• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Extinction Rebellion transport disruption from 17/04/2019

Status
Not open for further replies.

Kite159

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Jan 2014
Messages
19,228
Location
West of Andover
I wonder if the supporters of Extinction Rebellion even care about the number of police who have been taken off other duties in the capital city in order to attend their process of deliberate disruption?

Not just within London, but how many extra police have been drafted in from other areas to deal with them?
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Alanko

Member
Joined
2 May 2019
Messages
641
Location
Somewhere between Waverley and Queen Street.
ER have lost all my respect and support by the way they are behaving

They never had mine in the first place.

...the "don't have children" mantra I see crop up from time to time on Twitter is mad - and almost always made by men, too.

Usually white, middle class men as well. It makes me think that there is a deeper underlying motive that your regular ER crustie isn't aware of. Who benefits from a stalled UK population propped up by immigration, all acting quickly to remove any lingering sense of national identity?
 

DynamicSpirit

Established Member
Joined
12 Apr 2012
Messages
8,101
Location
SE London
Then there are battery planes, already viable for private jets up to 750 miles, and yes they exist to buy and are cheaper than jets!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-48630656

Larger planes, of 737 or A320 size, with 1500 mile range are not that far off either and well within 10 years.

Airports could cater for EVs, use EVs on site and tow existing jets to the runway saving huge amounts of CO2 emissions already today, if they could be bothered.

From the article you quoted:

BBC said:
The big problem with this is that 80% of the aviation industry's emissions come from passenger flights longer than 1,500km - a distance no electric airliner could yet fly.

I think you're being a tad optimistic if you think electric aircraft could solve aviation emission. Especially if you're expecting that to happen by 2025!
 

radamfi

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
9,267
Usually white, middle class men as well. It makes me think that there is a deeper underlying motive that your regular ER crustie isn't aware of. Who benefits from a stalled UK population propped up by immigration, all acting quickly to remove any lingering sense of national identity?

An increasing proportion of western women already choose to have childfree lives, something like 20%, despite the tremendous peer pressure to have them. Most of them do so without even considering whether it is good for the environment. That number would be higher if partners didn't pressure women into a tedious life of child rearing.

Unlike most other environmental choices, not having children doesn't involve making your life more difficult.
 

reddragon

Established Member
Joined
24 Mar 2016
Messages
3,146
Location
Churn (closed)
From the article you quoted:

I think you're being a tad optimistic if you think electric aircraft could solve aviation emission. Especially if you're expecting that to happen by 2025!

I think the critical word is yet. Already private planes, most business jets and some short hall could switch. Loganair are switching in 2022.

https://inews.co.uk/news/environmen...ine-route-scotland-loganair-flight-711-497112

An electric aircraft is being designed for essential inter-island airline services operated by Loganair

The short hauls up to 1500km could start the switch around 2025. Long haul? We will just have to do less of it! Aviation will never be able to make 0% in the next 20 years, or probably even 30 years.

There is a lot that could be done easily, like tugs to tow planes to / from the runway, cleaning up journeys to the airport. You have to start somewhere and the difficult stuff gets done last.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,272
Location
Fenny Stratford
An increasing proportion of western women already choose to have childfree lives, something like 20%, despite the tremendous peer pressure to have them. Most of them do so without even considering whether it is good for the environment. That number would be higher if partners didn't pressure women into a tedious life of child rearing.

Unlike most other environmental choices, not having children doesn't involve making your life more difficult.

Back once again with the child hatred! This is a load of codswallop.
 

radamfi

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
9,267
Back once again with the child hatred! This is a load of codswallop.

Why don't you ask the women who have chosen to be childfree? They probably don't "hate" children. They just see life without them as being preferable.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,272
Location
Fenny Stratford
Why don't you ask the women who have chosen to be childfree? They probably don't "hate" children. They just see life without them as being preferable.

Edit -I am not going to go into personal details and i cant be bothered talking to you, i will just say you are talking utter rot.
 

Geezertronic

Established Member
Joined
14 Apr 2009
Messages
4,091
Location
Birmingham
Why don't you ask the women who have chosen to be childfree? They probably don't "hate" children. They just see life without them as being preferable.

That is a small minority wouldn't you say? Are there any figures that can be referred to for the amount of women that have chosen to be childfree compared to women who choose to have children?
 
Last edited:

radamfi

Established Member
Joined
29 Oct 2009
Messages
9,267
That is a small minority wouldn't you say? Are there any figures that can be referred to for the amount of women that have chosen to be childfree compared to women who choose to have children?

Clearly most women have children at the moment but the proportion is falling for various reasons, notably improved education and emancipation. Even if a woman wants children she is not guaranteed to have them, because of a lack of partner or poor fertility.
 

DarloRich

Veteran Member
Joined
12 Oct 2010
Messages
29,272
Location
Fenny Stratford
XR has 3 aims and no policies other than acting in a non-violent way. Devolved groups, no hierarchic structure making it impossible to shut down or infiltrate.

Is that right? I am fairly certain that the Security Service could, very quickly, infiltrate this movement. In fact I bet they have already.
 

nlogax

Established Member
Joined
29 May 2011
Messages
5,368
Location
Mostly Glasgow-ish. Mostly.
Why don't you ask the women who have chosen to be childfree? They probably don't "hate" children. They just see life without them as being preferable.

Oversimplication of the truth, there. It's a little from column A and a little from column B. Don't forget that men also have some sway in this - there are a good many of us whom consider ourselves childfree and who underwent the medical procedure required to make it as unlikely as possible to become fathers. Granted the resulting practicalities are somewhat different, but the reasons are exactly the same. No desire to be parents, a desire to travel or live certain lifestyles, financial flexibility and yes, sometimes a dislike of children. On my personal part environmental reasons weren't at the forefront of my mind but it's certainly been a beneficial side effect, no doubt.
 

