Private Members Bill
View Full Version : Private Members Bill
In a similar vein to the Walking Helmets article in the
BMJ(?) but even more daft^H^H^H^H vital.
Pursuant to Section 14.4.5, subsection 12.5, paragraph 14c,
held within the blah blah waffle waffle safety of children
act waffle, I hereby declare my intent to present to the
house a number of child safety initiatives which will be
effective in promoting th welfare of children in the UK.
1) Children shall be banned from taking physical exercise
at school since excessive exercise will make the obese
children have heart attacks.
2) Children playing or walking near water will be required
to be wearing life jackets at all times. This includes
circumstances when children are in a private garden
which contains a fish pond. Please note also that it
will apply when taking a bath or a shower (see 3).
3) Due to the risk of children slipping in the shower, they
will be required to sit down (this is sometimes known as
"having a bath"), and shall also be wearing shower-
helmets. Unfortunately they will be unable to wash their
hair since I intend to ban ventilation holes in the
helmets due to the risk of scalp scalds (see 4).
4) Children shall no longer be able to shower in hot water.
Shower supplies must be cold water only, and it shall be
illegal to install a water heater in series with the
water supply (also known as a "power shower").
5) Children using sharp implementrs such as knives, craft
blades, scissors, compasses (compi?), pencils and
fountain pens will be required to wear protective
gloves. Due to the unfortunate effect of now being
unable to write by hand, all children will be forced to
use computers for all alpha-numeric based communication.
Parents who at home, allow their children to engage in
alpha-numeric communication without buying them a
computer will be subject to prosecution.
5a) It is understood that the banning of knives will have a
serious impact on children wishing to eat school meals. It
will therefore be necessary to ban all such foods requiring
the use of canteen cutlery. Suitable foods will be items
such as beefburgers. See also (12).
6) Children will no longer be allowed to climb stairs
due to the risk of gravitational accident. Parents
must either relocate to bungalows (government
ministers affected by this will be entitled to a
relocation allowance), reorganise their homes so that
children no longer need to climb stairs, or install a
stairlift (see 7).
7) I intend to make it illegal for children to use
stairlifts (including enclosed elevators) unless they
are wearing a suitabale helmet.
8) Children under the age of 16 may not cross the road
unsupervised. Walking helmets will be compulsary. Roads
which are of a width greater than 10m, roads which are a
designated bus route, and all roads which allow cars to
travel on them will be completely out of bounds for
child pedestrians. Children wishing to cross such a road
must do so in the safety of a motor vehicle (this is
sometimes know as "doing a three-point-turn).
9) Children wishing to read books must do so for only 10
minutes a week in order to prevent eye-strain. Books
will be replaced by the much preferred television, which
due to the increased distance of viewing, will reduce in
much lower eye-strain injuries.
10) Parents who wish to allow their children to play in
their own gardens must first of all have their
premises inspected by Child Recreation Analysis
Personnel. Dangerous devices such as those relying on
a fulcrum or simple harmonic motion for pleasure will
be banned. Gravity-challenge frames will be subject to
a maximum height of 0.5m
11) All ball games will be banned due to the risk of head
injury from an air-filled sphere. The preferrable
computer simulation will be deemed a safer alternative.
12) Vegetables will be banned since they grow in the ground
and are obviously dirty.
Final note: I understand that the above meausres may seem
over the top. But we have to think of the children. As a
financial assistance to the above measures, all parents will
be issued with 2 rolls of cotton wool per child per year.
Yours sincerely, Eric Martlew.
--
Young Musician of the Year 2004 was a fiddle
OK - do you have children? Would you let them ride a
bike without a helmet? If you wouldn't, what are you
trying to say?
For the record, my kids have always ridden bikes. They have
always worn helmets. They just see it as perfectly normal,
and it has not put them off. And yes, all three have fallen
off at times and on at least 4 occasions have had serious
damage to the helmet.
