Libel law is never going to be perfect or even close to. Yes, it would be awful to be libelled and have to prove a negative in order to get justice. But I prefer that possibility to the current situation. There's a reason for point 4 - the rich and powerful around the world know that British libel laws can be used to bludgeon their critics into silence. The truth or otherwise of said critics' claims doesn't matter next to the cost of fighting a court case which, due to our screwed-up burden of proof, the defendant is likely to lose.

Yeah, yeah. You need more straw there?

Erm, as a matter of fact I *do* blame Waco and abortion clinic bombings on Christianity - at least in part. Oh, that's not 'true' Christianity? Well, they say they're going on the Bible, same as all the others who profess themselves Christian - and short of a personal appearance by Jesus, we can't really know who's right.

So many Muslims think it's ridiculous too? Great, good for them. I never doubted it. But it doesn't necessarily follow that Islam is entirely blameless for what this poor women's going through.

Christianity, Islam, religion in general - the basic problem is the same; the glorification of irrationality. The idea that it's somehow *virtuous* to believe utterly in something for which there is not a shred of proof. It's high time humanity grew the hell up and stopped running its life according to the whims of its various imaginary friends.

Yes, I know that there is a lot of gun crime in Birmingham, and I'm quite sure that I've unknowingly been in the vicinity of people who were carrying weapons. Furthermore, I would say that my state of blessed innocence in the matter has a lot to do with the work of the thin blue line. I have no beef with the action the police took in this matter, up until the point at which they found there was no gun but took the man's biometrics anyway. (And even that I'd be a lot less unhappy about if it weren't so fiendishly difficult to get back off the database once on it. In my opinion, that decision shouldn't be in the hands of the police - it should be routine to destroy the information if its owner has never been convicted of a crime, and requests that it be done.)

What I was objecting to was Iain's implication that the Birmingham area was a lawless wasteland, as it seemed to be tied to his overly sanguine attitude to the database.

"Coming from the Birmingham area..."

I've lived in Birmingham for over ten years and never once seen a gun on its streets, or even a knife. If there are armed gangs 'running amok', they don't do it in any of the areas I frequent. Granted, it's a big city, but to read your post one would think the whole place is a crime-ridden danger zone!

I'm not nit-picking - this stuff matters. If people's fear of crime is overly inflated, that's a powerful weapon in the hands of the control freaks.

And I've got no intention of ever committing a crime either - but I still don't want my details on that database. It seems the platitude 'If you've nothing to hide you've nothing to fear' just can't be sufficiently debunked for some people...

Sadly, though, spouse abusers often don't fit the 'brain dead' stereotype.

"You never know, she could be the psychotic one, some strands of the female species are quite delusional at times."

Some strands of the *human* species are quite delusional at times. Try not to sound quite such a Neanderthal.

I always travel to the Post Office by bus or on foot. So, whilst undeniably more convenient, my licensing online this year saved a grand total of no carbon dioxide whatsoever. Indeed, given that I had to run my computer to do it, and there was undoubtedly some power-sucking hardware on the other end to make it all possible...

Shaky assumptions = statistics which are a load of hot air.

Orange has changed. After a lengthy period of more than satisfactory service, they pretty much blew all my accumulated goodwill last year, over a single incident in which they started charging me for a new service without authorisation. That in itself I could have lived with - accidents happen. What got my goat was a combination of factors including lengthy hold times, failure to cancel and refund the first time I asked, complete unhelpfulness when I tried to bypass the hold 'music' by contacting them via e-mail, a faulty web interface, the needless beauraucracy required to escalate the call beyond the front-line reps and finally the non-appearance of the apology in writing which I was moved to require of them before it was all over.

It all added up to an impression of utter contempt for me as a customer and I jumped ship for Virgin Mobile the moment my contract ended. So far, they've been a massive improvement.

The character set my teeth on edge, and I didn't find Tate's show at all amusing the one time I watched it. Worse, RTD will probably try to do funny things with her, and his sense of humour is just juvenile.

I guess I'm a glutton for punishment...

Rufus was completely out of line - and would have been even if there had been a 36-point, garishly coloured, animated - and properly-working - 'Download' link right at the top of the page. He should be ashamed of himself, and so should the people who have commented to support him. Anyone who works in a customer-facing role will get the occasional (or more than occasional) person who misses the obvious and ends up asking what seems to us like a stupid question, but it's our obligation not to fly off the handle at them, and not just because we want to keep our jobs. It's about compassion, too.

Yes, compassion. I'm quite sure that most people, when they get politely pointed at something they really should have seen for themselves, feel rather foolish anyway - and foolish in inverse proportion to how polite their inital query was. There's no need whatsoever to rub their noses in it.

Well, not unless they *then* go on to be jerks about it.