19th September 2013

My local police have sent out some information about doorstep crime and bogus callers.  I am sharing it with you so you stay safe.

Bogus callers also known as distraction burglars trick their way into people’s homes to steal money and valuables while the householder’s attention is elsewhere.  Most callers are genuine and mean you no harm but bogus callers can often seem very plausible and will try to fool you.

Follow this advice and keep yourself safe and secure at your door.

  • Close and lock the back door and any accessible windows before you go to the front door.
  • Bogus callers often work in pairs. One of them will try to keep you talking at the front door while the other tries to get in through the back door or a window.
  • Look through your spy hole or window.
  • Try to check who a caller is before opening the door.
  • Don’t let any caller pressure you into making a quick decision – if you are unsure‚ do not open the door.
  • Before you answer the door, put your door chain on and keep it on while you check the callers’ identity.
  • If you want to check with their company, keep the door chain on‚ tell the caller you are going to call their company and close the door.
  • A genuine caller will not object to you leaving them on the doorstep and closing the door while you confirm their identity‚ even if it is raining.

If the caller says they represent an electricity‚ gas or water company or another organisation such as the council or a charity, follow the checklist below to check that a caller is who they say they are.

  • Ask for the password
  • If you have set one up with the company, use it.
  • Does the caller have an identification card?
  • If the caller does not have an identification card‚ ask the caller to go away and close the door. If the caller persists‚ dial 999 and ask for the police.
  • If the caller does have an identification card, ask to see it:
  • Examine the card to see if it looks genuine.
  • Check the expiry date – is it still valid?
  • Does the photograph on the card match the person at the door?
  • Check the photograph is the original – has anything been stuck over it?
  • If you want to call their company, do not use the telephone number on the caller’s identification card – if the identification card is not genuine then the telephone number on the card will not be genuine either.
  • Find the telephone number in your phone book, on a bill or call directory enquiries.
  • Ask the company to confirm they have sent someone out to you. They will ask you for information about the identification card, what the caller looks like and may also ask for the date of birth or password of the caller.
  • If you need to get more information from the caller, leave the door chain on at all times.
  • If the company does not know the caller, dial 999 and ask for the Police.

Report any suspicious doorstep callers to the Police immediately Tel 999 noting description(s), accent, how the caller is dressed.  If you notice any vehicle(s) report the vehicle registration number and/or make, model, colour

Stay safe

18th September 2013

I really must do this more often.

Excellent week at Lib Dem Conference

Two speeches – one on taxation and the other on the NHS.

Protect your iphone

Iphone Alert Feb 2013 – This came from my local police contact.
With many Iphones now in circulation and also on the criminals hot list for items to be stolen, here is a quick guide to allow you to secure your iphone and protect all of your personal data held on your device.

One of the most valuable sources of personal information that can be gained are bank details and passwords.  These can easily be gained from stolen mobile phones if they are not protected.

Always ensure your phone has a phone lock as your first line of defense.

1. Select Settings
2. Click General
3. Select Restrictions
4. Set a Restrictions passcode
5. Click Enable Restrictions
6. Look for Deleting Apps and toggle the switch from On to Off. This will mean that no one can delete an app such as Find My iPhone without your Restrictions passcode
7. Scroll down the list of options until you reach the Privacy section, here you’ll find a link to Locations Services, click it
8. Select Don’t Allow Changes. This will mean it is impossible for a robber to disable the Find My iPhone application from broadcasting your GPS. You will now need manually to approve all new apps to access your location data.
9. Go back to the main Restrictions menu and select Accounts, changing this setting to Don’t Allow Changes. This makes it impossible for a mugger to disconnect your iCloud account that connects to Find My iPhone.
10. If your iPhone is stolen, it is only going to transmit its location for as long as a SIM card is inserted and is active. You may therefore wish not to inform your mobile provider in the case of a robbery until you have met the police.
You should also register your mobile serial number on Immobilise so that should it be stolen it can be highlighted to all police forces across England.
 (You can register any item that you own that has a serial number on this site.)

Notification of a scam from local police

Fraud details

A message comes up on your computer screen stating to be from ‘Metropolitan Police Central E-Crime Unit’. The message states that illegal activity has occurred on the computer and £100 must be paid within 24 hours for the computer to be unlocked.

(It could be any Police Force stated in the email.)