From: "Richard Bates" <usenet01@artybee.net> Subject:
Private Members Bill Date: 16 May 2004 10:18
In a similar vein to the Walking Helmets article in the
BMJ(?) but even more daft^H^H^H^H vital.
Pursuant to Section 14.4.5, subsection 12.5, paragraph 14c,
held within the blah blah waffle waffle safety of children
act waffle, I hereby declare my intent to present to the
house a number of child safety initiatives which will be
effective in promoting th welfare of children in the UK.
1) Children shall be banned from taking physical exercise
at school since excessive exercise will make the obese
children have heart attacks.
2) Children playing or walking near water will be required
to be wearing life jackets at all times. This includes
circumstances when children are in a private garden
which contains a fish pond. Please note also that it
will apply when taking a bath or a shower (see 3).
3) Due to the risk of children slipping in the shower, they
will be required to sit down (this is sometimes known as
"having a bath"), and shall also be wearing shower-
helmets. Unfortunately they will be unable to wash their
hair since I intend to ban ventilation holes in the
helmets due to the risk of scalp scalds (see 4).
4) Children shall no longer be able to shower in hot water.
Shower supplies must be cold water only, and it shall be
illegal to install a water heater in series with the
water supply (also known as a "power shower").
5) Children using sharp implementrs such as knives, craft
blades, scissors, compasses (compi?), pencils and
fountain pens will be required to wear protective
gloves. Due to the unfortunate effect of now being
unable to write by hand, all children will be forced to
use computers for all alpha-numeric based communication.
Parents who at home, allow their children to engage in
alpha-numeric communication without buying them a
computer will be subject to prosecution.
5a) It is understood that the banning of knives will have a
serious impact on children wishing to eat school meals. It
will therefore be necessary to ban all such foods requiring
the use of canteen cutlery. Suitable foods will be items
such as beefburgers. See also (12).
6) Children will no longer be allowed to climb stairs
due to the risk of gravitational accident. Parents
must either relocate to bungalows (government
ministers affected by this will be entitled to a
relocation allowance), reorganise their homes so that
children no longer need to climb stairs, or install a
stairlift (see 7).
7) I intend to make it illegal for children to use
stairlifts (including enclosed elevators) unless they
are wearing a suitabale helmet.
8) Children under the age of 16 may not cross the road
unsupervised. Walking helmets will be compulsary. Roads
which are of a width greater than 10m, roads which are a
designated bus route, and all roads which allow cars to
travel on them will be completely out of bounds for
child pedestrians. Children wishing to cross such a road
must do so in the safety of a motor vehicle (this is
sometimes know as "doing a three-point-turn).
9) Children wishing to read books must do so for only 10
minutes a week in order to prevent eye-strain. Books
will be replaced by the much preferred television, which
due to the increased distance of viewing, will reduce in
much lower eye-strain injuries.
10) Parents who wish to allow their children to play in
their own gardens must first of all have their
premises inspected by Child Recreation Analysis
Personnel. Dangerous devices such as those relying on
a fulcrum or simple harmonic motion for pleasure will
be banned. Gravity-challenge frames will be subject to
a maximum height of 0.5m
11) All ball games will be banned due to the risk of head
injury from an air-filled sphere. The preferrable
computer simulation will be deemed a safer alternative.
12) Vegetables will be banned since they grow in the ground
and are obviously dirty.
Final note: I understand that the above meausres may seem
over the top. But we have to think of the children. As a
financial assistance to the above measures, all parents will
be issued with 2 rolls of cotton wool per child per year.
Yours sincerely, Eric Martlew.
--
Young Musician of the Year 2004 was a fiddle
On Sun, 16 May 2004 18:33:35 +0100 someone who may be "Peter Taylor"
<taylorfamily2004@tiscali.co.uk> top-posted this:-
>OK - do you have children? Would you let them ride a
>bike without a helmet? If you wouldn't, what are you
>trying to say?
