Isn't...
Isn't normal background noise around 50dbs?
Loud sex a human right, says loud sex woman
A Tyne and Wear woman whose raucous lovemaking earned her an ASBO and multiple cuffings will declare in court that the order is a violation of her human rights. Caroline Cartwright, 48, of Washington, was dragged before magistrates back in April for five breaches of a noise abatement order requiring her to turn down the volume …
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 10:47 GMT Anonymous Coward
Human rights
I would guess that the neighbours' right to sleep takes precedence.
I once had a room in an otherwise quiet house next to a loud and somewhat insane female. Strangely, I didn't find her grunts and moans particularly disturbing: I tended to wake up when she started, then go straight back to sleep again. It's strange how some noises are so much more disturbing than others. If she'd grunted and moaned in a slightly different way, perhaps I would have been disturbed by it. You can't really measure the annoyance value in decibels, so I don't know how courts are supposed to decide in such cases.
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 10:47 GMT Steven Jack
Rights with responibilities
I think what this woman fails to understand that her rights do not override those of the people around her. Those db levels aren't just a bit loud, they are very very loud indeed.
It's depressing to hear that some people can be so selfish and show such utter disregard for the quality of life of their neighbours.
-
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 10:49 GMT davefb
oh dear
might sound funny, but my dad and step mum had this problem as well with a neighbour being loud .....
they moved eventually, obviously it wasn't just the loud 'banging' but having to listen to it during breakfast with my grandma round was apparently somewhat embarrassing.
perhaps she might like to consider that 'not having to listen to her' is also a human right ?
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 11:08 GMT Nigel 11
Soundproofing needed!
What else can I say?
I once lived in a Barratt box. The wall between my bedroom and my next-door neighbours' was made of paper, or so it seemed. It was most embarassing to hear every intimate detail of their failing marriage that happened while I was trying to fall asleep.
These days I live in a Victorian flat with a proper double brick wall between me and nextdoor. It works.
Someone buy that couple a few boxes of high-grade acoustic tiles and a double-glazed window for their bedroom!
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 11:08 GMT Drefsab
doesnt sound to bad if you ask me
Looking up some tables online (http://www.unesco.org/education/educprog/ste/pdf_files/sourcebook/module18.pdf) it would suggest at worst at 49db she is not as loud as an extractor fan, and is quieter than a fridge which is rated at 44db most of the time. Tbh if my neighbours complained that me and my missus's moments were heard at levels quieter than my fridge running id tell there where to go.
Maybe that scale is wrong but it certainly doesn't make this issue seam very serious and certainly not deserving of an asbo. Id put my TV on instead while making love as that's rated at higher than her most extravagant readings.
Paris well because we all know she's done some screaming :P
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 11:08 GMT Subban
I think she has a point...
>The kit recorded noise levels of between 30 and 40 decibels, "with the highest being 47 decibels".
Given a quick google shows that:
60 dB = conversation, dishwasher
50 dB = moderate rainfall
40 dB = quiet room
Given the recent years weather its more likely she is late because of the pitter patter raindrops keeping her awake than her neighbour. And that equipment measured 30db on one occasion.. Ye Gods, that is apparently...
30 dB = whisper, quiet library
If only we all had neighbours so stealthy!
Regardless, I don't think you can always help being a little vocal during sex unless you are trying to deliberately restrain from making a noise, which fair enough sometimes has to be done, but perpetually seems a bit unfair, sex should be a time when you can let go and enjoy it. within normal parameters (No screaming in agony while your other half whips you etc)
Love icon, because the neighbour needs to be getting some of her own.
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 11:08 GMT Storm Cloud
not so noisy
While I probably wouldn't want to be living next door to them, the levels are probably more annoying than disturbingly loud. Even 47db in blow normal conversation levels which can be 50-70db. Rainfall, a breeze or a refrigerator is rated at 50 db. Levels measured at 30db would not be much above background levels, although obviously night time is when things are quieter.
Maybe the neighbours are just not getting any action themselves.
-
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 11:13 GMT Jason Bloomberg
@ Steven Jack
"I think what this woman fails to understand that her rights do not override those of the people around her".
But do the rights of those people around her override her rights ? That is the crux of the case.
Sure, as Disco-Legend-Zeke says, she could install sound-proofing, but equally so too could her neighbours, and after all they're the ones who have the problem ( other than the artificially created one of the ASBO itself ).
