Microchip cat flap

[Robin]

Yep - just like the absence of photos of unicorns doesn't mean they don't exist.

[T i m]

<snip>

No, not like that at all, unless you have access to all legal cases across the world, however historic?

And given you yourself have referenced there are specific scenarios where a cat owner could be held responsible for their cat causing damage to property or personal injury, why wouldn't such exist?

Cummon, you are normally better that this Robin! ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[T i m]

<snip>

Whilst that does sound a little hypocritical, 'he' was the person in authority in that situation and knew (as much as anyone can) just how 'in control' his dog was, but didn't know anything about yours.

As a representative of the council / authority he probably had a duty of care to ensure any dog owned by members of the public was on the lead whereas his dog could have been council property and a tool of his job?

It's therefore quite possible he has some sort of 'special dispensation' to have his 'trained' dog off the lead when patrolling the park.

OTOH, it could have just been his personal pet that he was taking round the park at lockup time and had no more right to have his dog off the lead than you with yours. ;-)

Today he would quite likely be wearing a bodycam and have a lone worker recorder / alarm and had you attacked him, it would have all been recorded.

Cheers, T i m

[Richard]

Not *a little hypocritical*, 'he' was being a totally clueless knob.

Well done Adam!

[Robin]

I was simply agreeing that it is impossible to prove a negative. That applies equally to the absence of evidence of successful claims for damages against cat owners and the absence of evidence of unicorns.

I don't know about that. I do know that I find your paraphrase above misrepresents my comments.

[T i m]

Except we know unicorns don't exist and we do know that cat owners are able to be held legally accountable?

As your comment about Unicorns undermines the genuine spirit of my point?

And let's assume there is no case law yet on this subject, with the world becoming more litigious, who is to say there won't be in the future (given there is law that can already cover such). Not the same for your reference to unicorns (past or present). ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[ARW]

It's like a traffic warden parking up on double yellow lines and getting out of their car to ticket a car parked on the same double yellow lines. I photographed that happening in Watford.

[Robin]

You were trying to deflect the weight to be attached to the absence of known cases where cat owners had been held liable with the equivalent of "just because no one has seen a unicorn doesn't mean they don't exist".

I did say that I thought you'd be a good person to take such a case.

[T i m]

<snip>

*Except*, whilst they may have done the same thing as you, they are there specifically to enforce the rules *against* people like you and for the benefit of the majority who don't behave like you.

Also, the traffic warden will be moving on as soon as they have ticketed you and got you moving on (where they have no idea how long you would stay there otherwise) therefore the chances are they are creating no more of an obstruction than you and are only doing so in the first place to ensure the road is kept clear for the vast majority who realise these rules generally exist for the benefit of all (well, except those who don't feel the rules apply to them of course).

And breaking such rules (no matter how innocent any individual case may be) costs us all money and even more traffic / pollution.

With the advent and subsequent expansion of CCTV / ANPR systems, the people who break the rules (without any valid justification, like a Paramedic parking on double yellows or you stopping in your van on double yellows to help put out a fire that might save lives or minimise further traffic flow issues) can be penalised without others paying the price.

A minority of the population seem to test such things as double yellows as a game, they knowingly try it on (knowing the risks / consequences) as a gamble in the hope they will get away with it.

Unfortunately, all of us have to pay for the people and hardware that has to be put into place to 'manage' a minority who somehow feel they have rights over the rest of us?

Cheers, T i m

p.s. We went to an event yesterday where they had erected temporary (unofficial) road signs at the exit, indication that you should only turn left (and go around the roundabout up the road if you wanted to go to the right).

I turned right because ... those signs were put there for when the traffic was busy and when it's very difficult to turn right there, potentially then holding up all the traffic that was behind you, wanting to turn left or right.

However, when we left there was little traffic on the main road and no one behind us and I was able to pull straight out and inconvenience no one. Had it been 'busy' I would have happily turned left.

These were not official signs. They were just a request from the organisers of the event to try to prevent people not applying common sense when the roads were busy (I often go left and will turn round elsewhere at junctions that are known to be difficult. We have such locally where there is an office 'Left turn' sign and a roundabout no more than 10m away but 'some' will turn right, even when it's busy and they will cause flowing traffic to have to stop).

