Ian Johnston
What can you POSSIBLY imagine you have gained by snipping out the context for my (very reasonable) statement? Is your position THAT weak?
Here it is again in full:
Driving Technique 136The Enforcer I was taught just that by a PSV instructor when preparing for MiDAS (Minibus Drivers Awareness Scheme) test about five years ago in order...
"Of course, third parties taking offence at particular words cannot possibly be a bar to their use. What if convicted criminals objected to the terms usually used to describe them and their crimes?"
Since you like pursuing things to the nth degree, perhaps you'd like to say what we should call a liquidateer who objects to the term "liquidateer". Or a prisoner who doesn't like that word? If they see the words as abusive, should they be avoided? If not, why not (given your stance on other words)?
And wouldn't it be a good idea if you learned the difference between what is (or is not) something to which there is an absolute bar and something the use of which is (or is not) reasonable to avoid.
As you would know, had you been posting here longer, there are certain words which posters such as Brimstone and myself (and many others) never use, no matter ho frequently one may encounter them in real life. But we are not *barred* from using them. We *choose* not to use them and need no lessons from self-appointed guardians of PC.