Ultimately it's about whose rights trumps others' and there's no clear-cut answer other than by way of mob-rule, and there are plenty of arguments that mob-rule is not necessarily the right way to go.
Why should this woman be punished for something she has no control over ?
If it is accepted that her neighbours have a right to not be offended or nuisanced by her love-making moanings then where do we stop ? What if it wasn't her moaning that neighbours did not like, but her colour, her disability, her lifestyle choices ?
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 12:01 GMT Anonymous Coward
@g e
Might not be very loud but I'm guessing the 30 - 40db is a point measurement though a wall which would make it fairly loud on the otherside of the wall.
Even so I'm sure you would find having a constant whisper/converstation in your ear annoying after a time.
Maybe the answer to all this is to record a session and play it back though the wall to her. Her right to have noisy sex, our right to return the noise to the owner.
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 12:01 GMT Adam Salisbury
47 decibels?
Both my stereo and TV hit 50 when in normal use and you can't hear either of them outside, methinks the neighbouring prudes are suffering from a bout of inadequacy! Mind you imagine the reaction should she lose and have to tell HR she got ASBO'd for excessively noisy sex, that's gotta carry some bragging rights hasn't it?
Maybe only round 'ere then!
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 12:01 GMT Paul 4
40dBs
is quight loud in the dead of night. Just think how loud that dripping tap sounds a night, when it is in another room, and that is about 30dBs next to the tap, and this is twice as loud.
I imagin it would be very annoying. All they have to do is get some propper sound proffing installed.
I used to have a couple who would be just the same living next door to me. Is is a nightmare.
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 12:01 GMT Stu_The_Jock
It's not that hard.
Simple fact of the matter is that in the UK there is legislation on noise between 11pm and 6 or 7am.
IF she refrained from loud sex during those "quiet hours" it would have been fine, unless it became extremely excessive or continual.
Having had a downstairs neighbour that had screaming arguments with her sister, and told her to "F*** off out my flat" at 3am one morning, then denies there was ANY noise when faced with facts, and argued that she could do whtever she liked in her own flat, I can appreciate that sometimes it's not pure volume level but attitude.
Believe me, when a neighbour plays music that you can hear over your own choice of listening material almost the entire time they are in the property, it's not all about volume. BUT between 11pm and 7am, volume rules are stricter, and enforced more firmly.
<step off soap box and relax>
SO SO SO glad to not live ina flat in London now . . . gotta love nice peaceful Norway !
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 12:01 GMT Muscleguy
Type of noise matters
We are attuned to pay attention to voices, so a voice is more disturbing to sleep than say an equally loud fridge motor, its how our brains work. Coincidentally last night I awoke in the small hours and became aware of voices. They were beyond the range of being able to hear words, I was just aware that somewhere, probably the neighbours 30m away, someone was having an unquiet conversation, not even shouting (I was too drowsy to be bothered to look out the window for whose light was on).
This conversation I could only barely hear was enough to wake me from a deep sleep. Yet I bet noises equally loud if not louder (cars for eg) had intruded into my bedroom and left me blissfully unaware.
I agree that 49dB is not loud, unless you take into account it was in someone else's bedroom AND was a vocalisation. It must have been much louder at source. Her partner will be deaf soon.
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 12:01 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re : Jason Bloomberg
Perhaps you'd better re-read your comment again.
Last things first - "If it is accepted that her neighbours have a right to not be offended or nuisanced by her love-making moanings then where do we stop ? What if it wasn't her moaning that neighbours did not like, but her colour, her disability, her lifestyle choices ?"
Her colour and disablilty are things that she could not change. And thus are rightly protected against discrimination. Her lifestyle choice is also protected against discrimination. so I feel that this paragraph is totally out of order.
++++++
"Why should this woman be punished for something she has no control over ?"
In my (albeit limited) experience, people, men and women, do have control over their volume. Lovemaking or not.
++++++
"Ultimately it's about whose rights trumps others' and there's no clear-cut answer other than by way of mob-rule, and there are plenty of arguments that mob-rule is not necessarily the right way to go."
Well given the fact that she's causing a disturbance which affects people outside of the bounds of her property, this is fairly clear cut case. She should find a cure for the problem.
Also given the fact that a number of people have complained about this problem, and it has been measured according to environmental health guidelines, then does her 'rights' outweigh the same 'rights' of many others? I would suggest not.
