Child rapist allowed to compete at Olympics while an equestrian who gently whipped a horse is banned?

Dujardin banned from Olympics while van de Velde is allowed to compete by Michael Broad

----------------

This is a short note on something which troubled Nick Ferrari on LBC this morning. LBC is a popular British radio station and Nick Ferrari is a very popular, long-standing presenter on that station. He saw a disconnect or a lack of equality in the way two Olympians have been treated by the authorities.

Charlotte Dujardin is all over the news because she was secretly videoed using a lunging whip on a horse being trained for dressage, ridden by a young rider. This is a very long whip which might at worst sting a horse but it's a fairly benign training instrument which is an extension of the arms. That said she made a terrible mistake in whipping this trainee horse. She admitted it. But her illustrious career as a former gold medallist is in tatters because of the revelation.

She's been banned from going for another gold medal which would have made her Britain’s most decorated female Olympian in her own right. And she has lost funding from the UK authorities. Her reputation is in tatters as mentioned.

She's not been been charged with any animal welfare offence. And therefore she not been found guilty of a crime. Although we don't know whether she regularly used that kind of whipping treatment in her training programs. There is no suggestion that she did but the fact that she was filmed doing it might arguably indicate that she has used the method before.

What did Charlotte Dujardin do to force her to withdraw from the Olympics? - click this for her full story.

But set against that bleak picture for Charlotte Dujardin, we have the story of Steven van de Veld, a convicted child rapist who was convicted of raping a British 12-year-old girl in 2016. He was subsequently tried and convicted and has been punished according to the law. And he's allowed to compete at the Paris Olympics. The IOC is facing calls for an investigation into how a convicted child rapist has been allowed to compete at these games.

There is growing outrage at the presence of Steven van de Velde in the volleyball competition. Some senior people believe that it is irresponsible of the authorities to allow him there. It sends the wrong signal to the world at large. And there's an argument that even though he has served his sentence and been punished he should not be allowed to compete because the Olympic Games is about creating a harmonious environment. It's about promoting high standards. It's about excellence in sport and in general behaviour. These are top athletes who are influencers.

Many of them who are awarded gold medals will be strong influencers in the future of young people in particular and this underscores the need for them to be of good character.

There is an argument for banning Van de Velde from the Olympics and if that had happened it would put him in line with the ban of Charlotte Dujardin. It would make more sense. At the moment there seems to be a high degree of inequality between these two athletes and the application of different standards.

-----------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.

Do cat deterrent 'Doff Stop Cats and Dogs Scatter Granules' work?

Doff STOP Cat and Dog Scatter Granules cost £3.97 at Asda, which is a very small price to pay if you are a gardener and you don't like neighbourhood cats coming onto your garden. You will find countless numbers of tricks and tips about stopping cats coming onto gardens. 

Does cat deterrent 'Doff Stop Cats and Dogs Scatter Granules' work? Not very well or hardly at all is my opinion based on reviews.

I think the whole thing is overhyped myself because the best way to do it is by shouting at a wandering cat and looking aggressive but not harming the cat. This will put them off and eventually they won't come back as the link the place with danger. Or the ultrasonic deterrent is the best, working about half the time (see link below).

Do ultrasonic cat deterrents work? - click on this link for info about a pretty go deterrent and there are some other links below for more info.

But this particular product is currently in the news so I thought I'd just check it out. The claims are no doubt slightly extravagant and one has to be sceptical about cat and dog repellents.

In years of studying these products, I can say pretty confidently that most of them don't work very well or hardly at all. The news media like to report on them. And that assessment would apply to this product.

Real, sensible backyard cat deterrents without gimmicks - click for a sensible discussion.

I chose Amazon on as my source of reviews where the product achieves 3.4 out of 5 which is poor. A lot of the reviews report that it didn't work. The ones that gave four or five stars said that they thought it worked but they posted their review quite early on and therefore were unsure as to the long term benefits.

Rue is a plant that may work as a cat deterrent when crushed

And they are granules so if it rains they going to be damaged and ineffective I would guess. They're designed to last for a fairly short time anyway and they work by giving off a highly perfumed odour which is meant to deter cats and dogs.

Odour repellents of all kinds are not that effective despite the sensitivity of the noses of both cats and dogs partly because the fade quite quickly in time.

Cats and dogs are meant to find the smell 'repulsive' but being sceptical as I am I doubt it applies to all cats anyway. Perhaps if a cat smelled the granules from about 2 inches some cats might be repelled and disgusted but does it apply to all domestic cats? Cats are individuals. Some are more sensitive to deterrent smells than others.

