Leaderboard

Would that be this seizure by any chance? http://www.shetlandtimes.co.uk/2013/08/21/two-jailed-for-three-years-and-nine-months-for-bringing-40000-worth-of-heroin-to-isles Doesn't really seem like a perfect example of the dogs proving their worth if that is the case you are speaking of, from the write up in the Times it would suggest that the dogs were along for the ride if they played any part in the seizure at all. Good old fashioned police work seemed to be the deciding factor in getting a result in this case. Would you say the dogs would be kept in service if they were to be funded from your annual budget rather than from charity, public and business funds? I am beginning to think that this thread within the topic is more about the perception of "value for money' with regard to the "dogs". Dogs against Drugs are more than just "dogs" - there are handlers and other pieces of equipment. The seizure of heroin late last year is a perfect example of this in practice - police officers and "Dogs against Drugs" working well together. Prior to the current position where the charity provides two handlers, two dogs and the associated equipment the police used to provide one handler / dog while the charity provided the other. Now that the community / charity provide a second handler / dog the police are able to devote the former police dog post to addressing another issue - in this case the post is allocated to the Public Protection Unit dealing with offender management. So, to answer your question - Yes if the money was all in the local police budget I would spend the same amount on the drugs dogs and a sign of that commitment is the marked Police 4x4 dog van. That is paid for from the police budget. However you are right to ask about value for money. Personally I firmly believe that this should be expanded to look not only at the drugs dogs, but also the police and all those involved in delivering addiction services. The question we need to ask ourselves is - if we're working to the best of our ability, is the situation getting any better?. While I can answer in relation to the police and drugs dogs side of the question I'm not sure if anyone from the agencies providing addiction services is in this conversation - maybe it is a question for another topic. I guess it is safe to say that you view substance misuse as an issue, so I'd value your thoughts on what should be done to address it? Angus

Just when you think things can't sink any lower in Shetland I read this. http://www.shetnews.co.uk/letters/3538-casual-racism.html I am almost lost for words. The only Gollywogs I ever knew were the peerie guys on the marmalade jars and it was nothing more than a peerie character. As a peerie boy I enjoyed looking for the different character each time a new jar arrived in the hoose. I think the dolls are kinda cute and am ower blyde that a peerie shop in Lerwick is selling them. And as for the allegation that there's an underlying racism in Shetland.... Honestly, I think some folk need to get a grip.......

From as's account the original complainant was 'threatened' more by the abusive reactions of Shetlanders living up to their stereotype. Your ire here is a case in point that when these stereotypes are arguably true, you can't recognise as such and laugh at yourself but become more defensive and insular. with attitude of 'what right does he have to come up here and tell us what we can and can't sell in our shops?' He has that right of complaint just as Mrs Leask has the right to sell dolls loaded with racist symbology. Not being 'fae Shetland' or, of course, not being white doesn't deny him that right.

Don't forget, they'll all need to be shagging sheep as well to ensure full stereotypical authenticity. Personally, I'd find that act, with, or without the sheep shagging, absolutely hilarious - I might even be tempted to bother caring that it was UHA time of year if I knew the entertainment was of that calibre. You see, at least some of us have the ability not to take life so seriously that we can't laugh at and poke fun at the stereotypes of ourselves, as we know how inaccurate and irrelevant they really are. Unlike others who are not even an offended party, but claim to be proxies representing an "alleged potentially offended party", but never do present quantifiable verifiable proof of those claims, that come over all indignant and butt-hurt at the slightest hint that something might just possibly could be construed as mildly offensive to a small portion of some minority were they to happen to view it in a certain light. Personally I find religion and government wherever it is in the world and at whatever level, and especially the ostentatious edificies erected and maintained in their "honour" to be nauseatingly offensive. I realise that I am probably in a minority of as few as no more than one in feeling this way, and even if there are more, they're keeping it quiet, so out of politeness and respect for others I keep my feelings to myself of wanting to raize every last one to the ground. I am also aware that human nature being what it is, regardless to how many times religion or government is obliterated folk cannot wait to replace it with the same but different, so it would be a pointless and unending battle anyway. You cannot sanatise the entire world so that nobody is ever offended by anything, anywhere, anytime, you would obliterate everything that sustains life before you achieved that. Compared to being killed or seriously injured, or being denied the right to earn a living and ending up begging on the streets because of the colour of ones skin, having your nose put out of joint slightly for a minute by the sight of a soft toy pales in to insignificance in comparison. As some General or suchlike said at some past time, "sometimes you have to choose which battles to fight to win the war", or words to that effect. Obliterating Golliwogs from existence compeletly IMHO will not make one detectable difference to racism, and from where I'm seeing the attempts to do so going, they are far more likely to encourage and perpetrate greater racism than at present. To be blunt, if anyone, regardless of colour, creed, religion or whatever, feels so "threatened" by nothing more than a certain design of ragdoll, that they cannot find within themselves a mechanism to ignore them, or learn to live with them, perhaps a few sessions of therapy would be of greater help to them than removing all trace of the object that affects them so. After all, treatments for sufferers of PTSD and phobias involve conditioning them to react less negatively to their personal triggers, not insist that all triggers are obliterated from anyplace they might be at any future time. Oh, and about your Hitler doll in uniform giving the salute - they exist. Google is your friend, numerous hits. Am I offended by it? Nope, quite the opposite in fact. One glance at it and I burst out laughing as it just emphasised what a ludicrous and deluded little man he was.