Please do not pay any money to these scams, and if you are affected, please report these incidents to Action Fraud on 0300 123 2040.

Alternatively, follow this link: www.actionfraud.police.uk to see a full list of current scams.

Thank you for your continued support.

Further details.

The Metropolitan Police have received a number of complaints from members of the public concerning an ongoing Internet scam.

 Whilst using their personal computer the victim will visit a web site and click on an apparently genuine link.

 However, the link is not what it purports to be and clicking on it causing a particularly nasty piece of malware known as ‘ransomware’ to be downloaded onto the victim’s computer.

 This apparently causes the victim’s operating system to lock-up, rendering it unusable.

 A screen shot is then displayed to the victim, headed by the Union Flag and the Metropolitan Police logo. It contains a message to the user, purporting to come from the Metropolitan Police, stating that the victim has been caught visiting web sites containing extreme pornography or material related to terrorism.

 The victim is then told that to unlock their computer they must pay a penalty of £100 to the Metropolitan Police through the UKASH online payment system. 

26th January 2013

26th January 2013

One has to ask the question are some people really fit to be parents.  Having just walked back from town I stood at a busy junction, where snow and ice lay on the ground.  I pressed the button to stop the traffic and be able to safely cross the road.  On the other side of the junction were two young mothers with two prams and four children under the age of five on foot. [I am stood on corner of Brayford Way and A57; they are stood on corner of A57 and road opposite Brayford Way, called The Avenue].  The traffic flow in the area is slightly complex in that the traffic on Brayford Way is three lanes one way and two lanes the other.  On the three lane side there is a filter on the left hand lane up The Avenue to where the red vehicle is.  To add to the situation there are currently road works on The Avenue so stopping vehicles coming down The Avenue, which is an incline away from the A57.  Right so you now have the picture; add to this there are a few other people stood at the junction also waiting for the green man.  We have cars stationary in the right and middle lane of Bradford Way but moving in the left hand lane when suddenly with a gap of no more than thirty yards in the traffic these two young mothers start to cross the road, pushing their prams and the children on foot following behind.  Needless to say as a car came onto Brayford Way in the left hand lane as it reached the junction suddenly found two of the young children, who were straggling behind their mothers, in the middle of the road.  Fortunately the driver was able to stop and sound the horn of the vehicle.  At this point one of the mothers realised two of the children had not crossed the road and remonstrates with the driver.  Why were two of the children so slow you may ask?  Though I guess you might also be asking why the devil did the mothers cross the road in the first place and not wait for the green man.  Anyway the reason the two children were straggling was that in the road works was a cuddly toy.  This was retrieved by a gentleman walking down the Avenue.  But then to compound the matter one of the mothers runs back across the road to collect the toy again forcing another car to take evasive action.

So why do I tell this story.  Well it is very worrying that in modern society we appear to have a number of people who think that everything revolves around them.  So rather than waiting a few more seconds for the green man these two mothers put their children’s lives at risk.  Working, I presume, on the assumption that any vehicle coming towards them will stop or they would beat it across the road.  Imagine if the vehicle had been a 40 ton lorry and it had hit ice on the road rather than a family size car.  As it turned out the mothers did beat the car across the road but two of their children did not.  It was only either good fortune or the skill of the driver that a serious accident was avoided.  However, worse, it can be argued what was the message they have given their children “that it is acceptable to cross the road without waiting for the green man”.

At this point one has to consider are these two women fit to be mothers and why is it they either are willing to take the risk or cannot see the risk they put their children in.  I believe modern society has lost the art of parenthood for many people.  Why because it has become all too easy to put a child with the electronic nanny and this allows the parents to concentrate on themselves rather than bringing up their children.  Electronic nannies; be that the television or computer games; do not have any morals.  They are all driven by profit.  They put the responsibility on the adult to limit a child’s access to them.  However, if the adult’s moral compass is either spinning wildly or pointing in the wrong direction how can they possibly know what is the most beneficial decision for their child.  Further more and more children today have a television, computer, and other electronic gadgets in their bedrooms – so further cutting them off from their parents.

