alternative employment. I for one couldn’t get to work reliably using public transport and even then I believe I would have to change buses on at least 2 occasions meaning periods of standing around waiting. What if I need to take my tools into work… I can’t lug a hunking great toolbag around. What about when I travel for work… how would I get to the airport for example (a journey which is mostly on the motorway)? And visiting my parents? £156 a go. Gone would be the option to just pop up there. I would have to save hard to be able to afford it.

Note:- The costs I’ve used are examples, but they do give a pretty good indication if you just rough it out using say three rates as I’ve done. Once the full list of charge bands is announced, I’ll work this out more accurately.

Related Links:-
BBC News

Clearly following the success of the Sikhs in Birmingham in having Behzti removed from the stage, the Christians are jumping on the bandwagon. I’ve only heard about the Jerry Springer musical, but thats not the point here. The article talks about the number of complaints that the beeb received both before and after the show was broadcast and how the governors decided not to uphold them. Whats interesting is that more complaints were received BEFORE the show had aired (55,000) than after (8,000).

Wow… 55,000 people knew it would offend them before seeing it. How did they know? Had they seen it before? Heard about it from friends? Had it suggested to them that it may offend their religion? As far as I’m concerned, only one of those is a valid reason to complain… so thats an awful lot of people who’d seen it before. Of course, I doubt that this is the case… I’d suggest its more likely that they had been brainwash… oops that it had been suggested to them that it may offend their religious values (have I mentioned before about religion being mind control for the masses… for people too weak to form their own opinions and views on life and its meaning?).

So, here we have a supposedly tolerant religion trying to censor what the majority of the people who watch the beeb can see. Lets take a typical viewing figure… for the sake of argument, we’ll go with 3 million. 55,000 is a tiny 1.83% of that. So what about the other 98.17% of the beeb viewing populace? Are we not adult enough to make up our own minds?

If you don’t like what is going to be shown on the telly, unless some git has hidden your remote, you can change channels… thats an absolutely amazing fact isn’t it… and guess what… there are at least 4 other channels you can watch falls off chair in amazement

As far as I’m concerned, you can take your religious spiel and shove it. You (meaning the Christians behind this campaign against the show and the Sikhs behind the protest in Birmingham and any other religious group) are basically censoring (or attempting) to censor what we can watch and go and see at the theatre or cinema. Its amazing how practically all religions claim tolerance and yet they are all the most intolerant when it comes to someone elses opinions and views about their religion.

But the debate over the Springer show takes a new twist with this choice quote from the Christian Institute…

The group said the programme breached the BBC’s charter and broke the Human Rights Act by discriminating against Christians.

You have GOT to be kidding… so a show is now capable of violating the Human Rights Act? How does the show discriminate against Christians? Did it say ‘bomb christians’, ‘blow up their churches’, ‘kick them in the street’, ‘burn the bible’… I doubt it very much… had it done so I would have agreed that it shouldn’t be shown as it would have been inciting religious hatred. As for Christians being discriminated against… I suggest a quick forray into history… The Crusades anyone? All in the name of Jesus, so its OK! NOT!

And of course, not forgetting this little nugget from the Evangelical Alliance…

viewers would be “bewildered” by the decision.

“We are deeply disappointed that the BBC felt able to set aside the strong and sustained objections from such a volume of viewers.”

‘Bewildered’… ‘Disappointed’… I’d have been bewildered and disappointed had the beeb listened to your views and decided against showing it. As I pointed out above… 55,000 is only 1.83% of 3 million and only 0.001% of the total population. How is that ‘such a volume of viewers’… even at 1 million viewers its still only 5.5%. I know these people pay their TV licence, but from time to time, the beeb shows stuff that someone somewhere will find offensive. Its the nature of the beast. It has to provide a range of programs for a very broad range of people so its innevitable that from time to time this sort of controversy will arise, but trying to censor the beeb in the name of your own religious views is completely wrong.

The second article is mainly feedback from the public after the event… I’ve mentioned the TV licence above and its quite interesting how many of the complainants also talk about the licence fee and how their money shouldn’t be spent on shows that they find offensive.

I am extremely offended by the portrayal of Jesus Christ. A person’s religious belief is a fundamental human right and others should have the courtesy to respect their belief. The BBC take my licence fee and I feel that they have abused my rights by broadcasting this programme which portrays the image of Jesus Christ in this disrespectful manner.

First point… how do you know how Christ was protrayed? You must have watched despite the advanced warning that it may be offensive. You made that decision… if I know or think that something is going to offend me I don’t watch… I turn over or turn off. I’m guessing that for some reason, as a Christian, you were unable to make that choice and as such remained firmly rooted in your seat unable to reach for the remote during the entire show. Second point… religious belief is a fundamental human right… so too is freedom of speech and artistic expression. And as a side note… its not a right… its a gift. Given to us by many people long since dead who suffered so that we may not. As for freedom of speech and artistic expression… the writers of this show are only using their rights to express their views. Third point… others should have the courtesy to respect their belief… true, but the same could be said for those of you out there who force their religious views on those of us who don’t want them… programs like Songs of Praise (which is incidentally broadcast on BBC 1 at prime time on a Sunday evening, unlike the Springer show which was shown late on a Saturday night I believe on BBC 2) for example and of course Jehovahs Witnesses knocking on the door. How bloody annoying is that… isn’t that a violation of my human rights? I don’t want to be bombarded with religious clap trap yet still it is forced upon me by various means.

As for your licence fee… currently a colour TV licence costs £121. By my reckoning, that works out at about 33p a day or 0.02p per minute. So, if we assume that the offending show was on for 2 hours, thats a grand total of 2.4p. Now look at it the other way… My licence fee is the same 0.02p per minute. Songs of Praise runs for 35 minutes every Sunday… it offends me because it is an overtly religious display that occupies my television and uses my licence fee… it costs 0.7p every Sunday, so last year, its chewed its way through approximately 36.4p of my licence fee. So as far as I’m concerned, you can keep your feelings… the beeb abuses my rights every single week, but do I complain?