[Richard]

Here's a starting point for him as the 'offence' falls under this law:

Also, Good luck Tim.

[T i m]

I was? That was never my intention (and I never included any acceptance of a mythical creature (or any other hypothetical point) as any counterpoint). The spirit of my focus still stands (not that they have or haven't ever been held accountable, but that they can and should be).

Maybe with your assistance. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[Richard]

I have not read past your *Except* sentence. Perhaps you need to apply to become one of the moronic hypocritical jobsworth fuckwits illustrated in Adam's two posts as you appear to be well qualified.

[T i m]

<snip>

Yup, although that is difficult to pin on a cat owner.

That pretty well sums it all up from the POV of someone who never wanted a cat in the first place but has ended up with the negative consequences of them.

Thanks. I'll not be doing anything now, just like to express what could be the beginning of a groundswell in 'equal rights' for all of us who don't own cats but are obliged to keep *our* non-cat pets / livestock under control.

Like I said, smoking was once considered socially acceptable in public / enclosed areas but now it isn't in many places / countries.

Similarly, there was less social pressure (now legal duty) to clean up after your dog but now many people do.

As always though, there will be some who don't understand why they should also act like a good citizen and have social responsibility.

Given that pre cat owning, most cat owners appear to be perfectly reasonable people, it's my belief that whilst at the first visit to the vets or breeders / cattery with their cat, the owners are hit with a Neuralyzer type tool (see M.I.B.) that turns their common sense and rational brain to mush, particularly where cats are concerned. ;-(

"Aww, Mr Tibbles, you have just come indoors and walked across the area where we prepare food and knocked a can of Cola over into my brand new MacBook Pro ... what are you like ... now come here for a cuddle so we can share those fleas ... then go back out and cr*p in someone else's garden, scratch their car and kill some indigenous wildlife, just for fun ..." ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[T i m]

<snip>

No one there to help?

Perhaps the next time you are stuck in traffic because of someone parking where they shouldn't you 'get it' when you finally drive past?

Cheers, T i m

[T i m]

Nope. I said I will (typically, unless circumstances dictate it's sensible to do otherwise, like going up on the pavement to allow an emergency vehicle past) abide to the formal rules, but won't apply informal 'rules' unilaterally.

;-)

Then he was very much in the wrong (even if provoked).

I guess how potentially rational people react in those circumstances can be a function of if / how they were provoked.

;-)

<snip>

I'd say some can be more unreasonable than others but in many cases they are just doing their job [1] ... that we pay them to do to keep the traffic flowing and the parking spaces used as intended.

It was probably safely parked in a garage being repaired. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[1] If you ever had to deal with 'the public' on such matters on a regular / daily basis you would probably have heard it all and be little different to most of them in time.

p.s. I was issued 3 PCN's (ANPR) in quick succession in a Hospital carpark and a call to the Parking Co had them immediately squashed.

I got a ticket for not displaying a ticket (for free parking for up to

20 mins, after 10 mins there) and got the fine dropped because of poor signage (along with many others later on). It's all down to intent and what's reasonable.

On neither occasion did I intentionally intend to park without following the rules or try to escape the fees.

[dennis]

I thought that the correct thing to do if you find a stray animal is to take it to the rspca or cat protection place so they can attempt to find the owner.

[spuorgelgoog]

Cats can be asked not to go on food surfaces.

Serves humans right for having cola near a MacBook Pro ... serves them right for having a MacBook ;-)

Cat fleas don't go on humans anyway.

The RSPB admits that cats don't harm wildlife.

Mr Tibbles.

[T i m]

<snip>

<snip>

Good, we are in agreement then. ;-)

Cheers, T i m

[T i m]

Which is what the person did apparently (to the local Vets), or so Adam told us?

The problem was, it wasn't 'stray', it was just not under his full control (because it doesn't have to be, many cat owners seem to think (incorrectly)).

Cheers, T i m

[dennis]

Aren't machines that expensive spill proof? My windows laptop is and its half the price.

They lie then, I have seen plenty of cats hunting and catching wildlife. The neighbours cat brought them a rat about 15" from nose to tail. They weren't impressed. It wasn't dead, I did remind them that they couldn't release it as its vermin and that they had to kill it humanely.

Does hitting it with a spade count?