Research for the Literacy Trust in 2004 showed that young children who watch too much television have impaired language development.  Not surprising when programmes like “tellitubbies” are being produced. Interestingly the research by Dr. Robin Close [http://www.literacytrust.org.uk/assets/0000/0429/TV_early_years_2004.pdf] further suggested children watched more television in poorer families where parents had little education.  The research also does not recommend television for children age two or younger and for older children no more than one to two hours of educational [and I stress the word educational], non-violent programmes per day.

In Great Britain there are over 16 television channels dedicated to pushing out non-educational programmes to children.  However, in the USA; and rarely would anyone cite the USA of doing something right; where there are many more channels aimed at children Congress passed a law as far back as 1990 that required all television companies to produce three hours a week of “core” programmes.  Core programmes being of educational standard and with limited commercials and a clear demarcation between programme and advert.  Highlighting web links is also limited. Admittedly there are still some parents who use the electronic nanny but at least the children are then “forced” to watch something of educational value.  Here in Great Britain we have had commercials about road safety but it appears that in the case of these two young mothers that information failed to lodge in their brains.

As a society have we lost the art of communication?  Is everything so focused on the “meism” culture that young parents no longer are able to talk through how to bring up children with their parents?  Is society so splintered that turning to grandma or granddad and getting advice and support is not possible.  I believe it is time we cut down on the likes of the electronic nannies and started to spend on purposeful and practical pastime facilities.  We have all heard about the “hockey mum” and seen what she does.  Whilst I am not suggesting that only mothers put the interests of their family, and most importantly their children, ahead of her own we do need families where mum AND dad spend time with their children doing things that have no meaning but are beneficial.  Whether that is playing in the park, going swimming, sitting around the table playing a board game or having a meal together WITHOUT the television being on.  Sadly modern society appears to believe that it can only function with an electronic devise telling them what to do.  Let’s hope there is not a power cut because far too many people, young and old alike, in modern society will not know what to do.

19th January 2013

19th January 2013

On Thursday evening I joined about 300 other people in the Drill Hall in Lincoln for the BBC programme Question Time. It was an interesting evening with much of the programme being about the High Street and Europe. However, before the programme was recorded there was a “dummy” question about obesity and food. As some-one who is not exactly skeletal in size the debate was of interest as were the various issues that were bounced around. One of the main ones was that in modern Britain parents could not get or afford nutritious meals when out and about resulting in their only option to go to the burger outlets. Points were made about how this should be seen as a treat and if family meals at home were nutritious then the occasional less healthy meal would not be a bad thing. The argument was then put that people today do not know how to produce a nutritious meal at home and some in the audience said they could not afford it. Weigh up the simple cost of a bag of crisps against the cost of any apple. The latter if eaten slowly takes longer and is more filling and now-a-days is often cheaper. Today (Saturday) I went out shopping for lunch tomorrow and for £4.50 got a chicken; vegetables for under a £2 and few other bits and pieces which with the various bits and bobs in my culinary cupboards at home will enable me to produce, in no small part thanks to the Hairy Bikers, a full roast along with a dessert. I also noticed that if I had just purchased the chicken breasts they would have cost me around six pounds. This makes the whole chicken cheaper in the long run because any left over meat will go to make a curry on Monday. Now I am no domestic goddess as the photograph proves, also just because we had the kitchen done up does not make my cooking any better. However, it is very easy to produce a wholesome meal for a family of four for under a tenner. It is all down to education. This may well lead to howls and shrieks of I cannot afford a tenner I have to do it for under a fiver. This got me thinking. In my local co-op I asked the young lady serving the cost of 20 cigarettes at the same time I looked at the price of alcohol. Twenty cigarettes I was told are priced at over eight pounds and she even told me one company produces packets of one hundred for over thirty two pounds. So when a parent tells me that they cannot afford to spend a tenner in the local market or Lidls but they are stood there with a cigarette in their hands I have to ask exactly who are you kidding. Add to this I walk to my local co-op, good exercise for the dog (yeah right). If we are going to really address obesity then we need to address the way people see food. Trips to fast food outlets should be an infrequent treat not a daily occurrence. I have seen people using the local fast food emporium; just down the road where I live; as the place to get their Sunday main meal. We often have queues of cars spewing out of the drive through lane; blocking access to the rest of the shopping centre; full of children and waiting to buy yet another fast food to be eaten on the run. It is fairly obvious that this is not a treat but a way of life. Also often appears to be a way of silencing the children in the car. Cooking itself can be an experience for children. Imagine the sights and smells that mixing ingredients from scratch and how children can then make small changes to the basic recipe and still be healthy – substituting blackberries for raspberries or stuffing a lemon up the a*s* of a chicken. How can we expect a child to learn about good food and diet if the parents, who lead by example, head for McDonalds rather than make their own meals? When my children were young their treat was McDavids home made burgers into which all the ingredients were known, rather than a trip to McDonalds. No horse meat in those burgers. Also the burgers only had bread bases, the tops were open piled up with a variety of items – I wonder if that is where the Hairy Bikers got that idea from – then some salad or baked beans on the side add a few chips and hey presto a healthy fun meal. Matthew (when he was alive) used to make pizza and was proud of the fact that his veggie sister would eat it because one side was veggie and the other carnivore based. Try buying that in a shop and knowing what has gone into it. He learned those skills from school and being allowed to experiment in the kitchen at home. Both his sisters can cook and produce different styles of meals but which are wonderful. Lunch recently with one of my daughters was home made soup, using she told me the remains of her vegetable box, and home made fresh bread. She makes bread much better than me. As I freely admit I am not threadlike in physique but I do ensure I get fresh fruit and vegetables meeting my five recommended portions a day. I have cut down on things like pork pies – oh I so miss them – and cakes. It may not result in me becoming skinny but I have found I am saving money and I am told I am looking healthier. But more importantly I enjoy the cooking. The kitchen is becoming my domain. Admittedly it gets me out of the washing up. I get pleasure for seeing empty plates and hearing comments as people come into the house – “oh something smells good”. Now tell me does the meal in the photographs not set you taste buds alive and it cost me less than a tenner.

