Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Thursday, 24th July 2008

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the n/a site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

In My View this week with Catherine McMillan



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Well done to everyone who took part in the Sudbury fun-run on Good Friday. I like a bit of a run, but I didn't take part myself.
This is because my favoured discipline is the 50-metre jog.

If you are getting to the point where your chest hurts, your lungs are gasping for air and you're all hot and sweaty – as happens in long-distance running – well, I don't really see the fun aspect of that.

But a short burst to get you from A to B a little quicker, that I can enjoy.

Unfortunately, this isn't so socially acceptable, at least not for adults. If you're not wearing shorts and clutching a bottle of water and an iPod, people think you're a bit odd. Or a mugger who's just snatched someone's handbag.



And apparently in some circumstances running can actually be criminal.

The other night a teenage acquaintance of mine was walking through Sudbury with some friends. Engaged in what used to be called "horseplay", they attracted the attention of a passing police officer.

They were slapped with warnings under Section 5 of the Public Order Act, which applies to "conduct likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress", and is a little bit like an Asbo.

The lads claim the officer then told them that if he caught them doing anything such as running or shouting in the town centre he would arrest them, as it would be a violation of the warning.

So no fun runs for them then!


I am disappointed at Sudbury Town Council's decision to close the Burkitts Lane public toilets. If I was ever caught short in town I always used these, on the grounds that they were free.

Now I will have to pay 20p a time at Gaol Lane. Being extremely tight I am not happy at this extra expenditure. To add insult to injury, I have been reliably informed that gents still go for free.

What blatant discrimination. Did those women in the 1970s burn their bras for nothing? We still don't have equal pay and now this. Come on Sudbury Town Council, equal tinkling rights for all.

The full article contains 367 words and appears in n/a newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 27 March 2008 11:12 AM
  • Source: n/a
  • Location: Sudbury
 
 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Today's Vote

Do you think Suffolk should be run by unitary councils covering greater Ipswich and rural areas; East and West Suffolk; or one council for the whole county?
Ipswich and rural
East and West
Unitary Suffolk

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.