Have to say I sympathise with Trout's view, but at the risk of adding to the trøttel the debate reminded me that the first people of colour that most Shetlanders had dealings with in the old days were the Sikh salesmen who used to appear every summer selling drapery door-to-door. (I have a feeling they were students making a bit of cash in their holidays.) The interesting thing was that they were known as 'Packies' - which would seem pretty unacceptable to contemporary ears, but the fact was that the Scottish travellers who also sold clothing door-to-door were known as 'Packies' too. They were all called Packies because they carried packs. There's a little bit of metropolitan-centredness behind a lot of the assumptions in this debate, both the relatively sensible one here and the sometimes near-insane one in the Guardian. There's a slightly arrogant assumption that there's one acceptable standard and everyone should be educated to adhere to it. I would have thought that true tolerance would take account of cultural differences - we don't all have the same stories and we shouldn't assume that the rules we follow will be universal.

Perhaps we should abandon Trout's tasteful, inclusive, nuanced and subtle Swiftian satire and instead have an Up Helly AA skit where a crowd of gap toothed carrot crunching barefoot hick yokels in Fair Isle jumpers stare baffled and confused at a well dressed black person reading The Financial Times. The payoff being that when the stereotype islanders finally get over the miracle of the printed word and the 'funny coloured uncan man', the black person knowingly asides to the audience in a broad Shetland accent, 'whit's wrang wee dis folk, dere no right'

I know, those baby onboard stickers should be banned!

You would need to post the above in English, with correct capitalization and punctuation, then maybe we can talk Oh and by the way, £100 is small fry, the James Randi foundation will give you $1,000,000, yes that's six zero's if you can show proof of the "paranormal" Go and claim your prize, (or not I suspect)

The drugs dogs are a white elephant Suzanna, the majority of drugs found on the isle come from intelligence or tip off led busts, a drugs dog won't catch an unknown dealer unless they happen to cross paths while the dealer has a quantity of drugs on them and that's highly unlikely as a dealer will probably avoid going places you may find a drugs dog. Anyone wanting to get drugs onto the isle just has to put a little thought into how they go about it and the drugs dogs are made totally useless, using any type of air tight packaging or simply driving a car off the boat renders the sniffer dog useless unless the police recieve a tip off telling them who to target. Your money that gets thrown at the drug dogs would be far better spent on services to help those with drug addictions issues, and education of the younger generations to encourage them to stay clear of drugs in the first place, but that education has to be has to be well thought out as current plan obviously isn't working. And I'm sorry to say that your last sentence is a perfect example of how the current drug education policy doesn't work, it's tantamount to saying "don't do drugs, drugs are bad" without giving any reason why. Even the police admit that drink causes far more anti social problems than most recreational drugs do, there has been plenty of statements from the larger police forces down south stating that its easier to police a club full of Ecstasy users than a club full of drunks. You could maybe do a google search on Professor David Nutt, who was at one time the governments advisor on drug policy, he is very forward thinking on ways to eventually win the war on drugs.

It saddens me that as a small Island with very limited access, illegal drugs seem to be such an ongoing problem, how are they [the drugs] getting in here? And why aren't the drug dogs [that I support financially] Catching more dealers? It's my belief that illegal drugs lead to a lot [most?] of the other problems.

child drinking is an issue that needs enforcing. if we don't control problem drinkers when they are young we will have them as older folks.

Was a good evening for watching for sunspots :- http://i1207.photobucket.com/albums/bb479/beenister/sun2.jpg

I was out between 11 and 12 last night trying for some aurora pics. The long arc in the northern sky was very visible but there wasn't much in the way of activity at that point - the dancers wir restin I would need to get myself a wider lens to pick up the full panorama. http://i700.photobucket.com/albums/ww2/rasmie/Mirrie%20Dancers/DSC_0031.jpg http://i700.photobucket.com/albums/ww2/rasmie/Mirrie%20Dancers/DSC_0043.jpg http://i700.photobucket.com/albums/ww2/rasmie/Mirrie%20Dancers/DSC_0045NEF.jpg

The guy who did the petition would of had a seizure if he had gone to see the great exibition at the Shetland Museum on Shetland needle work, it has a quilt that is covered with golly wogs and very well crafted it is to. I bet 100% he is some one from sooth who has come up here and is hell bent on changing Shetland to fit his agenda.