Posted by: Alasdair | 1 April, 2008

is Harriet Harman MP still a bit thick?

Presumably Harriet Harman would consider her most recent gaff as merely an extension of her previous one.  After all, she’s a woman and there were men about wearing stab proof vests, she’s damned well entitled to wear one!

We all know London is a dangerous place a veritable metropolis sadly devoid of superheroes - unless you count Ken.  No?  never-mind.  It has now emerged that Harriet Harman’s very own constituency in South London is even more dangerous than most parts.  Just take a look at this picture:

 

That’s not the newest chief constable there on the left, that’s Ms Harman fearing for her life, insisting that she wear a stab-proof vest, despite her hefty police protection unit.  My sources have informed me that there is actually another 15 armed police out of shot.

The chap on her right is demonstrating, in the picture, how the locals wield a knife in each hand.  Obviously he wasn’t allowed to actually use knives in his demonstration on grounds of health and safety … sensible chap.

This is the first time Ms Harman has managed to go to her local constituency office in some time due to cuts in local policing, although following a course of ‘positive action’ police numbers have again reached a satisfactory level and the local EO officer was delighted to inform me that the latest batch quadriplegic midgets from the Amazonian basin are settling in nicely.

I will obviously be avoiding this part of London (or any part of London - thanks BA!  T5 is a truly a wonder of the modern world), and in the event that I do go I’ll be ensuring that I don’t leave my tank at home …

 

Seriously though.  How much of a slur is that against the people of the area.  She’s tried to say that it’s like visiting a food factory and wearing a hairnet or a hard hat on a builders yard.  But it’s clearly not.  In a food factory there is a risk of contaminating the produce.  On a building site there is a risk of having your skull caved in by falling debris.

Walking down the street surrounded by policemen and photographers and a coterie of other ‘folks’ isn’t likely to make you a target of some knife wielding nutter … is Harriet Harman a bit thick, you decide.

 

note:  that’s not really me and a tank!

Posted in Harriet Harman, Labour, crime, england, english, life, police, politics, vermin

« “yes” or “no”. it’s as simple as that.
is Wendy Alexander MSP a bit thick? »

Responses

Hi A,

And here I was thinking that the worst violence one could find in London was the occasional umbrella fight. Of course, even with knife wielding thugs on every corner, it’s nothing compared to Memphis, Tn near which I live and which city has just reclaimed its title of Most Dangerous City in America. Everyone around here is most proud of our urban neighbors as they have put a tremendous amount of effort into attracting more criminals to the area, financing the project with money saved by cutting back on the size of the police force and the quality of the education provided by the public schools. Oh, and don’t forget that our criminals, and a goodly number of our school children, carry guns instead of knives.

By the way, what kind of gas mileage does your tank get? It looks like I may be needing one soon.

the Grit

By: the Grit on 1 April, 2008
at 6:24 pm

Nice one Alasdair but have you considered the possibility that Ms Harman might have been participating in some elaborate April Fool’s joke…it’s that absurd.

By: jolenemartin on 1 April, 2008
at 8:09 pm

Sadly, this was no prank. Unless the polis were having a giggle at her expense…

By: charliemarks on 2 April, 2008
at 1:30 am

I’m leaning towards your argument, but in her defence the stab-proof vest ploy did work - she wasn’t stabbed or even prodded with anything.

No, on second thoughts, you’re right. She is a bit thick.

I’ve no doubt a press office team somewhere decided it was a good idea to inject some gritty realism into the election campaign that hasn’t actually started yet. It is showing solidarity with those on the front-line - getting the police on board.
In a few days time we’ll probably see her in a community centre, without stab-proof vest, keeping it real and telling everyone to fight the power.

I hate this election campaign already and it still hasn’t started.

(I like your blog by the way).

By: Paul Groves on 2 April, 2008
at 7:47 am

Hi Grit - Memphis sounds nice! I’m surprised that your gun lobby hasn’t been dishing out the armanents, as that’s obviously the answer when you’ve got a gun problem! Reducing gun levels would never work … I mean just look at the gun problems in the UK, wow! you wouldn’t want that!?!

Obviously the criminal element is the backbone of any modern economy and I’m sure the authorities in memphis are very proud of their strategy for encouraging ‘inward investment’. Perhaps it’s a model you and your neighbours should be looking to replicate, most rural communities do seem to be collapsing under the weight of the commuter element these days … maybe you’ll get lucky and the local ‘businessmen’ will relocate to your area!

As for te tank! Well, mpg is irrelevant when you live in the sole oil producing nation in Europe as our foreign caretakers (that’s westminster) have made sure that their, ahem, sorry, I mean ‘our’ economy has benefited through massive taxes at the pumps and by levying massive taxes on the oil companies, I’m so pleased that I can’t afford to travel to the nearest city as it means that I’m unlikely to be stabbed, not that that’s a huge problem when I’m in my tank right enough … oh the joys!!