++++++
"Sure, as Disco-Legend-Zeke says, she could install sound-proofing, but equally so too could her neighbours, and after all they're the ones who have the problem ( other than the artificially created one of the ASBO itself )."
Yes the others do have a problem and the problem is a person who will not take responsibility for her own actions.
Why on earth should a number of people have to alter their homes or lifestyles because this woman won't learn to live in a community?
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 12:01 GMT Anonymous Coward
good ol' times
Measuring quality of sex in dB?
A former GF of mine did that. She considered the LOUDNESS of it as the gold standard. And yesss, she measured (no scale, no gear, just her ear) hers, but credited me for the goodness.
Used to be funny stuff until she wanted it in an elevator. Don't ask...
AC for obvious (oh babe, still thinking of you) reasons. The hight pitch... priceless.
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 12:04 GMT Anonymous Coward
WTF?
A quick google turns up:
"The average background noise in a house is about 50 dB(A), while a car driving down a street will be measured at 60 dB(A) at a distance of 300 feet"
So the neighbour must wake up just from background noise levels and cars driving past her flat must be even more annoying.
- "Sunderland City Council installed "specialist equipment" in neighbour Rachel O'Connor's flat after she reported she was "frequently late for work because she overslept having been awake most of the night because of the noise"
So it's entirely possible then that the neighbour could have influenced the readings of the specialized equipment, being that it was setup in her flat.
I suspect the neighbour is just causing problems. Shame on the police and the courts for interfering.
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 12:04 GMT Andrew 6
@Jason Bloomberg
"Sure, as Disco-Legend-Zeke says, she could install sound-proofing, but equally so too could her neighbours, and after all they're the ones who have the problem ( other than the artificially created one of the ASBO itself )."
Ah, but those on the street cant escape the sound if she doesnt sound proof it, therefore the only logical solution is for her to sound proof her place, then no ones 'rights' are infringed too heavily.
And frankly Im of the opinion here that protection of the rights of the people who dont have an choice in the matter is more important than the perpetrators.. same opinion I have with criminals rights too :-P
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 12:04 GMT Evil_Trev
Iconic overloadus
On occasion there seems to be few appropriate icons to comment on a story, in this instance we have to choose between 'STOP , WTF , Shouty,Shouty,Shouty 'Prepare for boarding me young bukaroos' ,' Big brother is watching you', but I eventualy plumped for 'Suck on this' which is advice that husband Steven might find useful to impart to his orally unconstrained significant other.
From a technological POV perhaps there is a niche market for electronic noise cancelling equipment here?
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 12:04 GMT Paw Bokenfohr
it's a tough one to be correctly PC on...
...whose right trump whose?
I don't think that this one can really come down to rights. It's one of those ones where it has to come down to the responsibilities that go hand in hand with rights. In this case, the woman who can't control the volume of her lovemaking should be responsible, and exercise her right to be a decent human being and not do it at a time of day when most people (I know some people work nights and sleep during the day etc etc) are trying to sleep.
Even if by the time the noise gets to your bedroom it's the level of a whispered conversation, imagine trying to get to sleep with that happening. It's just not possible if, like many, you're not a very sound sleeper.
I used to live in some flats where the guy above me used to get stoned and listen to loud reggae music at 2am. Even after it finished (often after several hours, and only because he passed out) I could often hear of the clicks and pops of the needle in the lead-out of the record, and it was a nightmare. It really really gets to you, it screws you up, you can't sleep properly, you get angry and sad and a little bit weird.
As a result, I'm really careful about respecting others standard of living and making sure that mine doesn't degrade theirs. It's only fair in a responsible society of responsible people.
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 12:04 GMT Law
thats nothing...
... at university I had a housemate who would leave his bedroom door open when him and his girlfriend (who made sounds similar to that of a seal in pain) would come back from the pub together.
When I realised another housemate had asked them to keep it down once, which is why he begun leaving the door open to add extra annoyance to us, I decided something needed to be done.
Luckily, being a take charge kind of guy I made sure a link to his porn folder on his pc popped up one day on his desktop - and after a long night of seal clubbing on their part the girlfriend decided to check her emails, discovered said link, and we were noise free for the rest of the year.
Mean? Yes. But he had it coming...
