Roll up and get Your Blue Badge Here

[Vespa]

I didn't say I couldn't come up with them, I said I couldn't be arsed to go through the research again. Because of the prejudice and narrow mindedness, it's really not worth starting or even contributing to threads at the moment on here, it's just turns into a merrygoround of duplication.

I'm not narrowminded to evidence, why not just show the research you've seen for widespread abuse?

It's officially around £1.6billion a year, according to another 30 second google.

Give it up, you could plaster the thread with one hundred links and the denial would continue.

At the end of the day, ideally all handicapped people should be able to take advantage of the scheme, but various inhibitors means that will never happen. The latest idea will cause resentment, a shedload of problems and issues and will end up a disaster.

A few people on here throwing their arms up in outrage and accusing others of not caring about handicapped people won't change owt.

The 800,000 blue badges account for £1.6bn in fraud? I didn't know they were printed on sapphire.

I'm just going to assume the research doesn't exist.

[Zambo]

Yeah if you say so. It's all made up by those who hate the handicapped. Euthanise the lot of them and pour all the money into something worthwile like straight pride.

[Vespa]

Yeah if you say so. It's all made up by those who hate the handicapped. Euthanise the lot of them and pour all the money into something worthwile like straight pride.

Cite the research.

[subsub]

Yeah if you say so. It's all made up by those who hate the handicapped. Euthanise the lot of them and pour all the money into something worthwile like straight pride.

Cite the research.

Ol' Zam getting tied up in knots even more than Pet did in his D-Day post

[Vespa]

Yeah if you say so. It's all made up by those who hate the handicapped. Euthanise the lot of them and pour all the money into something worthwile like straight pride.

Cite the research.

Ol' Zam getting tied up in knots even more than Pet did in his D-Day post

There are some very valid reasons people can't quote research they claim exists to support an opinion:

1. It doesn't exist.
2. It does exist but its a secret
3. You have it, but you obtained it as a member of a hacking collective and don't want to expose yourself to law enforcement.
4. The dog ate it

[Zambo]

Yeah if you say so. It's all made up by those who hate the handicapped. Euthanise the lot of them and pour all the money into something worthwile like straight pride.

Cite the research.

Ol' Zam getting tied up in knots even more than Pet did in his D-Day post

Ol Zam never gets tied up in knots Subs, you should know that by now. I just like to encourage posters not to be lazy and seek out things for themselves. It's educational. I have given examples in two posts with indicators where to go, and that should be plenty even for supporters from the left to build on. Go and get it and report back. I'll mark papers later.

[subsub]

Yeah if you say so. It's all made up by those who hate the handicapped. Euthanise the lot of them and pour all the money into something worthwile like straight pride.

Cite the research.

Ol' Zam getting tied up in knots even more than Pet did in his D-Day post

Ol Zam never gets tied up in knots Subs, you should know that by now. I just like to encourage posters not to be lazy and seek out things for themselves. It's educational. I have given examples in two posts with indicators where to go, and that should be plenty even for supporters from the left to build on. Go and get it and report back. I'll mark papers later.

You're the one posting erroneous Daily Mail stories.
I'd say the onus is on you to back them up, given that you started the thread.

[Zambo]

Yeah if you say so. It's all made up by those who hate the handicapped. Euthanise the lot of them and pour all the money into something worthwile like straight pride.

Cite the research.

Ol' Zam getting tied up in knots even more than Pet did in his D-Day post

Ol Zam never gets tied up in knots Subs, you should know that by now. I just like to encourage posters not to be lazy and seek out things for themselves. It's educational. I have given examples in two posts with indicators where to go, and that should be plenty even for supporters from the left to build on. Go and get it and report back. I'll mark papers later.

You're the one posting erroneous Daily Mail stories.
I'd say the onus is on you to back them up, given that you started the thread.

Whatever I post, you and your mates will deny it, so what's the point. I've listed, I've linked, and so has Roy Twing, yet I'm still asked the same questions.

It's Father's day, I deserve some pampering rather than pander to a load of militant and radical lefties on an internet forum.

[Vespa]

I've linked

Where what post number I'll go and read it.

[Roy Twing]

So someone required to provide enough proof to show they gavd a mental disability is akin to fraud and tax evasion? Good yo see your sneery vindictiveness is alive and kicking.

You know, I was actually reading a few of your posts earlier, and yet again wondered if I'd judged you harshly, and then you go and post something like that.
I've no idea what you think I meant, but I was just trying to say that usually, when it's mentioned how much tax money is defrauded by benefit cheats, someone will mention that it's dwarfed by tax evaders.
Back to ignore I guess.

[kancutlawns]

No, no need to ignore but if you do, that’s your choice.

[subsub]

Back to ignore I guess.

Only wanting to read the views of those who agree with you?
Why do that?

[Roy Twing]

Back to ignore I guess.

Only wanting to read the views of those who agree with you?
Why do that?

I don't mind anyone disagreeing with me, obviously, - it's what debate is about.
That poster though, if you had the time and inclination to do so, if you checked on previous instances, you would see always, after a few civil posts with me, reverts to personal insults.

[kancutlawns]

Back to ignore I guess.

Only wanting to read the views of those who agree with you?
Why do that?

I don't mind anyone disagreeing with me, obviously, - it's what debate is about.
That poster though, if you had the time and inclination to do so, if you checked on previous instances, you would see always, after a few civil posts with me, reverts to personal insults.

You really need to forgive and forget Roy. It was one post which I’ve used intemperate language against you in I don’t know how long. Sometimes if one poster uses the sort of inflammatory speech that another poster takes exception to, the other poster will use similar speech in return. That’s just life. I talk to others on here whose politics I may take exception to and vice versa but really, we have to let go. Life’s too short to hold grudges on an anonymous forum.

I extend my hand to you so we can end this animosity and I hope you will do the same. And I mean this with utmost sincerity.

[Roy Twing]

Back to ignore I guess.

Only wanting to read the views of those who agree with you?
Why do that?

I don't mind anyone disagreeing with me, obviously, - it's what debate is about.
That poster though, if you had the time and inclination to do so, if you checked on previous instances, you would see always, after a few civil posts with me, reverts to personal insults.

You really need to forgive and forget Roy. It was one post which I’ve used intemperate language against you in I don’t know how long. Sometimes if one poster uses the sort of inflammatory speech that another poster takes exception to, the other poster will use similar speech in return. That’s just life. I talk to others on here whose politics I may take exception to and vice versa but really, we have to let go. Life’s too short to hold grudges on an anonymous forum.

I extend my hand to you so we can end this animosity and I hope you will do the same. And I mean this with utmost sincerity.

I've no grudge with you, genuinely.
I just have my views on certain topics and it seems to me that you appear to find them abhorrent to the extent where, it appears to me, you resort to over the top insults.
I won't alter my opinions for anyone, but if you genuinely want to debate to try to make me see your side, however aggressively, I'm more than happy to do so.
I will debate with anyone as long as extreme personal insults are avoided.
I know the above sounds a bit formal and pompous, - it's not meant to be, - bottom line is that I'm happy to end the animosity with you, - call me anything you want if you can back up the accusation with facts and I'll be happy - it looks like we'll always be at the opposite side of most political and social debates, and I guess neither of us will see eye to eye, but if we can avoid being personal, I happily accept the olive branch.