snakey1

I'd rather not think of it that way if it means thinking i've had sex unprotected or not with men

I would agree with you on that kleinboet but what do you expect from a government run by the scottish(blair,brown,reid) and the welsh(prescott) and as for sharing parliamentary space with former IRA terrorists what next invite Al-qaida to join in just so we can have their point of view as well. Just look at most official forms nowadays when you have to declare your nationality there are boxes for irish,scottish and welsh but not english sorry you'll just have to be white european instead, is this because tony has sold us and our rights down the river to the EU

when i was a union rep one of the other reps( a paid up member of the labour party)once said to me the only difference between labour and the conservatives was that the conservatives stabbed you in the front and I tend to agree with him. as for tony blair and that grinning harpy of his the sooner they're gone the better mind you i don't think gordon brown will be any better or david cameron if the conservatives were to get in next election.I think we're stuck between a rock and a hard place at the moment.

Welcome to the madhouse drumgerry, boots wise i wear 5-10 canyoneers great boots very comfortable with great grippy & thick soles, not cheap At approx £60 a pair but i think they're well worth it, compass wise i have a silva 58 but have yet to fit it to the yak, i am using the gps built into my fishfinder at the moment but wanted the compass as a safety back up.

Good luck with getting a shark mark , i'm trying for tope this year and after that who knows i think blues are a definite possiblity, porbeagle i would be wary of as i don't personally agree with deliberately targeting juvenile porgies in the 80 -150lb bracket and i think trying to tackle a 200lb plus shark from a kayak would be too much for most people although fair play to you if you want to try its just not something i fancy.

I hadn't heard that air bubbles from scuba sets provoke a feeding response from sharks infact from what i've read sharks don't actually like the air bubbles given off by scuba sets and there were some experiments in the past using curtains of air bubbles as a shark deterrent however i don' think they were particularly successful. Still as you say i think the jetskiing fraternity are more likely to be a hazard than white sharks off the UK coast.

true you are a hell of a lot more likely to drown. i personnally think although its likely white sharks do visit our coast occasionally the chance of becoming ones lunch is negligable so i wouldn't worry, your more likely to get a good gumming from passing basking shark

Divers don't actually look like seals but when they are on the surface they become targets for one of the white sharks favourite feeding patterns that being to ambush and attack from below prey at the surface and as such they are constantly looking out for objects silhouetted above them. They are also very curious and will inspect unusual items they find, one way of doing so is to give said item an exploratory bite. As for seals not being yellow, this is true but it was thought that yellow was a colour that sharks found highly interesting hence it getting the nickname "yum yum yellow". There are no biological reasons why white sharks shouldn't be found off the coast of the UK and there have been a few reported sightings of them over the years but no confirmed captures.One of the nearest white shark captures was off La Rochelle in france in 1977 which when you consider that white sharks tagged off Australia have been recorded in South Africa means that the distance form La Rochelle to the UK isn't really very far for a white shark to travel. Perhaps the only reason we haven't seen them so far is because they are such a rare species anyway. Mind you if you did come across one you'd have a hell of a time hauling it up on your kayak! get your picture in the papers at the least.(probably in the missing person listings )

Have to agree, i wouldn't p*ss in their mouths if their teeth were on fire, unless i'd been drinking petrol first that is, they're a right shower of sh*te the lot of em.

i posted a comment on mr millibands blog yesterday but it has yet to appear, as they check all the comments before posting maybe my suggestion that sea angling licences were like suppositories and as such he should know where to stick them may have offended his taste and stopped it from appearing.

Off chasing fish from a kayak in tywyn amybe bass maybe tope who knows.

Apparently he was the only person to ever enter parliament with honest intentions though

For maximium safety in more remote areas i've looked at personnel EPIRB's with GPS but even carrying one of them i would still take flares you just can't be too careful when the sea's involved imo and to be honest an inshore flare pack doesn't take up that much room even in a kayak.

To answer your questions kleinboet yes, yes, because i don't fancy getting fined by the police(whilst in the back) and for my own safety(whilst in the front) yes, i would so there is no why not. the 747/microlite comparison was to show up why differences between licences and safety regs for different vehicles is not discrimination which you said it was, do you think that because someone held a licence to fly a microlite it is discriminating against them not to allow them to fly a 747(consider the amount of collateral damage each would cause if crashed into a busy shopping centre for instance as opposed to one crashing into another) .you said"why one rule for motorists and another for cyclists, thats discrimination!!" i could have stated the obvious and maybe i should have and said it can't be discrimination as have you ever tried fitting a seat belt to a bicycle! but i chose to illustrate the point in a different way. Anyway it is plainly obvious that you and i will never agree on this subject so as its getting boring going around and around i think we should just agree to disagree.

Tripping over and banging your head while walking can be fatal so why not wear a crash helmet all the the time(as I said i used to wear a polystyrene bed pan but the times i nearly came off were at relatively high speed,25mph + ,and on busy major roads in which circumstances i don't think they would have helped much) you can't wrap people in cotton wool, after all fire extinguisher systems, roll cages,fireproof suits and crash helmets would increase car drivers safety(motor racers have them for this reason) but no-one is calling for those to be made compulsory for drivers. In old classic cars that do not have seat belts fitted(it became law in 1967 for all new cars in the UK to have front seat belts fitted) it is not compulsory to either fit or wear seat belts though said vehicle cannot be used for carrying children(and if you do fit seatbelts it is compulsory to then wear them).Having different laws regarding car safety and bicycle safety is not discrimination kleinboet, if it is then having a difference in safety law between HGV's and cars is also discrimination and yet i don't hear you calling for the motor car driving laws to be tightened to match the laws regarding HGV drivers. Its like the difference between being able to fly a micro light and a 747 do you think both pilots should have the same licence and safety regs? Its not discrimination just common sense.