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 12:04 GMT Ted Dannington
@ Jason Bloomberg
No it's pretty clear cut. The right of the other people to get to sleep and be able to function properly is greater than her right to make a bunch of noise, and it's /she/ who should be purchasing sound proofing gear as it's her noise affected the other people, not them deciding to be disturbed by it. If you say she has no choice in making these noises, they sure as hell have no choice being woken up by them, and why should they expect to have to deal with it?
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 12:04 GMT Baying Lynch Mob
@Lloyd
``Don't display pictures of the couple in question, they're an affront to my human rights to not heave thinking about the pair of them "at it".''
Yes, you shouldn't even have to consider that people you don't find attractive might have sex. Remember that when you're about to introduce someone to your parents.
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 12:21 GMT irish donkey
They are two REAL mingers without jobs
Partying all night and generally pissing people off is wrong for several reasons...
1. Ugly people shouldn't be allowed to have sex
2. If they do have sex they should do it behind closed doors and out of earshot
3. Working people have jobs to do which means they can't lie in bed all day recovering from the nightmare of ugly people having sex.
4. Laughing at your neighbours when they leave for work blearily eyed because you have kept them awake all night. Not funny.
Its not human rights. It called consideration! Some older people might remember it.
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 12:21 GMT Raumkraut
Soundproofing
«she could install sound-proofing, but equally so too could her neighbours, and after all they're the ones who have the problem»
From TFA:
«Neighbours described her performances as "murder" and "unnatural", the Telegraph notes, and "even the local postman and a woman, who walked past the house taking her child to school, complained".»
So give the woman a choice:
1. Stop making a racket.
2. Soundproof the bedroom (and any other room they do it in).
3. Pay to soundproof all the neighbours' houses (every bedroom thereof, at the very least), as well as paying for ear defenders to be made freely available to every man, woman and child who might walk past her house.
She should pick one, and quit whining.
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 12:38 GMT Nigel 11
White noise a solution?
It occurs to me that there is a solution for the neighbours trying to sleep, but being disturbed by vocalisations, that would cost a lot less than soundproofing.
Get a white noise source. 50dB of white noise will sound like silence after a few minutes, but will mask other quieter noises. It's sometimes used in open-plan offices to reduce the disturbance caused by conversations at other desks. Another example is the seventy-plus dB of fans in our server room - doesn't sound noisy when you are working in there, until you discover that the only way to have a conversation is to shout.
Those "natural noises" CDs (breaking waves, windswept plains, babbling brooks, etc) work on a similar principle - some people find them more relaxing than white noise. (The brain treats white noise as silence, and complete silence can itself be disturbing, so add the texture of a natural soundscape).
Wish I'd known this back in my Barratt box days!
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 12:38 GMT Frumious Bandersnatch
Persuasion, Jane Austen
Everybody has their taste in noises as well as in other matters; and sounds are quite innoxious, or most distressing, by their sort rather than their quantity. When Lady Russell not long afterwards, was entering Bath on a wet afternoon, and driving through the long course of streets from the Old Bridge to Camden Place, amidst the dash of other carriages, the heavy rumble of carts and drays, the bawling of newspapermen, muffin-men and milkmen, and the ceaseless clink of pattens, she made no complaint. No, these were noises which belonged to the winter pleasures; her spirits rose under their influence; and like Mrs Musgrove, she was feeling, though not saying, that after being long in the country, nothing could be so good for her as a little quiet cheerfulness.
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 12:38 GMT Anonymous Coward
by comparison
I'd rather listen to her than the a$$hat that feels the need to honk his horn at 5 a.m. a few times a week, because his wife/g.f. hasn't made it to his car fast enough. If the two blondes next door did the same thing instead of leaving their beer bottles and condoms all over the landing on the weekend, life would be much nicer.
AC - because my neighbors probably don't read this site, but you never can tell.
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 12:41 GMT Wize
@Jason Bloomberg
'"I think what this woman fails to understand that her rights do not override those of the people around her".
But do the rights of those people around her override her rights ? That is the crux of the case.'
I'd have thought the overriding factor in the case is that she can choose where and when. Her neighbours do not have that choice. Their choice has been taken away from them, thus removing their rights.
They are not taking away her rights to have sex. Just that she should be more considerate about volume, time and/or location.
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 12:41 GMT Anonymous Coward
Well ..
Let's hear it for the girl :-)
It might also be time to add a bit of reductio absurdum to this.
