Youtube comments of Tony L (@tlangdon12).
-
270
-
95
-
63
-
57
-
56
-
52
-
43
-
39
-
39
-
33
-
28
-
25
-
24
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
While I agree, the issue is recalling the flow diagram when you are stopped in the street at some random point in the future. Even if you keep the flow diagram on you, you might find it difficult to consult without escalating the situation. Really the best advice is to keep the conversation pleasant with the police, and try find out: i) if you are under suspicion of an offence, in which case you will have to give your name, dob, address for indentification, ii) if they want you to account for yourself, in which case you should (only) tell them about what you have been doing, where you have been and are going and what you have on you and only do so IF you wish to (they can ask the question, but you don't have to answer), iii) if the police want to search you, in which case, you should ask them what they are looking for and why they think you have this item on you; you don't have to tell them anything but should allow yourself to be searched. Try to memorise this.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
There will always be debate about whether a government should do something or not, but there are some fundamentals that all prosperous societies rely on. The rule of law, courts and legal protection for property owners, defence, social services to care for the ill and disabled, immigration control, regulation of critical services such as banking, building, industry and transport are all vital. Stopping all of this, at once, is crazy. Swamp or no swamp, you don't take needless risks.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
It is outrageous if it is true. There is so much disinformation that it is difficult to know whether people were required to speak Ukrainian in stores and in public buildings. I don't have too much of a problem requiring people to speak the national language when engaging with officials (to pay taxes, claim benefits, apply for permits, etc.) because translators are expensive, but people should be able to use any language in business or at home. Clearly in a store, the staff have to be able to speak Ukranian, but there should be no expectation that customers cannot use Russian when, for example, speaking to the person behind them in the queue. Ukrainian and Russian are really similar languages anyway. I would expect a Russian from Vladyvostok to be able to communicate with a Ukrainian shopkeeper to buy breadand milk, and the shop keeper should be grateful for the custom, even if their Ukrainian is a bit dodgy.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@sassy3923 The truth is that prior to 2014, when Ukraine was more aligned with Russia, there was peace and some prosperity across all of Ukraine, and especially in Donbas. But from 2014, the coup in Kiyv ousted the pro-Russia government, and a pro-European government was elected. The pro-European nature of the government upset many in Donbas who have traditionally had stronger ties with Russia than other areas of Ukraine had. It is also the case that the shift to a pro-Europe view in Kiyv was accompanied by a greater nationalism, which is to say Ukraine begain to see itself as more an in independent and sovereign nation. I don't mean nationalism in the sense that the Nazis used the term. True Nazis believed that everyone who is not of their race is sub-human. Ukraine became more nationalistic in sense that people were more patriotic about being Ukrainian. One result if this nationalism is that a law was passed to encourage the speaking of Ukrainian (in Soviet times, you were only allowed to speak Russian in Ukraine, so that is what was taught in schools). I don't think Ukrainians think that Russians are sub-human. Many Ukrainians have close family in Russia and vice versa. It isn't clear to me whether the law to encourage the use of the Ukrainian language was abused or not. Clearly a supporter of the far right would be inclined to abuse it, and force Russian-speakers not to use Russian. My view is that anyone should be able to use any language they want to at home, and in any small business they run, but it is reasonable to expect that only Ukrainian will be taught in Ukrainian school, and that you need to use Ukrainian when filling in official government forms, e.g. for paying tax, or claiming benefits. If the Ukrainian state has been telling Russian speakers that they cannot speak Russian at home, then this is wrong, but I don't have enough information to know whether this was the case. It's all very sad for the people of Ukraine.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
My view is that it is wrong, because we are taxed throughout our life. If we earn money, we pay tax (Income tax), if we spend money, we pay tax (VAT, Insurance Premium Tax, Passenger Air Duty, Fuel Duty, etc), if we save money, we are taxed on the interest (Income Tax), if we buy more than one house we pay tax (Stamp Duty Land Tax), if we invest prudently and are lucky enough to make a gain, we pay tax (Capital Gains Tax). At the end of our life, what we have managed to accumulate in spite of the tax system, should be ours to do with as we please. It is my view that the state should have no call on it.