Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Q for brits : can pregnant women really pee in policehelmets ?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Colonâ„¢


    For 2006:

    1 Jack 6,928, 2 Muhammad (all spellings) 5,991, 3 Thomas 5,921, 4 Joshua 5,808, 5 Oliver 5,208, 6 Harry 5,006, 7 James 4,783, 8 William 4,327, 9 Samuel 4,320, 10 Daniel 4,303, 11 Charlie 4,178, 12 Benjamin 3,778, 13 Joseph 3,755, 14 Callum 3,517, 15 George 3,386, 16 Jake 3,353, 17 Alfie 3,194, 18 Luke 3,108,19 Matthew 3,043, 20 Ethan 3,020

    Joshua is the fourth commonest?
    Why can't you be a non-conformist just like everybody else?

    It's no good (from an evolutionary point of view) to have the physique of Tarzan if you have the sex drive of a philosopher. -- Michael Ruse
    The Nedaverse I can accept, but not the Berzaverse. There can only be so many alternate realities. -- Elok

    Comment


    • #17
      Jews?
      12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
      Stadtluft Macht Frei
      Killing it is the new killing it
      Ultima Ratio Regum

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by KrazyHorse


        Jack and Jake are two different names.

        The different spellings of Muhammed are different transliterations of the same name.
        12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
        Stadtluft Macht Frei
        Killing it is the new killing it
        Ultima Ratio Regum

        Comment


        • #19
          You can make an argument for Jake and James, but even that common origin is long buried...
          12-17-10 Mohamed Bouazizi NEVER FORGET
          Stadtluft Macht Frei
          Killing it is the new killing it
          Ultima Ratio Regum

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Re: Re: Q for brits : can pregnant women really pee in policehelmets ?

            Originally posted by BlackCat
            Maybe not, but the claim has been made. Is it true or not ?

            im a serving police officer, in england.
            Im sorry to have to burst everyones bubble here, but no it is NOT a law and never has been.
            There was once in the 1950's a remarkable event, at a public meeting in London. The police of the 1950s in england were nowhere near as closely monitored as they are today, and the way they applied minor laws and served the public interest was largely down to their discretion.
            so this event in london resulted in a pregnant female needing to urinate.
            a police officer was asked what the lady should do.
            To save her dignity, the officer lent her his helmet, but only to cover up her vaginal area, which may have been on show. she did NOT urinate into the helmet. It was used a screen for prying eyes.
            there is absolutley nothing in law to that effect for pregnant females. Pregnant females may need to urinate more often due to their condition, however the onus is on the pregnant female, to ensure that she is paying greater attention to her health needs, and not making upstupid laws to help stupid people.
            what purpose would it serve to let the female urinate into a policemans helmet? she would still be making a spectacle of herself, people could still see her private areas, and what does the police officer then do with his now useless helmet?
            urinating in public is a criminal offence, and so there would never be a law passed to allow this to happen.
            the incident in london, was an exceptional case, and there were large crowds around from what i understood of the incident, the public toilets nearby had just been vandalised and were inaccessible at the time. So the officer, UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES did what he could.
            it is all a question of common sense.
            ask a policeman if you can borrow his helmet to pee in, as you are pregnant and its the law, and you will probably be met initially with laughter, and then instructions to go to the nearest public toilets, and stop being so narrow minded


            The search engine that helps you find exactly what you're looking for. Find the most relevant information, video, images, and answers from all across the Web.


            (scroll down)

            Comment


            • #21
              Face it, BC...your thread has been jacked
              Im not sure what Baruk Khazad is , but if they speak Judeo-Dwarvish, that would be "blessed are the dwarves" - lord of the mark

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Last Conformist

                Joshua is the fourth commonest?
                OMG!!!!!!!!

                The filthy Jew scum are only 183 babies behind the evil dastardly A-rabs...

                We're being overrun by foreign trash!

                **** off Winston you xenophobic piece of ****, and spread your racist lies elsewhere...
                Is it me, or is MOBIUS a horrible person?

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Asmodean
                  Face it, BC...your thread has been jacked
                  Yeah, I know, but I really are dissapointed. I expected some threadjacking on a friday night britbashing thread about an obscure subject, and what do I get ? A flame war about stupid names and a serious answer

                  Poly is surely in decline
                  With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

                  Steven Weinberg

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    nm
                    You just wasted six ... no, seven ... seconds of your life reading this sentence.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Well, you can always count on me to provide the serious answer!
                      Is it me, or is MOBIUS a horrible person?

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        actually I misinterpreted your post
                        You just wasted six ... no, seven ... seconds of your life reading this sentence.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Joshua is a Jewish name?
                          You just wasted six ... no, seven ... seconds of your life reading this sentence.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            So if any child is given a Jewish name, even if he is, say, Muslim, or native English, he gets called foreign trash?

                            Meh.
                            You just wasted six ... no, seven ... seconds of your life reading this sentence.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by MOBIUS
                              Well, you can always count on me to provide the serious answer!
                              No offense, but you swallowed hook, sink and bailt on the threadjack, but I assume it was too tempting considering your pov's.
                              With or without religion, you would have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, that takes religion.

                              Steven Weinberg

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                the cliche is hook line and sinker.
                                You just wasted six ... no, seven ... seconds of your life reading this sentence.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X