Other than using the ultrasonic deterrent which can hardly be heard by people, or waving one's arms around and making a noise, an additional deterrent would be to plant the right kind of shrubs which cover the entire ground in the flower beds. Cats won't go into those. This of course might not please a gardener because they want to plant pretty flowers and they want to participate in gardening rather than have a low maintenance garden.

Are citrus fruits a good cat deterrent?

Some plants are quite prickly and they can be usefully employed in flower beds as a deterrent. That's about it. My recommendation is don't bother with these granules.

I would like to say that when I state that ultrasonic deterrent works moderately effectively I am basing that on scientific research. That's not hearsay or subjective reviews but hard science.

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.

Ryan Reynolds jokes Taylor Swift sued him for using her cats in ‘Deadpool 2’

I have stolen the title from a website called NME. The story is a bit of fun. Ryan Reynolds and Taylor Swift are buddies I believe. So Ryan is taking the Mikey when he said that Taylor sued him for not asking her permission to put photos of her cats on his T-shirt. 

In a recent Sirius XM interview (July 19), Reynolds discussed featuring Swift's cats, Meredith and Olivia, on a T-shirt in his 2018 film. The sequel, Deadpool & Wolverine, is set to hit theatres this week (July 26).

“Yes, I had a T-shirt made. Yes, of [Swift’s cats] Meredith and Olivia on Wade’s shirt,” Reynolds explained during the interview. “Yeah, you know, just little details, that’s all.”

He was asked if he'd got permission and his jokey response was:

 "No, I was sued. I lost everything in that one. And getting sued by a friend is tough to swallow. Also, she has just a lot of very, very powerful lawyers. I found out later those are just the paralegals. The real lawyers didn’t even bother with it. But…I would never do such a thing." Meaning wear a T-shirt with Swift's cats on it."

Here is the video of the podcast (nice location) where the conversation took place.

Taylor's cats get everywhere. There's probably more gossip about her cats than about 90% of the celebrities in the US! 😉💕😃

Ryan Reynolds is a Canadian-American actor, producer, and businessman. He's renowned for his charismatic and often comedic roles, but he's also proven himself as a dramatic actor.

He gained widespread popularity for his portrayal of the irreverent superhero Deadpool in the eponymous film franchise. His witty and self-aware performance in the role solidified his status as a Hollywood A-lister.

Beyond Deadpool, Reynolds has starred in a variety of films, including romantic comedies like The Proposal, action flicks like Blade: Trinity, and even dramas like Buried. He's also known for his entrepreneurial ventures and sharp wit on social media.

Taylor Swift is a Grammy-winning American singer-songwriter known for her candid lyrics and evolving musical style. Rising to fame as a country artist, she's transitioned seamlessly into pop, showcasing her versatility and immense talent. Her dedicated fanbase, the "Swifties," is a testament to her global influence.

---------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.

Would there be more crime without police? Answer is not clear!

It may have occurred to you that the police force is irrelevant. Why spend billions of dollars or pounds on the police if they achieve nothing? They may be so corrupt that they add to the crime rate. That's certainly true of some countries.

Shoplifting up by Michael Broad

--------------

Put it this way: there is no direct correlation with the presence of police and less crime or the lack of presence of police and more crime. It is a very difficult area of discussion. Below are the thoughts of Google's Gemini there artificial intelligence computer. They make the point that there might not be more crime without police which is a very troubling thought.

However, what got me thinking about this is the news today about shoplifting at a record high in the UK as thieves operate without fear. This has been an ongoing problem in the UK for many years. It's got worse and worse over the years as thieves have come to recognise the fact that the police do not attend shoplifting crimes. They have publicly declared to the world that they will not deal with shoplifting.

And because of that, thieves know that they can commit these crimes with impunity. This, then, confirms that the presence of police deters crime. And it confirms in at least one way that there would be more crime without police. Because in the UK there are no police, in effect, when it comes to shoplifting.

It is rampant. Personally, I see people next to me on self-service machines stealing food in supermarkets. It's quite commonplace. This forces up the prices so people like me have to pay the miscreant behaviour of ordinary citizens.

And the report today is that "Shoplifting has reached its highest level since records began more than 20 years ago as thieves operate without fear."

The number of shoplifting offences recorded by police in England and Wales is up 30% compared with last year.

Police forces logged 443,995 shoplifting offences in the year to last March. This is the highest since records began in 2003. Overall fraud incidents rose by 8% or 1.2 million offences compared to last year. There's been a surge in offences. The public is concerned. The public is mystified as to why the police have allowed this to happen.

What's worse is that the data probably represents a tiny fraction of what is actually happening. The true levels of theft is much higher. It causes apprehension in citizens.