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Mike Allen I think that locking the doors and speaking to the police officer through a partially open window is fine, but if the officer is concerned about your manner of driving, e.g. they think you are drunk or driving under the influence of drugs, or the car is not roadworthy, they are not going to let you drive any further than the safe place they have stopped you. So if you decide to drive on after being stopped, whatever other offences you are (or aren't) prosected for, you are likely to be successfully prosecuted for failing to stop for a police office. You have the choice whether to drive on or not, but I can't see it being a defence to claim you are scared of police officers, unless you have strong evidence of this. I think it also makes a difference if the police officer is working alone - I would see a lone office as much more of a threat. If you know the area, and you know of a petrol station or an open supermarket or pub car park you can drive to in five minutes or so, then I don't see the problem with saying to them "I'm a lone female, you are a single officer, I don't feel comfortable dealing with this here, can we drive to xxx?". Their response might cause you to drive to the nearest police station to report them as a police impersonator, or might reassure you that all is well.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@boiteobscure На самом деле я понимаю, что имеется в виду: мы видим много видео, которые являются «правдивыми» в том смысле, что они не являются постановочными или фальшивыми, но то, что означают эти видео, требует анализа. Многие видео Патрика Ланкастера «правдивы», но смысл, который я им придаю, сильно отличается от того, что говорит Патрик Ланкастер.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
We know that the Market alone does not produce the outcomes that most people want. We have examples such as Thames Water, Royal Mail, the Energy market, private rented housing, railways, banking, etc, etc.
Most people want a caring state that provides a counter-balance to market forces, to prevent capitalism from putting all the choices in the hands of the very rich.
Not everyone wants to see their neighbour as themselves, because this requires empathy and self-sacrifice. The UK has been following the US model of individual independence for too long, hence the rise of gated-communities. It's not ok that the rich starve everyone else of law and order because they are safe behind their gates!
I felt that Tony Blair's government achieved the best political outcomes because they had Gordon Brown making sure the government actually cared and Tony Blair to find that 'third way' that was neither Tory nor Labour, but was a sensible long-term strategy that both parties could live with.
Merry Christmas Richard! Thank you for a thought-provoking year.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Actually, it's the ordinary people who have gone mad! They think it is sensible to have 80,000 people in jail, when the jails are overcrowded and there are not enough prision offieers to spend time rehabilitate offenders, some of whom are only in jail for a few months - you are not going to change a lifetime of bad habits and decisions in a couple of months. James Timpson, the current Prisons Minister, was appointed because he is something of an expert in the penal system, and has stated before being appointed that he beleives that at least a third of prisoners should even be in jail due to their mental health problems. They don't get treatment for these problems because there is no time, and no mental health services to help them, so they go away for a few months, them come out to reoffend. It's plain daft, but the public think it it's ok. They are wrong, and its time the people that know about this stuff started telling them they are wrong.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@CadizHexus Thank you for taking the time to provide a long reply. I don't think that Putin had any justifiable security concerns. A strong Ukraine would never have been a threat to Russia; to Russian influence, yes, but to Russia itself, no. It's like we say in the UK, "Good fences make for Good neighbours". Putin massively underestimated the risks to the Russian economy. He beleived his own world view, rather than asking others how the West would react. He has surrounded himself with "Yes" men who think like he does, and hence who don't understand the West at all. I do however agree that in 2014 the Ukrainian government did send the Ukrainian army to suppress the dissent in Donbas, and to do so violently. This was wrong, but I think Russia made a mistake by both arming the seperatists and encouraging them to become seperatists. If Russia had stayed out of Ukraine in 2014, the dissent in the Donbass would have been ended, unfairly, but many lives would have been saved. I think the Ukrainians in the Donbass that have stood up against the Ukrainian army in the past 8 years showed the same spirit that other Ukrainians have in fighting the Russian army. If the occupation of Ukraine by Russia continues for another 8 years, the death toll with be much worse than it is now, and it is already too much.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