I think the humour of the original posting is easy enough to
spot. It was a very good posting.
--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number
F566DA0E I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK
government prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.
"Peter Taylor" <taylorfamily2004@tiscali.co.uk> writes:
> For the record, my kids have always ridden bikes. They
> have always worn helmets. They just see it as perfectly
> normal, and it has not put them off. And yes, all three
> have fallen off at times and on at least 4 occasions have
> had serious damage to the helmet.
I don't have kids, but I can remember being one. We used to
play outside on bikes without helmets; between us I can
think of several accidents which would probably have been
helmet-damaging or helmet-destroying (e.g ramp on pavement
with plank and bricks, brother goes over it too fast,
applies front brake after leaving the ground) but which
caused no skull or brain damage, and indeed required no
professional medical attention.
Well, I say that. He grew up to be a professional chef, but
seems otherwise unharmed.
What happened to the world of Swallows and Amazons? "BETTER
DROWNED THAN DUFFERS IF NOT DUFFERS WONT DROWN."
-dan
--
"please make sure that the person is your friend before
you confirm"
Peter Taylor wrote:
>
> OK - do you have children? Would you let them ride a
> bike without a helmet? If you wouldn't, what are you
> trying to say?
Well, I do. This afternoon I went out with my 9 and 12 year
olds and covered about 30 miles. Neither wore helmets and it
may surprise you taht we returned home unscathed - except
for some very slight sunburn.
> For the record, my kids have always ridden bikes. They
> have always worn helmets. They just see it as perfectly
> normal, and it has not put them off. And yes, all three
> have fallen off at times and on at least 4 occasions have
> had serious damage to the helmet.
If they fall off so much and also hitting their heads then
perhaps you should be asking why.
John B
PS: I think you may find it that Richard's post was a
humourous one.
On Sun, 16 May 2004 18:33:35 +0100, "Peter Taylor"
<taylorfamily2004@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
>OK - do you have children?
Can't speak for the OP but I do. 5 and 7.
>Would you let them ride a bike without a helmet?
Of course.
>If you wouldn't, what are you trying to say?
I think he was making a very good joke with more than a
grain of truth, unfortunately.
>For the record, my kids have always ridden bikes.
Are we talking poncing about on Sustrans routes here or
real cycling? If it's the former then the biggest danger
they'll face is cuts & bruising; a helmet will help prevent
this. If it's real on road cycling, to and from school for
instance, the biggest danger is getting hit by a car.
There's not a helmet made that even the manufacturers claim
will save them then.
>They have always worn helmets. They just see it as
>perfectly normal, and it has not put them off. And yes, all
>three have fallen off at times and on at least 4 occasions
>have had serious damage to the helmet.
So?
On Sun, 16 May 2004 18:33:35 +0100, "Peter Taylor"
<taylorfamily2004@tiscali.co.uk> wrote in message
<40a7a5f1_1@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>:
>OK - do you have children?
Yes
>Would you let them ride a bike without a helmet?
Yes.
Next?
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk (http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/)
88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
in message <40a7a5f1_1@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>, Peter Taylor
('taylorfamily2004@tiscali.co.uk') wrote:
> OK - do you have children? Would you let them ride a
> bike without a helmet? If you wouldn't, what are you
> trying to say?
For the record, I have no children.
> For the record, my kids have always ridden bikes. They
> have always worn helmets. They just see it as perfectly
> normal, and it has not put them off.
What benefit do you believe this offers them? If you think
it's protecting them from scratches and bruises, fair
enough, it probably
is. If you think it offers more, you're deluding yourself
and misleading your children - and that might, possibly,
put them at more risk than they otherwise would be
(although to be fair children tend to believe they're
immortal anyway, so it probably makes little
difference).
--
simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke)
http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
[ This .sig intentionally left blank ]
JohnB wrote:
> Peter Taylor wrote:
>>
>> OK - do you have children? Would you let them ride a
>> bike without a helmet? If you wouldn't, what are you
>> trying to say?