… sorry that was a bit of a rant and I’m not proof reading it :P

Hi Jo - you’re right. it is completely absurd.

Hi Charlie - somebody (everybody?) seems to be having a giggle at her expense … I’m not surprised she’s a minister though, being a nutter seems to be a pre-requisite these days.

Hi Paul - Is there an election? oh! of course you guys are building up to your local elections aren’t you, thankgod ours are were all wrapped up last may!

I fear though that ms Harman’s ploy of getting police support may backfire when they realise she’s just taking the proverbial!

Thanks for the compliment :)

By: Alasdair on 2 April, 2008
at 12:33 pm

The local elections to a lesser extent. I’m becoming more convinced we’re seeing the countdown to the next General Election already - even if its 12 months away.

By: Paul Groves on 2 April, 2008
at 2:10 pm

Who knows what Harriet Harman was thinking - very little it would seem. And as for BA and terminal 5 - it’s all complete madness.

Imagine what would happen if Harriet Harman worked for BA. The two together could prove the end of the world as we know it!

By: Rosie on 2 April, 2008
at 2:14 pm

Hi Paul - oh, those elections! You may have a point, although I’d be surprised to see them before 2010. I suspect that, unless Labour’s poll ratings pick up significantly, there won’t be an election until the last possible moment.

Certianly up here in Scotland a combination of poor performance down south in conjunction with scandals on either side of the border, in conjunction with extremely negative and patronising campaigning before (and since) May 07’s election has left them a fairly ragged bunch. Did I mention the whole Edon’t mention the economy” thing?

Labour are clearly coming apart at the seams and I predict a trouncing of tory ‘97 proportions coming the next general election … just don’t quote me on it ;)

Hi Rosie - indeed, very little as usual! Yes a Harman / T5 tag team could cause untold damage … speaking of which, Micahel Greenwell has just written an interesting post on climate change hypocrisy.

By: Alasdair on 2 April, 2008
at 3:21 pm

Hi A,

Well, since our police can’t even make a dent in the flow off illegal drugs, I doubt they’d have any better success with confiscating all of the firearms in the US. On the other hand, our State did get a concealed carry law passed, so now we can take a course and legally carry a hidden gun. Interestingly enough, in areas where significant numbers of people have taken advantage of this crime rates are way down with violent crimes leading the fall. It appears that a life of crime isn’t as attractive when your next victim might be your last, ever.

the Grit

By: the Grit on 2 April, 2008
at 7:50 pm

Hi Grit,

To be honest I wasn’t advocating the mass confiscation of firearms, more of a tightening of gun laws, gun amnesties, and the like with a view to reduce overall numbers over an extended period of time. Of course given the high levels (perceived?) of gun ownership in the USA I’m not sure on the practical implications of this.

It seems to me to be counter-intuitive that increasing gun ownership should reduce crime, it seems likely that where there are more guns then more ‘bad’ people will have guns and be willing to use them … possibly in self-defence!

Alasdair

By: Alasdair on 3 April, 2008
at 9:28 am

Just a thought on Ms Harman as pictured above … perhaps she was going to help the police issue a parking ticket to the chap parked on the double yellows!

By: Alasdair on 3 April, 2008
at 9:31 am

Hi A,

Well, some of our liberal politicians have proposed mass gun confiscation although, so far, they have not been successful in their efforts.

Also, we do have high rates of personal gun ownership. Of course, this has to be taken in the context of our historical culture and the fact that we still have plenty, as in several times the size of many countries, of vacant land on which to hunt. Related to this is the operating principle of our law enforcement systems, which is that they will do their best to catch criminals after they do something nasty, but won’t lift a hand to prevent crime in the first place. This worked pretty well during the first 100 plus years of our history when it was expected that individual citizens could protect themselves, but over the last few decades our Government has conspired to make it a crime to protect yourself from criminals. Apparently, we are supposed to allow ourselves to be robbed, raped, assaulted, and/or murdered without protest and then call the police to report the crime. The next step in our judicial process is that the police attempt to apprehend said criminal, assuming that they have the available staff to assign to the case. Then, if they get lucky, the criminal is arrested, charged, and let out on bail to await trial. This can take several years. After that, if convicted, the criminal goes to jail for a number of years based on what type of crime was committed, except that, given the overcrowding of our jails, they only serve a fraction of their sentence before being let loose to prey on the law abiding majority of our population once again.

After many, many years of experimentation with this system, we are finally coming to the realization that it is not meeting the needs of the average citizen to such an extent that the Government, if they want to keep their cushy jobs, will either have to provide actual protection from crime or allow citizens to defend themselves. Since expanding the police force to the point where they could actually deter crime would cut deeply into the number of special interest / vote buying projects that could be funded, the balance is slowly tilting back to the last thing that worked.