16th January 2013

16th January 2013

It is -80c outside the hospital as I arrive.  I am rushing to get inside from the warmth of my car to the warmth of the hospital as fast as I can without slipping on the icy footpath.  As I travel the 100 yards or thereabouts I pass the hospital’s “smoking station”. A place set up because since 1st of July 2007 it has been illegal to smoke in public places.  Since then we have seen the growth in “smoking stations”.  As I pass this one there in the dark at -80c is a nurse; no coat, no jumper or cardigan; smoking.  If ever there was an image of how addictive nicotine is that has to be it.  She is on what is probably her only 20 minutes break during her shift and she has gone out into the freezing cold night to get her fix of her chosen drug.

Now I know the smokers amongst you and even some non-smokers will be saying “sanctimonious old git” because I am a non-smoker – well actually an ex-60 a day smoker, though in fairness I probably gave away ten or so a day to patients.  I could get through six plus on the drive to work in London and another six on the way home.  But it is not the fact people smoke that concerns me, hey it is a free world and if you want to fill your body with chemicals that can and do kill go ahead.  No the thing that bothers me is that nicotine is so addictive that people will go to any length to get their fix and once hooked struggle desperately to stop.  I know from when I smoked that at 3.00 a.m. when I was out of cigarettes and woke up wanting one I would drive to a vending machine and buy a packet.

I remember being told once that pure nicotine crystals if ingested would kill you.  With this and all the other risks why do so many, especially the young more start each day and become addicted.  Furthermore how can we stop them from starting?  Perhaps you may say should we stop them?  It can be argued that once hooked nicotine will drive the user to their next fix more readily than any other drug.  It has been argued that as the most addictive substance in the world; nicotine has a 96.5% addiction likelihood; it should be banned.  Studies show while alcohol, caffeine, and cannabis are the most commonly used drugs, it is nicotine that has the highest rate of reinforcement (continued use) and dependence (difficulty with cessation).   The top five “addictive” drugs are nicotine, crack, Methamphetamine (smoked), Crystal Methamphetamine (injected) and Heroin.  But nicotine is the only “drug” in this group that can be legally purchased and this is what makes it dangerous.  Equally of the five four are or can be smoked.  Smoking gives the user of any drug the fastest hit of their substance of choice – about 8 seconds.

The government tries to get us to stop.  It pushes up the price – well that never stopped me.  They run adverts on the television – we ignore them like many adverts because we are in the kitchen making a cuppa. They force manufacturers to hide the brand – when I smoked a cigarette was a cigarette Sovereign and Players No 10 it did not matter so long as it was a cigarette.  They raise the age you can buy them – I started aged 11 behind the Health Authority buildings with Dave Agar (sadly he is no longer with us).  None of that worked.  My father even showed me cancerous lungs – in one eye and out the other.  What got me to stop – being offered a choice, the cigarette or the mortgage.  The mortgage won.  So what choices can we offer people?  And what can we replace nicotine with?

