SPITTING IN THE STREET COURT CASE

@Elegran - "Bet you didn't stand on your hands to pee up a tree!"

You would definitely win that bet...

@Petra - surely if they are spitting bright red juice that's unlikely to be tobacco - sounds like betel nut.

I personally find dog poo underfoot much more nauseating and the people who allow their dogs to do so equally so. Spitting is not something I am aware of around here although I do remember instances in the playground in my last school. Yes, it is anti-social behaviour, so is leaving litter or food (and who takes any notice of that if the rats in our cities are anything to go by) not to mention drunken vomiting outside pubs and clubs. Chewing gum which sticks on your shoes combines the foulness of litter with that of spitting - as it has been chewed.
Zero-tolerance always sounds reassuring to the chattering classes but I am less impressed by focusing on "soft" targets as the police often seem to do. Do they have the resources to follow this policy along with doing the rest of their job? Theft/violence/mugging/sex crime/ criminal damage - if I had to prioritise, I don't think spitting would be at the top of my list either. Doesn't mean I condone or approve, but could it be a wheeze tactic to improve the prosecution statistics.

Unless it somehow defaces the pavement...

I agree. I don't understand why some posters seem to think spitting in the street is no big deal...

As most people would never dream of spitting, littering, allowing a dog to foul, dropping cigarette buts or other litter, why should we have to put up with the filthy habits of a few socially disgusting individuals? More power to Waltham and hope it encourages other councils to follow suite.

Reported BB.

It means can't be arsed to deal with you!

From the Huffington Post:

'Launched in July, the campaign targets "enviro-crime" including spitting, litter, urination, dog mess, cigarette butts and takeaway litter and enforcement officers can issue fines of £80.'

It seems as though Waltham Forest Council is having a general zero-tolerance crackdown on anti-social behaviour, not specifically on chewing-tobacco spitting.

'Not biting' appears to be the phrase 'du jour' of a certain group of posters. Roughly translated it means' you've made a really good point that I'm not able to refute'

It was only this lunch time when I was coming home from the supermarket and boy about 16 spit casually, just in front of me. He saw me looking at him and I told him not to spit. He was surprised but didn't attack me or swear or anything. I'm sure he didn't know it was wrong or just 'not done'

I'm glad those others were fined but wonder if it is against the law in Germany where I live. Must find out.

Not biting Absent

Aka Please don't try to patronise me.

I know what I wrote ... so no need to get your knickers in twist. Nowhere did I say someone approves and you know that. So let's not take this up a level dear Absent and then accuse someone else of that.

Aka

I said: Why is there so much shouting on this thread when everyone is in agreement about the nastiness of spitting in public?

You replied: Absent not everyone is in agreement.

Doesn't that imply that there are those who approve of spitting?

Btw What sort of opportunity do I not want to miss? Are we heading into personal insult territory now? If so, let's stop.

glammanana a classic post

Hey ho Absent please remind me where I posted that someone approves of spitting? I of course didn't say that, but then you wouldn't like to miss an opportunity...would you?

Aka So who has posted to say that they approve of spitting in public?

Ugh !! spitting is so disgusting but I can bet your life both of my boys have done it at one time just not in my presence or they would have got the back of my hand,I have to admit when I read the story about these young men I did think "poor you for getting caught" (not that I approve of what they did) the Grandmother of one of them said he was a nice boy who caused the family no trouble and went to college but unfortunatly he couldn't be in Court on the day of sentencing as he was on remand in a young offenders institution for another offence he was charged with.

Ah, but was it really nothing to do with the opposite sex, feetle? Were peeing contesta not either? Did you know that males pandas wanting to impress an ovulating female will back towards a tree and walk their back feet up it, then pee as high up as they can? when a female passes that tree, she measures who has peed highest. He is clearly the biggest, strongest and most agile of her suitors, so she chooses him.

Bet you didn't stand on your hands to pee up a tree!

I know it was always fun to see who could spit a cherry stone furthest - still is! But I can't say I ever took to spitting per se.

Having actually been a 14-year-old boy, I can aver that sitting on a wall and seeing who could spit furthest was not a crude attempt to attract the attention of the local birds... it was similar to that great game of Who can pee highest?

I don't like spitting in myself or other people. But I can't see that it is a subject for moral outrage or the use of police time - unless of course someone is creating a public nuisance by spitting at people, or spitting herbal substances all over the pavement...
I mean how near the top of police priorities in N London do you think this should be? And how would you feel if your hypothetical clueless grandson got a police record for spitting?

Jess

I wouldn't have a clue how do that . Put a link up that is, not spit.

If they make Khat illegal then they should most certainly ban chewing gum. I suspect that chewing gum must make a far worse and more permanent mess on our pavements.

Where's J0?