As to the availability of guns to “bad people,” you have to keep in mind that, over here, money talks. We’ve allowed crime to get so out of hand that, with a modest wad of cash, I could purchase most any hand weapon in Memphis within a day or three, no questions asked. With a larger wad of cash, I could probably have a tank like yours delivered to my home within a month complete with an owner’s manual and a big pile of ammunition. Of course, all of that would be illegal, but since most of our cops are busy confiscating cars involved in drug buys and issuing speeding tickets, it would be highly unlikely that my legal infractions would be noticed until I drove the tank through the wall of a bank, sprayed the customers and staff with automatic weapons fire, loaded in a few sacks of money, and attempted to make my exit. We are so screwed.

On the other hand, it’s really not about who has guns, but more about who is a criminal. For instance, I have owned at least one firearm for almost as long as I can remember and, to date, my most antisocial bit of behavior has been two speeding tickets, one of which I would have challenged in court had I access to the resources to do so. On the gripping hand, I have also experienced several encounters with violent types that I have had to back down from as I knew that just putting a fist in their face could land me in jail. Now I can shift my clothing to expose the gun on my hip, and the trouble magically goes away. Someone, and I can’t at the moment remember who, once said that an armed society is a polite society, and I can vouch for the truth of that statement.

Sorry for the rant :)

the Grit

By: the Grit on 3 April, 2008
at 8:36 pm

Hi Grit,

Rant away, no skin off my fingertips ;)

To be honest it doesn’t sound like your criminal ‘justice’ system is too far removed from ours.

Where you have guns we have knives and isn’t just a joy when the two wee bastards have a brief stand-off before running each other through!

I don’t buy the ‘historical culture’ arguement though when it comes to gun ownership, but then I live in a country where - as a general rule - the police are armed with nothing more ‘disuasive’ than a long stick.

The notion of arming our police force has been mooted on a number of occasion, much to most people’s dismay, but then it’s a different world over here.

Right enough a police marksmen had to be despatched post haste the other morning following an ‘altercation’ on the local highway … I’m pleased to report that the bovine causing mayhem were dealt with severely!

Other incidents include the shooting of innocent (although illegal immigrant) jean-charlez demenez on the london underground (following ‘the London Bombings’), and a Scottish chap carrying a table leg in London who was mistaken for an Irishman due to his accent (!?) some years ago.

Nor do I buy the hunting arguement, of course, BIG cities must mean BIG rats. It is possible to legally obtain a gun in this country and hunting with guns is a popular past-time among certain segments of our society, it’s hardly common though … most hunting being carried out on managed estates.

I was taught how to use a double barrelled shot gun as a small child (although I was never allowed to fire it - would have ruined the decor in the kitchen) … very heavy when you’re only little!

Alasdair

By: Alasdair on 3 April, 2008
at 10:48 pm

Hi A,

The secret to firing a double barrel is to remember NOT to pull both triggers at once. The recoil from a single 12 gage round is more than sufficient to make most people take notice, and two at once is enough to make many people fall down :)

As to hunting, you have to keep in mind how much more land we have per person than y’all do. This is effectively increased as more than half our population is now densely packed into cities. Thus, it’s possible for almost anyone to go hunting if they have the desire and the modest amount of cash necessary to buy a license, gun, and ammunition. Enough people decide to partake in this sport over here that selling all the gadgets to make it easier is a multi-billion dollar industry. One of my favorite products, from a what?! perspective, is bottled deer urine. Last I checked, it was going for $20 per ounce, and would be more than that if I was the one holding the cup to collect the sample. Apparently, hunters spray it on their clothing to camouflage their human scent. Not only does this supposedly improve their chances of shooting a deer but, when they return home tired from the hunt, they’re much less likely to be pestered by their spouses for a bit of romance.

the Grit

By: the Grit on 5 April, 2008
at 10:44 pm

Hi Grit,

Fortunately I was never allowed any ammo for the shotgun so the recoil was never a problem!

I guess what you say about your countries square footage is right enough given that you can squeeze the whole of the Uk into some your states without touching so much as a remote outpost and nobody would notice that we were there.

That’s interesting, what you say about bottled deer pee, as I’ve been reading recently about methods of keeping deer away from your prized shrubs by tying locks of human hair to them … turns out folks should just be peeing on them instead :shock: :lol:

Maybe all that deer pee accounts for the high rate of divorce these days :?

Alasdair

By: Alasdair on 6 April, 2008
at 6:49 pm

[...] bit thick! I have questioned Ms Harman’s intellect previously, most notably here and here.  Now, following the introduction of her Equalities Bill, it has been confirmed that she is a bit [...]

By: Truly, Harriet Harman MP is a bit thick! « man about the house on 26 June, 2008
at 3:14 pm

Leave a response






Your response:

Categories