Another quote…

No is the simple answer. If people want to watch this type of entertainment, can it be at their expense, as I do not think it should be supported by the BBC at my expense.

I do find this type of comment so laughable, that I’m almost willing to say that if the people who made these two comments get in touch, I will personally reimburse their 2.4p (it might be a little off 2.4p as I’m not sure I can cut a penny piece accurately enough), although thinking about it, your licence fee doesn’t just cover a single channel, so if we say the 15 major TV and radio channels the beeb runs, its more like 0.16p and the cost of Songs of Praise to me is more like 2.4p.

And another…

Not only Christian organisations objected. Many people objected on the grounds of moral decency. The show has already been aired, the BBC will be prosecuted and eventually lose their public charter.

Moral decency? Its a show… a comedy (I’m guessing based on what I’ve read)… shown after the watershed, with ample warning that it would offend some people and that it contained strong language. In terms of morals and whats right and wrong, generally, I’ve found that people over a certain age… I call them adults… are (unless they are incredibly easily lead) more than capable of deciding what, in their mind, is right and wrong, and as a consequence are able to make an informed choice about what is morally acceptable and what is not. Moral decency is challenged more in a typical day on the news than it is by one showing of this particular show. Everyweek, murders, rape, theft, beatings… and of course not forgetting war… much of which is caused by differing religions and people to biggotted to live side by side. Oh how tolerant religion is.

I cannot believe the BBC, a channel which I have respected for being accepting of all religions, has broadcasted this blasphemous and disrespectful show. I am also appalled that the BBC have not publicised the fact that there were peaceful protests outside their studios across the country on Saturday evening, they have had no problem parading the fact that people who work for the BBC have received death threats for broadcasting Jerry Springer – The Opera. The BBC has lost all the respect I have ever had for them. I believe the BBC should issue an apology for offending so many people (not just Christians) and for broadcasting such a disgusting programme on their channel.

By not broadcasting it, it could be said that they would have offended those like me, who don’t consider themselves religious. I may have wanted to watch it and you may have succeeded in having the show removed from the schedule… how is that right? As for publicising the fact that a lot of fanatics were peacefully protesting? Peaceful protests go on all over the place at all sorts of times… we don’t hear about them all, but publicising the fact that BBC staff received death threats… shows the level to which some of you will stoop to try and get your point across. What is it the bible says, good will to all men (or something like that) or ‘thou’ shalt not kill’… ring any bells? Oh, I forgot… as a Christian, you can randomly quote and abide by the bible as and when it suits you and forget it when it doesn’t. Those of us without such mind control… *oops* moral guidance are clearly incapable of deciding whats right and wrong… although I have to say I generally think threatening people with death for speaking/showing something you disagree with is… erm…. let me think… WRONG!

However you decorate it, religion has been used twice in the last 6 months to censor (or attempt to) entertainment. I have to ask… where will it end? By trying to remove or removing shows from view you are effectively forcing your religious beliefs on people and I for one don’t want them. I am, like the majority of the population of the UK an adult, more than capable of deciding for myself what is offensive and what isn’t. Just because its not your cup of tea, doesn’t mean its not mine. So please, keep your religion to yourself and stop trying to censor the media to suit your own ends.

Story Links:-
BBC rejects Springer complaints
Should BBC have shown Jerry Springer opera?

I came across this story on the beebs news site and I have to admit, it made my blood boil. Castle Combe is a privately owned race track that holds Formula 3 meetings. Its been used for racing since the 1950′s, now all of a sudden the owner has been served with a noise nuisance order because some of the residents that live nearby have complained about the noise.

WTF??? It was there, most likely before many of them were looking to buy a house in the area… now they’ve bought that house, moved in and are complaining because the race track, which was there when they bought the house, is too noisey… GET OVER YOURSELVES!!! It was there when you moved in… it was there when your solicitors should have done all the searches and told you all about the things near your home that could affect your life there… and yet you think you have the right to move in and demand it stops races because its too noisey…. I have 2 words… whinging twats… don’t you realise you could be destroying other peoples livelihoods with your demands.

You are the same kind of person as those who move into houses near major airports or on the flight paths of major airports and then proceed to complain about aircraft noise. Or to use an example I have personal experience off, the kind of people who move into a property knowing that there will be a major road running along the bottom of your garden and then try to sue and complain to the council when work finally gets going, because it diminishes the value of your property, even though the road had been planned for 30 years or more.

I can’t decide with people like this whether they are just so totally stupid they don’t even think to check whats going on development wise, or even whats in the local area (whatever happened to talking to the sellers of property about the local area?), or whether they are so up themselves that they think the universe revolves around them. In the case of Castle Combe circuit… why has it taken this long for people to complain… I’m guessing its probably one miserable grumpy twat who has complained… if thats the case, then I guess its the later… in the case of the countless people you see on the news complaining about aircraft noise near Heathrow and Gatwick… its definitely a distinct lack of common sense. Major airport = major noise pollution = don’t buy a house there.

Bloody hell… I just re-read the story on the beeb… the people who complained don’t even live next to the circuit… they live in a village which is a 1/4 mile (at least) from the circuit… I guess motor racing is too common for them or something… get over yourselves and suggest to the council that maybe you were wrong and that maybe a noise nuisance order is a little over the top. Whats even more gauling about this is that in a typical year, the races that may be stopped because of this only run for about 6 hours. 6 hours in a year and still some plonker has complained. Whoever it is really does need to get over themselves.

Story Links:-
BBC News