Yet another thread for the purposes of awarding a cockpunch


#5432

Yes,have helped out on quite a few,i’m partial to the pissed stained plywood around the bog,with ideally stubborn lino welded on top


#5433

We have a very good, regular plumber, but he was booked up, and my wife needed the job done.
Local company, lots of vans, lots of work in London. DISASTER!!


#5434

I helped my mate do his when he bought a Victorian terrace. The soil pipe was cast iron and too long for the new bog to couple to. I was the one with an angle grinder so I got to cut it to the right length.

Ahh, the heady aroma of fresh cut cast iron and roasted shit.


#5435

the cast iron soil stack was the very reason we paid someone to do ours. Even then his apprentice cocked up the basin waste.


#5436

Sir Christopher Chope can have one for blocking the Upskirting Bill from going through. Cunt.


#5437

His wife probably wouldn’t let him ruin their fun :roll_eyes:


#5438

Me for getting involved in shit about which I know nothing!

I joined the station World Cup sweep and drew Morocco. I have no idea if that’s good or not :thinking:


#5439

Not.

Believe me, NOT


#5440

Bugger :pensive:


#5441

Put it this way, Iran beat them this afternoon…


#5442

OK :face_with_hand_over_mouth:


#5443

Own goal too.


#5444

The dream is still on…


#5445

To be honest, that was my first reaction. But there’s more to this than meets the eye (there has to be really - how on earth could anyone object to this FFS). Chope’s problem is that he hates ‘flabby’ undebated legislation. This would have gone through undebated. He and a few of his mates have made it their mission to object to pretty much all of this stuff. He is not in favour of upskirting (or, at least, not in favour of keeping it outside the law).

I was surprised that it wasn’t already illegal. If I’d spotted anyone doing it I’d have been calling the police straight away. The obvious charge is voyeurism, which is illegal. But under English law voyeurism is restricted to activity when the victim is on private property (usually their own). Presumably the idea is to stop people who accidentally snap someone cavorting in their pants on the beach from being put on the sex offenders register. But the critical differences are that people wearing skirts have actively made an effort to keep their underwear private. And people poking cameras up them have actively made an effort to invade that privacy. In this case no magistrate is going to fail to see that the perv has committed voyeurism. So the Scots have simply expanded their definition of voyeurism to include this sort of thing. Job done. No new Bill required. The Statute Book kept lean and fit.

VB


#5446

Presumably also including inspection of what a Scotsman keeps under his kilt…


#5447

:scream::face_vomiting::face_vomiting::scream:


#5448

Funnily enough that was Mrs VB’s conclusion. “As long as it’s just girls being molested, historically no-one has cared. But when a man’s prowess is threatened then that’s been a big deal since time immemorial.”

I had to point out that getting an historic plate camera onto the end of a selfie stick was enough a challenge that upkilting wouldn’t have been much of a problem way back when.

VB


#5449

…usually by females, of course

and maybe the odd dog


#5450

that he’s an egomaniac attention-whore who is happy to abuse his position to put his own dogma in front of the safety of this country’s citizens.

Hopefully he is currently discovering that he isn’t as clever as he thought he was.


#5451

How did he vote on Brexit?