Will ASBOs be awarded against people in the toilet with gutsy, gusty wind related gusto and flappy lips suitably trumpetlike?
(I thought not)
Will ASBOs be awarded against people with chronically chronic and equally vocal constipation?
(I thought not)
I put it all down to a lack of proper education really.
Could the money spent so far have provided local soundproofing thereby allowing all parties sufficient confort?
And (of course?) what about the man?
Is it not he who makes and provokes the noisy outpourings?
Far too many questions for sure?
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 13:10 GMT Anonymous Coward
dB noise levels: above ambient sound?
After lots of "it's below ambient levels" comments --- which clearly doesn't fit with "postman walking past and complaining" and all neighbours trudging to court --- you may consider it's (as usually badly paraphrased) tech reporting.
The reported noise levels are those above the ambient levels I'd presume. Making it loud and disturbing indeed.
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 13:10 GMT Hugh G. Rection
Yesssssssssssss!!!!
My wife and I lived in a flat after getting married, and we made quite a bit of noise of the coital kind, as did our downstairs neighbours - she would shriek as he chased her around the flat before getting her into bed where the noise continued.
It's all a matter of give and take. We now live in an old detached house, and don't have to give a flying f**k about anyone else :)
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 13:10 GMT JohnG
Priorities
The neighbour moved into the flat next door in 2007 and then started complaining. The owner of said flat lives in another flat directly below and they have also started complaining.
Apparently, the local authorities first made recordings, which were subsequently presented to the judge (sounds like a breach of privacy to me) and later installed an SPL meter, which the complaining neighbour could activate when her neighbours were causing a noise (so not difficult to interfere with those readings then). This looks like the start of a campaign to remove people from their home.
If officials have not got the resources to address the kind of bullying that sees people murdered or commit suicide, then they for sure have not got the resources to be worrying about someone else's love life. If I were local taxpayer, I would be unhappy to see public money pissed away on something as trivial as this.
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 14:07 GMT BlackMage
Infringment
I don't recall the source of the quote but: "Your right to swing your fist ends at the tip of my nose." In other words, you are free to do what you will until you have an impact on someone else. This case is completely clear cut. She is causing a noise equivalent to a normal conversation in *someone else's bedroom* in the middle of the night thus impacting that person's ability to live normally. She must bear responsibility for her actions, whether it be keeping it down or installing soundproofing.
I hope she gets laughed out of court and saddled with a fat bill for her stupidity.
-
Tuesday 10th November 2009 16:13 GMT Bardlee
Figures....
Not so loud but anyone thinking that they can make all the noise they want, not get in trouble, at all hours of the night is stupid.
That's like me firing up a chainsaw and revving it all night because it's my human right.
I say Fight fire with fire. They should move their washing machine against the wall, make it off balance, and wash bricks all night. Because you know, it's their human right to wash whatever they want in their washing machine.
-
Wednesday 11th November 2009 00:00 GMT Graham Marsden
From the Human Rights Act 1998...
[quote]
You have the responsibility to respect other people's rights, and they must respect yours.
Your human rights are:
* the right to life
* freedom from torture and degrading treatment
* freedom from slavery and forced labour
* the right to liberty
* the right to a fair trial
* the right not to be punished for something that wasn't a crime when you did it
* the right to respect for private and family life
* freedom of thought, conscience and religion, and freedom to express your beliefs
* freedom of expression
* freedom of assembly and association
* the right to marry and to start a family
* the right not to be discriminated against in respect of these rights and freedoms
* * * * *
* the right to peaceful enjoyment of your property
* * * * *
* the right to an education
* the right to participate in free elections
* the right not to be subjected to the death penalty
If any of these rights and freedoms are breached, you have a right to an effective solution in law, even if the breach was by someone in authority, such as, for example, a police officer.
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Governmentcitizensandrights/Yourrightsandresponsibilities/DG_4002951
[/quote]
There is nothing there about you having the right to disturb others...
-
Wednesday 11th November 2009 00:00 GMT Neil Cooper
If I was her neighbour
Sorry I just don't buy the fact that she really has to scream her head off during sex, and nor can she control it.
If I was her neighbour I spend a week or 2 waiting in silence until 2am then putting my stereo on full blast and start using power tools to do all sorts of projects coincidentally most of which would be to the adjoining wall.
When she complains I'd say that I couldnt control my urge to do DIY at 2am, and besides its in my house. See how she likes it when she's the one being woken up.