They say sex is a great if not the greatest driver of humans, particularly men.  Though having watched both modern and not so modern women it appears to drive them just as much.  Just say George Clooney, Nicholas Cage or try Luke Benward and Justin Bieber for the younger ones and look into their eyes, the signs are the same as if you say Ursula Andress, Samantha Bond, Drew Barrymore, Avril Lavigne or Lindsey Lohan to a man.  But what if you add a cigarette to the picture which has now developed in your mind’s eye.  The picture to the right shows a young lady who most men would see as attractive, everything is as it should be.  But then look again and think if she were standing before you right now looking into your eyes what would you see?  Her long blonde hair flowing over her shoulders or the curves of her body accentuated by her limited clothing or would all that be lost by the smell of her ashtray breath as she exhales and says “Hello darling”.

Over the years, since I gave up smoking, I have come to see the cigarette as a barrier.  When I smoked it was a bridge, “have you got a fag mate” it opened up a conversation – unless you were in New York where asking for 20 fags got you some very strange looks in the 1980s, perhaps not today anyway – and allowed you to develop friendships or get over a problem, share information, even gain the attention of a patient, the list was almost endless.  But now things have changed and the cigarette and all its associated smells and sights puts a cloud between you and beautiful things.  Yet people continue to smoke and new smokers join the band daily.

Should we be making it even harder for the smoker to get their fix or should we be treating them as some-one who is an addict and providing them with treatment?  It is a question that will run on for many years to come.  However, to the beautiful people out there putting that cigarette to your lips; in my eyes; it moves you from a beautiful person to person; your beauty is lost to me in a cloud of smoke.

It is still -80c outside and I am willing to bet some-one is stood at the smoking station outside the hospital without a coat or jumper or cardigan but with a cigarette to their lips.

14th January 2013

14th January 2013

As I was tootling along the Lincolnshire lanes today watching the snow flakes fall like little stars between the leafless trees my mind wandered to the 20 children and six adults who were needlessly killed in Sandy Hook, Newtown, Connecticut just before Christmas.  I thought how those little children would never see such beautiful sights again.  Never get to feel the softness of the snowflake on their nose or the tingle of flakes as they settle on their hair.  Then Wayne LePierre’s words crossed my mind about how it was the fault of video games makers, the media, the film industry just about anyone except the person carrying the gun that they died.  He demands the right to bear arms, says it is his Constitution right – a Constitution that is only a couple of centuries old and was drawn up in the time of violence and civil war – to bear arms.  One has to ask the question would LePierre have said the same things if one of the 20 children at Sandy Hook had been his grandchild or one of the teachers his daughter or his wife.  I guess not because his views are driven by an ideology that is stuck in the America of the Wild West that saw the Constitution as the only way to build a society.  In a time when politicians lacked the insight to realise that by allowing people to carry a weapon of mass destruction it would in reality destroy their original desire that of their right to protect themselves.

If LePierre’s argument of “The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun” worked then gun crime would have died out in America years ago when they armed their police officers and when they put armed guards on the banks, airports, office buildings, power plants, courthouses and sports stadiums he listed with great gusto.  But it has not.  The death rate continues and does not appear to be stopping any time soon.

No the way to stop gun crime is to remove the weapons from the streets.  For the United States of America that does mean a major culture change.  LePierre went on to say quote They’re our kids. They’re our responsibility. And it’s not just our duty to protect them — it’s our right to protect them. You know, five years ago, after the Virginia Tech tragedy, when I said we should put armed security in every school, the media called me crazy. But what if, when Adam Lanza started shooting his way into Sandy Hook Elementary School last Friday, he had been confronted by qualified, armed security?” unquote.  But surely the first thing Lanza would have done on arrival at Sandy Hook School would be to shoot the security guard and then gone on his killing spree.  No the answer is to remove the right to bear arms and ensure that anyone who illegally carries a weapon knows that they spend a very long time reflecting on their actions behind bars.