As per my reply to Angus mecoatup, kettleing per se is not likely to be false imprisonment, if the police can justify the length of the kettleing being necessary to prevent a breach of the peace. But detaining someone until they provide their name and address would be false imprisonment unless there was a specific legal obligation for them to provide these details. You can survive without water for a number of days, so assuming the police allow the protestors to disperse that day, the lack of water is not an issue. Toileting however, is more problematic. My own feeling is that the police should allow protestors to leave the kettle to use the nearest toilet, and the protestor should be escorted (to ensure they return) if the police are not willing to let protesters leave the kettle generally for reasons of public order. A German Court has upheld that the German police acted inhumanely, and therefore illegally, in not allowing a protestor to go to the toilet. The UK courts have ruled differently, although the UK case cited the denial of food, water and toilet facilities. I would hope that a case in the UK, where the only issue was access to a toilet, would succeed. Have a read of the Wikipedia page on "kettling" if you have more interest in this subject.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Я также пишу через переводчика, потому что хочу сказать вам, что вы ошибаетесь в некоторых вещах. Зеленский не наркоман. Это видно по тому, как он себя ведет. Он порядочный человек. Он не контролируется США. Он не марионетка. Он и большинство украинцев хотят, чтобы Украина была больше связана с Россией. Украинцы не Россия. Они были порабощены Россией и вынуждены говорить по-русски. Они теперь хотят быть более европейскими и говорить по-украински. Это их выбор. Это не решение, в котором принимают участие Россия, США или ЕС. Это правда на большей части Украины, но не на Донбассе. В Донбассе около 50% населения хотят оставаться тесно связанными с Россией, а 50% - нет. Ни России, ни Зеленскому не удалось решить эту проблему. Это трудно. Никто не должен покидать свой дом или говорить на чем-то другом, кроме своего родного языка. Они также не должны подвергаться бомбардировке своего дома сепаратистами или собственной армией. Война должна прекратиться, российская армия должна вернуться в Россию, и должен быть найден способ, позволяющий всем украинцам жить в мире. Молодцы, что воспользовались переводчиком. (Translation: I am also writing through a translator, because I want to tell you that you are wrong about certain things. Zelensky is not a drug addict. You can see this from the way he behaves. He is a decent man. He is not controlled by the USA. He is no puppet. He and most Ukrainians want Ukraine to be more aligned with Russia. Ukrainians are not Russia. They were subjugated by Russia and forced to speak Russian. They now want to be more European and to speak Ukrainian. This is their choice. It is not a decision Russia, the USA or EU has any part in. This is the truth in most of Ukraine, but not in Donbass. In Donbass about 50% of the population want to remain closely linked to Russia, but 50% do not. Neither Russia nor Zelensky have managed to solve this problem. It is difficult. No-one should have to leave their home, or speak anything other than their mother language. Neither should they have their home bombed by seperatists or by their own army. The war must stop, the Russian army must go back to Russia, and a way to allow all Ukrainians to live in peace must be found. Well done for using the translator. )
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@HowdyJJE An offence is a crime if you can be punished for it by a criminal court, e.g. a magistrate's court. So if you don't provide your insurnance documents, you can be arrested for not doing so, but you cannot be punished for the offence if you provide your insurance documents at a police station within 7 days. That said, it is very, very unlikely that you will be arrested just for not having insurance. The police will only arrest you on this charge, if they think you have given them false information to try to convince them you are insured when you are not. Most motorists with insurance will appear on the database that the Police ANPR cameras have access to, and the Police will know if you are insured and if you are a named driver or the policy holder. If you took out insurance in the last 48-72 hours, you might not be on the database yet, but most people will have an email confirming that payment has been taken by their insurance company even if they have't yet received the policy via email, and this will be enough to avoid arrest.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Украинский солдат хочет бросить свою семью, чтобы помешать Путину завоевать Украину, чтобы русские не бомбили его мать и бабушку. Я буду кормить семью украинского солдата, пока Россия восстанавливает его дом, школу, где учились его дети, и аэропорт, где работала его жена. Его жене никогда не придется продавать себя, чтобы прокормить детей. Я позабочусь об этом. Будьте сильными, украинские бойцы, мир и я обнимаю вас. Вам вернут вашу страну захватчики.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
It is much easier to spot scam ads that Facebook make out. When you accept a payment for advertising, you need to check whether the company is real and whether the product or service is real. Try ordering the product, try calling the contact centre, try visiting the company's website, check how long the company has been operating for, and whether its accounts make sense, check where its offices are, check who the directors are and that you can see their home address on Google maps, perhaps most importantly, meet with the marketing director and get them on CCTV. How about making them use a payment service that has a dispute process so that the customer either gets what they have paid for or their money back? There is so much more that tech companies can do, but they just more profit.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1