>
> Well, I do. This afternoon I went out with my 9 and 12
> year olds and covered about 30 miles. Neither wore helmets
> and it may surprise you taht we returned home unscathed -
> except for some very slight sunburn.
Perhaps they should be wearing cotton sun-hats ? At least
they offer some protection against a risk which is
reasonably well understood (skin cancers).
I went out for about 5 hours riding today; the wide brimmed
floppy sunhat had its first decent ride of the season.
> John B
> PS: I think you may find it that Richard's post was a
> humourous one.
Yes, I thought it was funny too.
- Nigel
--
NC - Webmaster for http://www.2mm.org.uk/ Replies to
newsgroup postings to the newsgroup please.
NC me@privacy.net opined the following...
> Perhaps they should be wearing cotton sun-hats ? At least
> they offer some protection against a risk which is
> reasonably well understood (skin cancers).
A very sensible suggestion. On a whim I rode to North
Berwick today (47 miles all in). In my usual state of being
stupendously badly organised I neglected to take food or
money and had only one water bottle which contained energy
drink. The outward journey was fast (Tailwind as always) and
as I began the return, I felt the familiar feelings of
dropping blood sugar level. Cue a rapid swig of my remaining
drink and a gentle potter back to Edinburgh. The gorgeous
sunshine has left me with mild reddening of the arms (Not a
problem, will be gone by morning) and very mild sunstroke.
The remainder of the evening was spent attempting to
rehydrate.
One day I hope to learn how to plan these routes so that I:
a) Come home with a tailwind
b) Take enough water
c) Don't run out of energy
Despite this it was a good ride, it's nice to be doing
some distances again rather than sprinting round town
all the time!
Jon
On Sun, 16 May 2004 18:33:35 +0100, "Peter Taylor"
<taylorfamily2004@tiscali.co.uk> wrote (more or less):
>OK - do you have children?
Yes.
> Would you let them ride a bike without a helmet?
Yes.
>If you wouldn't, what are you trying to say?
I realise son, that the greatest danger to you while on
a bike is being hit by a dozy or impatient motor
vehicle driver.
I realise that helmets won't help in those situations.
I also realise that rise in helmet use have been associated
with clealy identifiable /rises/ in head injuries to
cyclists in London, the USA and Australia.
If you're going to fall off your bike a helmet will help
slightly in such cases. But these falls are almost never a
cause of serious injury anyway, even unhelmetted.
--
Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr (http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr/)
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122 (http://html.dnsalias.net:1122/) Smalltalk
links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk)
http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk
On Sun, 16 May 2004 19:03:03 +0100, Daniel Barlow <dan@telent.net>
wrote (more or less):
>"Peter Taylor" <taylorfamily2004@tiscali.co.uk> writes:
>
>> For the record, my kids have always ridden bikes. They
>> have always worn helmets. They just see it as perfectly
>> normal, and it has not put them off. And yes, all three
>> have fallen off at times and on at least 4 occasions have
>> had serious damage to the helmet.
>
>I don't have kids, but I can remember being one. We used to
>play outside on bikes without helmets; between us I can
>think of several accidents which would probably have been
>helmet-damaging or helmet-destroying (e.g ramp on pavement
>with plank and bricks, brother goes over it too fast,
>applies front brake after leaving the ground) but which
>caused no skull or brain damage, and indeed required no
>professional medical attention.
I was standing upright on a six foot wall at eh age of
seven and slipped and fell, forehead first onto a
hardcored surface.
I didn't even get stitches.
--
Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr (http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr/)
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122 (http://html.dnsalias.net:1122/) Smalltalk
links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk)
http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk
On Sun, 16 May 2004 10:18:46 +0100, Richard Bates
<usenet01@artybee.net> wrote:
Sorry, folks, I didn't mean to start a helmet thread... :-(
--
Young Musician of the Year 2004 was a fiddle
NC wrote:
>
> JohnB wrote:
> > Peter Taylor wrote:
> >>
> >> OK - do you have children? Would you let them ride a
> >> bike without a helmet? If you wouldn't, what are you
> >> trying to say?