Burglaries are also hardly ever attended by the police. There are almost no arrests of burglars in the UK. That has been the state of play for a long time. The police have completely abandoned the British public with respect to these offences. 

Even when they investigate separate figures show that proportion of crime investigations recorded in the year to March which were closed without a suspect rose to 40.2% from 39.3% in the previous year.

Difference between losing your cat through theft, robbery or burglary

Finally, I can't ignore the theft of companion animals. It's all part and parcel of the same problem. There are more thefts of companion animals nowadays than before. This causes huge distress in caregivers. I don't think the police fully recognise this. They don't recognise the emotional context. The police are asleep basically and have been for years in my view.

Knife crime

The Times also has an article about "Children seriously hurt by knives up 50% in a decade". The report goes on to state that "The number of young people suffering serious injuries from knife crime has risen almost 50% in a decade, with black children six times more likely to be murdered than other children, a landmark report reveals."

This is just another aspect of crime generally in the UK. It's frankly shocking. And it is undermining the well-being of Britain's citizens. It might even be linked to the fact that a far too high a proportion of working people in the UK are not working. Some experts put it down to mental health issues. It might be because they're just lazy but perhaps they simply have given up on integrating with society because what they see in the newspapers is too bad.

Livestock crime

The police are also impotent in stopping livestock crime in the UK. A sheep farmer returned from his father's funeral to discover an organised crime gang had stolen 300 ewes and lambs from his field. The farmer believes that the lambs and mountain ewes were taken away in an unmarked lorry by somebody who knew about the funeral. The cost of livestock theft of farmers has reached a four-year high in 2023 with £2.7 million worth of cattle, sheep and pig stolen often by organised gangs according to a Times report. Another example of how a lack of police presence encourages crime. This supports the view that without police there would be more crime. It depends upon the community of course and whether they are predisposed to committing crime or not!

Gemini's response to the question

Whether or not there would be more crime without police is a complex question with no easy answer. Here's a breakdown of some key points to consider:

Arguments for More Crime:

• Deterrence: Police act as a deterrent, with the threat of arrest and punishment discouraging some potential criminals.
• Investigation and Apprehension: Police investigate crimes and attempt to apprehend offenders, removing them from the streets.
• Maintaining Order: Police presence can help maintain public order and prevent situations from escalating into crime.

Arguments for Less Crime:

• Over-Policing: Excessive policing, particularly in marginalized communities, can lead to overcriminalization and erode trust between communities and law enforcement.
• Ineffective Policing: Not all policing strategies are equally effective in reducing crime. Some approaches may even lead to increased crime.
• Root Causes: Many crimes are driven by underlying social issues like poverty, inequality, and lack of opportunity. Addressing these root causes could have a greater impact on crime rates than simply increasing police presence.

The Bottom Line:

There's no definitive answer to this question. The relationship between police and crime is complex and varies depending on numerous factors. It's important to consider the potential consequences of both maintaining the status quo and reforming or abolishing the police.

----------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.

Management evict 2 popular public house cats. Pushback from regulars.

The senior management of Black Country Ales intend to evict Malt and Hops from the Wellington Real Ale public house in Birmingham City Centre.

These two very popular cats have called it home for the past five years. Malt and Hops are a beloved part of life at "The Welly", cherished and well-respected by both staff and regulars.

“It’s actually one of the reasons a lot of us go to The Welly,” says Laura McEwan, the owner of local blog Bite Your Brum. “The cats are part of the experience.”

Malt and Hops are popular with the regulars. Image: Facebook.

The Welly simply won't be the same without these two characters who bring joy and entertainment to its patrons.

We must convey to the upper management our collective disapproval of their plans to evict Malt and Hops from their home. By signing and sharing this petition widely, we can prevent this unwarranted eviction from occurring.

The Wellington on Bennetts Hill is reportedly being instructed by Black Country Ales, the brewey that owns the establishment, to remove the two resident cats following a complaint.

We don't know who made the complaint.

The complaint is arguable unreasonable as:

• The public only provides packaged bar snacks and not cooked food so there is not chance contamination which is frankly absurd anyway as there are countless public houses in the UK with dogs inside the place.
• Pubs like the Bag of Nails in Bristol and the Duke of York in Salisbury are renowned for their resident cats, which have become beloved by the regular patrons.

Perhaps the anonymous complainant is allergic to cats. Fair enough but he or she has no right to spoil the ambience of the place for all others. These cats are popular.

A petition has been started on Change.org: Petition · Stop Malt & Hops getting evicted - Birmingham, United Kingdom · Change.org - please click to sign it.

--------------

P.S. please forgive the occasional typo. These articles are written at breakneck speed using Dragon Dictate. I have to prepare them in around 20 mins.