I knew I liked the French!


Well-Known Member
I've got a mate who says that ww1 and 2 were a big mistake because the true enemy of Anglo-Saxons is the French.


Well-Known Member
Particularly President De-Gaul.
He outlawed some of our English words, You could get a fine if you drive a "LORRY".
Can't even remember what the "Gaul's " name for said vehicle is ,(Gaul, is French is it not) .
Just one of many.


Well-Known Member
Plenty of animosity was evident between the Brits and the French when I was there in the 80's. Like "why would you Go there mate? Wogs begin at Calais" etc. Plenty of brit's live there, and seem happy enough. Better to advise the French you are not English, I found. .They do have a sense of humour also as long as you don't beat them at anything. Currently the way our country is behaving, I'm trying to acquire a new Zealand accent, just in case I go back there.. A few years back a Doctor in a Melbourne Hospital asked me what part of London was I from. My Mob came from the very North of England, On both sides in1860 OTA. but my "supposed" London accent puts me 1/2 way to the New Zealand one so there's hope. IF I go back. I actually found them generally most helpful and honest and never saw one inebriated. Nev.

old man emu

Well-Known Member
My action was taken pursuant to Section 100(b) of the Law Enforcement (Powers and Responsibilities) Act 2002 (NSW).
The section reads as follows:-
A person (other than a police officer) may, without a warrant, arrest a person if:-​
a. The person is in the act of committing an offence under any Act or statutory instrument; or​
b. The person has just committed any such offence; (my italics); or​
c. The person has committed a serious indictable offence for which the person has not been tried.​
You will note that in the present case, there was no detention after arrest, no initiation of any legal process. This is because the word "may" is used in describing the power to arrest. It is important to remember that the power to arrest is discretionary. Section 9(1) of the Interpretation Act 1987 (NSW) provides: (1) In any Act or instrument, the word “may”, if used to confer a power, indicates that the power may be exercised or not, at discretion.​
In R v Beaudry 2007 SCC 5, Doyon JA writing for the majority of the Supreme Court of Canada said, "There is no question that police officers have a duty to enforce the law and investigate crimes. Nevertheless, it should not be concluded automatically, or without distinction, that this duty is applicable in every situation. Applying the letter of the law to the practical, real-life situations faced by police officers in performing their everyday duties requires that certain adjustments be made… The ability – indeed the duty – to use one’s judgment to adapt the process of law enforcement to individual circumstances and to the real-life demands is in fact the basis of police discretion."​
The power of arrest may be exercised simply by calling for an action or activity to cease. Thus the words, "Stop! Move away from the computer." constitute an arrest and prevention of the recurrence of the offence.​
Ignorance of the existence of Orthographers no doubt leads some people to corral orthographers with grammarians.​
Last edited:


Well-Known Member
None of those. I'm referring to the French who are often accused of being drunks because they always have wine with meals. Not very clear the way I wrote it I must confess. I'm always getting called away for something, so I'm not checking my stuff enough. At least I know ONE person is reading my posts. That's encouraging. Nev
Top Bottom