Let us be realistic if we are a civilised society; and we claim in UK and USA to be civilised societies; then the answer to a grievance is as Churchill in the White House in 1954 is reported to have said “jaw jaw is better than war war”.  We will never know what actually drove Lanza to do what he did.  Furthermore there will be others who for whatever reasons believe the answer to their problem is go out and make a dramatic statement.  What we as a society have to do is help them make their statement in a way that does not physically hurt others.  Banksy made and continues to do so dramatic statements and whilst some may argue that they financially hurt some people they do not physically hurt them.  The outcome of his actions has made him world renown and raised the profile of many causes.  But more importantly if before you read this blog I had asked you two questions:

1 – who is the satirical street artist using subversive epigrams to get his message across and

2 – who entered a school in a Connecticut and shot teachers and pupils

would you have been able to name Adam Lanza as the answer to the second question.  I doubt it.  However, most of you would have guess Banksy as the answer to question one.

So it befalls to all of us and that includes Wayne LePierre and the NRA to put down our guns and teach our children the right way to address the pressures in life.  We must train them how to talk through a painful problem, a distressing thought or a moment of anger.  We also have to educate them to learn the difference between reality and fantasy.  How the latter can be fun but has to be controlled and limited to consenting adults and how the former has consequences that can cause you and others life long pain.

So LePierre and Co at the NRA are you willing to risk that the next school killing in your county;  and sadly I am sure there will be one;  may include your child or grandchild?  Or would you rather show you are man enough to recognize that the world has moved on from the days of Wyatt Earp and give up your right to bear arms.

10th January2013

10th January 2013

Here is a quick thought for tonight’s blog.  

If the world is getting warmer due to climate change how come I now have to wear woolly bed socks at night to keep my feet warm?

Surely if the world is getting warmer then I should be wearing less not more in bed at night.  But I am finding that it is colder at night.  This is not just a winter thing because I also was wearing them in the summer months.

I know the weathermen/women tonight are telling us snow is just around the corner but the snow does not get into my bedroom.

The only thing John Prescott got right when he was in government was the Kyoto Protocol agreement, which sadly the USofA has not ratified.  If places like China, Germany and Fiji can sign up and ratify how come the UsofA is unwilling to ratify.  Is this another example of words from the UsofA but little useful action.  A bit like their comments over Europe as well. 

However, getting back to my bed socks, is it in fact that the climate change we are experiencing at present is a reduction in temperature around the world or should I just blame my cold feet on the Jet Stream coming from America?

9th January 2013

9th January 2013

It is amazing what chaos an overturned lorry can cause.  Heading out to a meeting of nurses in Nottingham tonight at about 3.00pm I passed an overturned lorry on a roundabout just outside Newark.  The Highways Agency was busy clearing up the mess and cargo from the lorry.  It lay on its side like a beached sperm whale.

Five hours later and driving home I discovered traffic backed up all over the place. Coming from Nottingham the cars and lorries were stationary all the way to the Mansfield turning, some three miles from the accident.  Even when I took detour through Newark and around the villages I ran into stationary traffic.

At the accident cite the men were busy still clearing the chaos of the overturned lorry.  However, they had now had to close half the roundabout on the major artery out of Lincolnshire.  This was causing total traffic turmoil.

It does beg the question “how safe are our roads?”  Why had the lorries; it turned out there was a second lorry there; turned over?

Increasingly we are seeing more and more potholes and broken carriage ways, with the length of time before damage is repaired lengthening.  Country Council and Highways Agency do not appear to be making repairs.  However, in middle of next month and in March I am sure we will see loads of road closures as repairs are hurriedly carried out to spend the budget before the end of the financial year.

Why is it that public services all appear to be unable to budget so that spending is balanced over the year?  At the end of each financial year managers start spending in the knowledge that if they do not some government department or other will take it away from them.  Surely if the money was spent as the potholes appeared this would provide road users with a better service.  This would also save motorists the cost of repairs to their wheels and cut down the number of accidents.

However, potholes for cyclists are even worse.  Whilst a pothole to a car is an inconvenience most of the time – to a cyclist it is an almost guaranteed accident if they hit it or worse are forced into it by a motorist.  Motorists pay billions of pounds a year to use the roads.  It is time that money was spent on roads.

I finally got home, after a detour of ten miles and an extra 45 minutes on my journey time.  Thank goodness I have a comfortable car – I dread to think what it would have been like in a small car.