alchresearch Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 I could be misremembering, but I thought he'd closed it first. You're right: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/isle_of_man/7052486.stm The Top Gear presenter has been criticised after he fenced-off part of his land that is popular with ramblers. He said he put the fence up near his Langness lighthouse home as people were staring into his kitchen window. Someone then cut and uprooted the fencing, and lobbed it over the cliff! The guy is a moron and a liar though. In his column last Saturday he wasted an entire section going on about his daughter's 18th birthday and how he employed a team of people to ensure it was safely managed. And then went on to say that someone cut themselves on a broken glass but the safety people couldn't administer first aid due to "health and safety". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 "Clarksojn the Showman, who makes loads of money from crappy TV shows which are fikkiwed avudky by the brain dead? Are we talkimg aboutthe dame guy or arethere treally that manx brain-daed people in the world? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 It's quite likely that a team of 'event managers' wouldn't do first aid, they may well not be qualified. Rupert - what has happened to your keyboard (or your fingers) you're posting gibberish. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shanes teeth Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 "Clarksojn the Showman, who makes loads of money from crappy TV shows which are fikkiwed avudky by the brain dead? Are we talkimg aboutthe dame guy or arethere treally that manx brain-daed people in the world? Have you got youself a new phone or something? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Location114 Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 No it isn't selfish at all i value my privacy and i dont see why they cant just use the footpath thats what it there for. They maybe walking on public property but still abit of thought for others wouldnt hurt anyone. Why would it be a travesty its a shame when someone dislikes a situation moans and groans about it and does nothing about it its a good thing to see someone fighting against something they dont agree with. Well yes your right i did make a mistake but the mistake was believing people would use a footpath that is dedicated for that. Because both you and Clarkson bought your properties with public property/right of way already in place. To then try to change that because of your preference is the very definition of selfish. No, they're still walking on public property. No it isn't. It would be a travesty if he won. So it's not private then, and it wasn't private when you bought it, and so you made a mistake if privacy was important to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted April 30, 2012 Share Posted April 30, 2012 From reading his telegraph rants he doesn't seem like someone who is in favour of human rights laws, or is it just 'human rights laws gone mad'? For a good example of an obnoxious turd-for-brains, who used to moan about the human rights act and then complained about his human rights being violated, look no further than Jon Gaunt (ironic name for a lardy arse). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 No it isn't selfish at all i value my privacy and i dont see why they cant just use the footpath thats what it there for. They maybe walking on public property but still abit of thought for others wouldnt hurt anyone. Why would it be a travesty its a shame when someone dislikes a situation moans and groans about it and does nothing about it its a good thing to see someone fighting against something they dont agree with. Because simply not agreeing with something doesn't mean that it should be changed, that's pretty obvious really. If you buy property that has a public right of way or public land next to it then complain about that after the fact then I have no sympathy and apparently neither does a court. Well yes your right i did make a mistake but the mistake was believing people would use a footpath that is dedicated for that. The mistake was assuming that they wouldn't walk on land next to your window where they were allowed to do so. I'm sure that the majority of people do use the footpath. It sounds like you'd prefer it if the land next to your window were turned into your garden... Presumably without you having to pay for it though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Location114 Posted May 1, 2012 Share Posted May 1, 2012 You are correct it doesn't mean it should be changed but it does mean i should and do have the right the challenge something im unhappy with. If im being brutally honest i couldn't care less wether you have sympathy or not for me its not something i will lose a great deal of sleep over i do not wish to attract sympathy i just think that if i realistically thought there was a chance i could change it i would. The mistake was assuming people would walk on the path rather than walk on the grass. If the garden could be changed into my own personal garden i would be more than happy to pay for it subject to circumstances. Because simply not agreeing with something doesn't mean that it should be changed, that's pretty obvious really. If you buy property that has a public right of way or public land next to it then complain about that after the fact then I have no sympathy and apparently neither does a court. The mistake was assuming that they wouldn't walk on land next to your window where they were allowed to do so. I'm sure that the majority of people do use the footpath. It sounds like you'd prefer it if the land next to your window were turned into your garden... Presumably without you having to pay for it though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted May 2, 2012 Share Posted May 2, 2012 You correctly think that there is no realistic chance of changing it, Clarkson should have had the same thought process and not wasted everyones time with his selfish behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Location114 Posted May 3, 2012 Share Posted May 3, 2012 I may think he was an idiot to think he may win but i do still think he should have challenged it. You correctly think that there is no realistic chance of changing it, Clarkson should have had the same thought process and not wasted everyones time with his selfish behaviour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.