-
Wednesday 11th November 2009 00:00 GMT Anonymous Coward
"...whose right trump whose?"
Got an inspiration when reading that question.
You cannot survive without sleep. Sleep deprivation can be fatal.
On the other hand, you can spend any number of years without sex, and the worst that will happen, if you take matters into your own hands (so to speak), is blindness or maybe getting an iPhone. Any apple product really. Apple buyers are all wank*rs.
So, I beliave the right to sleep of the neighbors trumps the right of the woman to annoy the f*ck out of everybody.
-
Wednesday 11th November 2009 07:23 GMT Anonymous Coward
hmmmmm
Ah well ladies in heat, but a few comments here, if the postman and milkman complain then she is obviously having the fun out of noise free hours, and anyway I fail to see what is wrong with listening to these well remembered sounds (yes am male), I think I agree with some of the others, sounds like someone is not getting any and is a mite upset..... judge included!!!
-
Wednesday 11th November 2009 10:18 GMT Mithvetr
Human Rights Act
As some have touched on already, the problem with Human Rights cases - especially when Human Rights are invoked frivolously, as in this case - is that they depend on the establishment of an order of precedence. This woman claims protection under Article 8 - the Right to Private and Family Life. Since her 'privacy' involves interfering with other people's privacy and family life, someone somewhere is going to have to decide whose rights take the upper hand here; because either way, someone is going to lose their rights under Article 8 - at least as they perceive them.
Although it's worth bearing in mind that many of the Articles contain an all-encompassing exception clause - for example, Article 8 itself:
"There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic well-being of the country, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others."
These generalised exemptions mean that the Human Rights Act cannot be used to restrict any behaviour by government or state representatives. Its only remaining purpose is to settle scores between squabbling citizens.
-
Wednesday 11th November 2009 10:18 GMT Anonymous Coward
By Nigel 11
Bang on Nigel.
Of course if we actually built half decent houses on this island we might not have these issues. Blame the bloody house builders doing everything on the cheap to get their 30%. An ASBO for this is 1984 (Orwellian SEX CRIME) stile madness. I thought buy now we had lost those faux -horrified-at-sex Victorian toss. The rest of Europe must laugh their cocks off at us in this rain - socked Europe backwater with our sex issues. It's the 11th of the 11th - men and women are dying in the line of duty both in the forces and the civilian uniformed Police Fire and Rescue teams and moronic tat like this makes the headlines. FAIL
-
Thursday 12th November 2009 10:20 GMT Pat 9
REALLY!?!?!?
obviously they are complaining because they don't get the same enjoyment. Sorry my girl is loud and i love every second of it. Sorry 1 hour isn't all that bad and it isn't constant (close but not quite) while yes i will agree they could invest in some soundproofing. SO SHOULD THE NEIGHBORS. I have to say i would fight tooth and nail to keep my right to have my girl be as loud as she wants/needs. If they were blaring a stereo i could understand. But the love between two people is a completely different subject.
At the same point. Written in the constitution is we have the DUTY to stand up to a government that goes too far and tries to control too much. But we can't make love because there is a law it happens to cross? isn't that going a little far?
-
Thursday 12th November 2009 10:20 GMT Mithvetr
@ AC 09:03 11/11
"Of course if we actually built half decent houses on this island we might not have these issues."
Or better still, why not use some of the masses of properties that're already built and standing derelict, but which could be perfectly usable with a little investment and renovation?
Oh, yeah, I forgot: people only want *shiny new* houses on *shiny new* estates, never mind the fact that even the crappiest sink estate was shiny and new at one point.
Keep building, folks, and soon we'll win final victory over the evil forces of, you know, trees and fields and green stuff and stuff...
-
Wednesday 18th November 2009 20:40 GMT Decius
"Human Rights" and "Noise ordinaces"
Firstly, "Human rights" simply do not exist.
Think you have a "Right to life"? Try and collect on it. You _will_ die, and neither legislation nor philosophy will change that.
What we have here is a case of "I don't want to be interacted with." We have a way of dealing with this exact situation, in fact: Noise ordinaces. It is only an issue of fact as to whether the law was indeed broken. If the mailman heard it, I doubt that it was during a "restricted noise" time. Ditto for the kids walking to school. Sorry prudes, but I can have loud sex anytime I can have band practice.
This topic is closed for new posts.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