found this link to the actual story looks like the photos are real after allwhale story

As i said in another thread when the coastguard stopped me and my mate off tywyn a couple of weeks ago one of the things they asked if we had with us were flares. they seemed to think it was a good idea to have them and i would agree with them on that and with overruns opinion that the more ways you have to raise the alarm the better. If your worried about them being around your kids lock them in the boot of your car when your not using them or somewhere similar the kids can't get to easily.

i think its sensible to wear safety gear but i don't think it should be made compulsory by law (well maybe for children but not adults) afterall how much nannying do you think is necessary.at some point people will have to start making decisions and being responsible for their own actions. its not compulsary for motorcyclists to wear hi-vis gear so why cyclists? it makes sense to but then its down to individual choice. 2 or 3 people on a bike made for one is probably illegal i would have thought and so should be prosecuted. Not all cyclists enjoy taking risks that is why i packed in cycling to and from work as i considered after several near misses with pillocks driving cars as though they were blind(including one at approx 40mph on a busy dual carriage way where the dick in question decided to take a side turning to the left from the outside lane cutting across in front of me in the inside lane without looking while i was doing about 40mph and missing me by about 12 inches) that it was just to dangerous even with safety gear(little polystyrene bed pan on the head and hi vis waist coat,although i don't think either would have made any difference coming off at 40mph) to cycle on the busier roads at rush hour.

i believe the first tar stabilized macadam roads were laid in the 1830's thats 60 years before karl benz patented the first petrol driven car so perhaps roads might not still be cobbled if it weren't for motor cars. Ferret to answer your questions from your post on the 17th of april(sorry it took so long) yes i think to cycle on any major road (not necessarily housing estates were speed limits should be kept to a minimum for all vehicles for pedestrian safety) you should have to complete a road safety/awareness course(a licence is perhaps too strong a word but going on some sort of course i think is fair enough). yes i think if you intend to cycle regularly on busy roads you should have third party insurance. yes i think bicycles should have some sort of basic safety checks done (thats only common sense if you cycle on the road on a bike with poor brakes etc your pretty daft and asking for trouble anyway). no i don't think wearing full safety gear should be made compulsory it is down to personnel choice as your going to be the one who gets injured in most accidents anyway. no i don't think bicycles should be taxed. we're taxed far too much as it is. no i don't think bicycles should be nationally registered because i don't think it is feasible or practical. finally i don't think its ok for cyclists to ignore the laws of the road the same as i don't think its ok for car drivers to. cyclists are subject to the laws of the road the same as motorists(dangerous driving/riding etc) and as such should be prosecuted if they are caught breaking the law the same as motorists should be.If the police however chose not to enforce the laws governing cyclists that is down to them not the cyclists.

Actually alot of the people i used to know used to carry their handguns(unloaded in accordance with the law) in a concealed shoulder holster rather than a locked case (unless they were carrying several handguns) their idea was if you carried a shiny metal lockable case it made you a target for mugging as the thieves knew you were carrying something valuable.

Thats funny i held a class 1 Firearms certificate for over 9 years, carried guns and ammunition regularly to and from the gun club and never shot anyone, I guess i must have been doing something wrong.

Just as a side note me and a mate got stopped the other week by the aberdovey coastguard in their RIB, they asked if we were carrying VHF radios and flares(we were). they said that as the number of kayak anglers was on the increase they were doing random safety checks to make sure they had all the right safety gear. they asked how the fishing was and then went on their way. They were polite and pleasent at all times and it was good to know they were out and about even on a sunny calm day however i have a feeling if we'd been out there without radios, flares and PFDs our reception might not have been so pleasent(and deservedly so in IMO). my only wish was that had stayed around a little longer and checked on the eejits on the jetskis who came within about 10-20 yards of us as they flew past on way to somewhere beyond the horizon.

cheers guys at least i know now what he was.

does anyone recognise this ugly little spud? caught him a week ago off tywyn he was about 4 - 6 inces long with a face only his mother would love(i like his woodland camo look though). i think he might be a sea scorpion but i'm not sure. any of you guys have a positive i.d for me.

Sorry, your right corydoras, i cocked those figures up well and truly i hold my hands up normally i do research my statistics a little better thanks for correcting me. Kleinboet i neither accused you of using the phone while driving or said that all vehicles should be banned from the roads,you claimed that you reported anyone you saw breaking the law(meaning i assumed, that this included anyone breaking the law whilst driving as this is what the posts were concerned with not that you were driving while reporting them) and i said that if you reported all the motorists you saw breaking the law whilst they were driving you would spend most of your day on the phone.I've just come back from wales and i saw dozens of cars exceeding the speed limit and quite a few using mobile phones,drinking or eating while driving if i was to report them all i would never have been off the phone this is the point i was making. Rabbit mentioned banning cars from the road in one of his posts (although i don't think he was serious) ,in my original post i stated that i thought that anyone under 25 shouldn't be allowed to drive a car but should first be made to ride a motorcycles first as i think that this would make them more considerate and observent drivers when they became old enough to drive a car. i realise that this country could not function without cars and lorries and generally i have nothing against car drivers but i do think that they should clean up their own house first before throwing mud at other groups (be it cyclists or motorcyclists). Yes there are some truly terrible cyclists out there as there are some lousy drivers however as i stated before, generally if a cyclist has an accident on the road with another vehicle(be it his fault or not) he is the generally the only one physically injured however if a car driver does he is rarely the only one injured. anyway to get back to the original theme of this thread i still don't think bikes should be taxed for using the road and i don't think registering or licencing push bikes would be feasible or would work well if it was, people drive cars today without valid licences and get away with it if you were to licence and register bikes what makes you think it would be any different. a lot of people would obey the law but a some wouldn't.