Geezertronic

Established Member
Joined
14 Apr 2009
Messages
4,091
Location
Birmingham
XR has 3 aims and no policies other than acting in a non-violent way. Devolved groups, no hierarchic structure making it impossible to shut down or infiltrate.

Given what I have seen on TV and in person, their protests are a mile away from non-violent. There is also a lot of anti-social behaviour and abuse that is not seen on TV. Any protests that involve arrests (and significant arrests) cannot be defined as non-violent.
 

reddragon

Established Member
Joined
24 Mar 2016
Messages
3,146
Location
Churn (closed)
Is that right? I am fairly certain that the Security Service could, very quickly, infiltrate this movement. In fact I bet they have already.

Standard infiltration process is to infiltrate the command structure, gain information on plans and confuse or thwart and stop. Basis is illegal actions can be shut down.

XR publish their official national plans, have no 'command' structure and leave it to the local groups to do their own things autonomously and 'wing it' as they go along. With there being hundreds of local groups many made up of groups of friends (who shun unknown outsiders), filled with sub-groups they have only limited potential of access. Success via chaos rather than organisation.
 

reddragon

Established Member
Joined
24 Mar 2016
Messages
3,146
Location
Churn (closed)
Given what I have seen on TV and in person, their protests are a mile away from non-violent. There is also a lot of anti-social behaviour and abuse that is not seen on TV. Any protests that involve arrests (and significant arrests) cannot be defined as non-violent.

The arrests are due to breaches of section 14 in 99% of cases. That is not legally defined as violent, which is why they just get released after a few hours.
 

reddragon

Established Member
Joined
24 Mar 2016
Messages
3,146
Location
Churn (closed)
What 'success', exactly?

If XR believe they have been successful, then they have whatever anyone else thinks.

Arrestables is a policy to overwhelm the system and to create legal challenge. They have had many legal victories due to a huge band of top end pro-bono lawyers.

The simple fact that so many are talking about it to them is a victory!
 

Kite159

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Jan 2014
Messages
19,228
Location
West of Andover
If XR believe they have been successful, then they have whatever anyone else thinks.

Arrestables is a policy to overwhelm the system and to create legal challenge. They have had many legal victories due to a huge band of top end pro-bono lawyers.

The simple fact that so many are talking about it to them is a victory!

So wasting more taxpayers money and the time of the police which could be spent on other things...

"Sorry Mrs Bloggs we couldn't investigate why your son was mugged at knife-point, as we were too busy baby-sitting an idiot dressed up as a broccoli"
 

Geezertronic

Established Member
Joined
14 Apr 2009
Messages
4,091
Location
Birmingham
Arrestables is a policy to overwhelm the system and to create legal challenge. They have had many legal victories due to a huge band of top end pro-bono lawyers.

So the normal people of London and other places suffer because these people with their rich backing want to cause civil uprest and public order offences. I am sure that will appeal to the masses... not
 

reddragon

Established Member
Joined
24 Mar 2016
Messages
3,146
Location
Churn (closed)
So wasting more taxpayers money and the time of the police which could be spent on other things...

"Sorry Mrs Bloggs we couldn't investigate why your son was mugged at knife-point, as we were too busy baby-sitting an idiot dressed up as a broccoli"

In context, 69000 people a year die in the UK due to pollution of which around 44000 are attributed to diesel pollution, versus 100 ish stabbed to death.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,745
Location
Yorkshire
In context, 69000 people a year die in the UK due to pollution of which around 44000 are attributed to diesel pollution, versus 100 ish stabbed to death.
Therefore, the solution is to disrupt public transport, is that your logic?
 

Aictos

Established Member
Joined
28 Apr 2009
Messages
10,403
I think the critical word is yet. Already private planes, most business jets and some short hall could switch. Loganair are switching in 2022.

https://inews.co.uk/news/environmen...ine-route-scotland-loganair-flight-711-497112



The short hauls up to 1500km could start the switch around 2025. Long haul? We will just have to do less of it! Aviation will never be able to make 0% in the next 20 years, or probably even 30 years.

There is a lot that could be done easily, like tugs to tow planes to / from the runway, cleaning up journeys to the airport. You have to start somewhere and the difficult stuff gets done last.

XR could always practise what they preach instead of coming across as the hypocrites that they are with a Do what I say, not what I do for example:

One of the founders taking a 11,000 miles flight to rediscover herself, never told XR that did she?
A actress deciding that instead of protesting in LA, she had to fly 5,000 miles to London to protest...

Then you come across the idiots in court who are charged rightly but claim they're not guilty of the offence they were charged with!
Gluing yourself to a plane is a public disturbance offence and rightly so should be charged as such, to claim in court that you're not guilty shows how arrogant XR is!
 

reddragon

Established Member
Joined
24 Mar 2016
Messages
3,146
Location
Churn (closed)
Source please

I am lucky enough to have access to documents not yet in the public domain

This is some of the older research that has been published

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/air-pollution-smoking-deaths-compare-a8818851.html

Air pollution responsible for more deaths than smoking

It is also known that there are significantly higher life shortening rates due to air pollution yet to be published. For example the current best figure is that you lose 1 hour of life for every 10 miles driving a diesel car, that is 1000 hours of life per year at 10,000 miles pa in city driving, about half that rate outside of populated areas.

I will not drive behind a diesel vehicle, I refuse to let them out of a side road instead letting cleaner small petrol cars out to provide a buffer. Large diesel SUVs are the worst followed by other commercials.

You might want to have a shorter life, I don't.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top