> >
> > Well, I do. This afternoon I went out with my 9 and 12
> > year olds and covered about 30 miles. Neither wore
> > helmets and it may surprise you taht we returned home
> > unscathed - except for some very slight sunburn.
>
> Perhaps they should be wearing cotton sun-hats ?
I'm not sure my daughter would have appreciated a sun-hat
strapped to each forearm ;-)
John B
Simon Brooke:
> For the record, I have no children.
No need for paranoia - I don't think there's anyone from the
CSA on the ng. ;-)
d.
JohnB:
> If they fall off so much and also hitting their heads then
> perhaps you should be asking why.
Back in the day, my mates and I fashioned a kind of BMX
track up in our local woods and we would spend hours on end
bombing round with reckless abandon. We used to fall off
occasionally but I don't recall anyone ever suffering
anything worse than a few cuts and scrapes, and I certainly
don't recall a single head injury - shins and ankles came in
for the most damage, then hands and arms.
From the evidence, it sounds like the OP is letting his kids
go out on bikes that are not fit to ride, in which case
shame on him. Either that or his kids are incompetent
nitwits who ought to be on trikes. Someone buy that man a
copy of Cyclecraft.
d.
In article <40a7a5f1_1@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com>,
Peter Taylor <taylorfamily2004@tiscali.co.uk> wrote:
> OK - do you have children? Would you let them ride a bike
> without a helmet?
Yes and yes. Next question.
> And yes, all three have fallen off at times and on at
> least 4 occasions have had serious damage to the helmet.
Which is odd, because I suspect that most people here
present rode bikes as children, and for anyone over thirty
(twenty?) helmets for children simply didn't exist. Were the
1960s and 1970s a killing field for children on bikes? Has
there been a marked decrease in child cycle deaths over the
past decade?
ian
In article <kbpfa01eg5ru8qp2560btk07kbvqv2afhe@4ax.com>,
Gawnsoft <xlucid@users.sourceforge.remove.this.antispam.net> wrote:
> I was standing upright on a six foot wall at eh age of
> seven and slipped and fell, forehead first onto a
> hardcored surface.
>
> I didn't even get stitches.
I fell a similar distance headfirst onto sharp rocks when I
was about ten. I have a very small scar over one eyebrow,
thanks to the excellent work with butterfly plaster by a
Spanish doctor.
ian
Ian G Batten wrote:
> In article <kbpfa01eg5ru8qp2560btk07kbvqv2afhe@4ax.com>,
> Gawnsoft
> <xlucid@users.sourceforge.remove.this.antispam.net> wrote:
>> I was standing upright on a six foot wall at eh age of
>> seven and slipped and fell, forehead first onto a
>> hardcored surface.
>>
>> I didn't even get stitches.
>
> I fell a similar distance headfirst onto sharp rocks when
> I was about ten. I have a very small scar over one
> eyebrow, thanks to the excellent work with butterfly
> plaster by a Spanish doctor.
I fell (or was pushed) from a 3 foot high wall when I was
about 6, and fell on my bonce. Fractured my skull. I blame
my parents and Eric Martlew for not making me wear a
playing helmet.
--
Keith Willoughby http://flat222.org/keith/ Generalísimo
Francisco Franco is still dead
Richard Bates <usenet01@artybee.net> said:
> In a similar vein to the Walking Helmets article in the
> BMJ(?) but even more daft^H^H^H^H vital.
*snip*
Fx: applause.
Don't forget the free isolation suits used to protect
children in the Great Outdoors from such nastiess as grazed
knees and biting insects.
Regards,
-david
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by
vBSEO 3.3.0
