To be honest I'm amazed to hear that civilians, in this case shopkeepers, have the power to prevent anyone from walking in a public area.

I understand they can ban them from entering their shops, and should do if the individual has been convicted of committing a crime against them.

But banning them from walking past their shops – effectively banning them from passing through the town centre – must be (and this may be the first and last time I'll ever say this) an infringement of civil liberties.

Retailers have been asked their opinion on SIREN, which would allow them to issue civil trespass notices to prolific shoplifters so they could face police action and a court appearance if they were found in town.

Police, council and traders appear to be getting very excited about this power, but can it be legal?

Millets manager Paul Goodchild suggests it has already worked effectively elsewhere and seems content that persistent shoplifters are moved on from one town to another – Hunstanton, Downham, Fakenham, anywhere so long as they're not in Lynn?

I applaud the idea that shops in Lynn could work together, communicating information to one another about known villains who are spotted in town. In fact, I thought they already did this. I am sure I have overheard warnings about known shoplifters and heard descriptions of suspected shoplifters being broadcast to traders via walkie talkies attached to their belts.

The police appear to suggest that it would be up to shopkeepers to decide who should be banned from the town centre.

It would be interesting to see a test in law of this kangaroo-court legislation. Is a convicted shoplifter to be banned not only from shops, but from a trip to the doctor, opticians, dentist, bank, pub, JobCentre, public toilets? Will they really have to take a diversionary route to anywhere in order that they do not walk through the public areas of the town centre? Will an infringement of any such order really be upheld in court?

It's a shameful fact of modern life that some people will help themselves to what is not their rightful property. If they are caught then the penalty of the courts has to fit the crime and fit the need for it to be a real deterrent to any further criminal activity.

We all need to be cautious and vigilant. I wasn't once, ignoring the night-time barking of my dog, and thieves who came in the dark jemmied, on reflection, a fairly flimsy padlock from my shed door and had it on their toes across the fields with my motor mower.

My new shed is locked, barred, bolted and alarmed to the gunnels.
Shopkeepers, too, have to be vigilent, supported by police and the courts.

We are already the most filmed nation on earth and even Lynn has an abundance of CCTV cameras both inside and outside shops.

If my recent experience of shopping in Westgate department store in Lynn is anything to go by, a visible presence of shop assistants would be a deterrent.

And (flogging a dead horse here) a few more shops with closed doors would limit thieves' ease of egress.

But civilians banning other civilians, law-abiding or not, from public areas smacks of something I'm not very comfortable with.

It would be interesting to hear a legal viewpoint from a lawyer on this one. Any takers?

• Shame on West Norfolk Council for going for a soft target and scrapping free car parking for disabled people. And even more shame on leader Nick Daubney for justifying this outrage by saying those without cars (and a pair of working legs) should not have to

subsidise those with a pair of non-working legs. Shame on you, sir.

Blue badge holders do not have the choice of leaving the car at home (or not even having a car) and walking to the shops. That's why they've been blue badge holders in the first place.

A logical extension of Mr Daubney's argument would be reductions in council tax for those who generate least rubbish, who do not have children to be educated, who do not make use of subsidised arts and leisure services. Or perhaps extra charges for those who do have children to be educated and who do use the swimming pool, Lynnsport and the arts centre... ah, now I see where he's coming from!

How about extra charges for the sick, maybe a pay-to-park stealth tax every time they have to visit the hospital, and money off if you're rich enough to afford private medical care. You could even have extra incentives for the super wealthy, such as being able to live here and remain British but avoid paying taxes by salting your fortune away in Monaco – oh, already thought of that one, have they?

The argument is hollow, the reasoning flawed and the council would do itself a good deal of good by going back on this and not targeting a vulnerable section of the community. Just do it.

• Ever been cut up at Hardwick roundabout? Is the pope a Catholic? One reason, claims a correspondent, may be confusion for those unfamiliar with the area caused by the gradual, and almost complete, disappearance of road markings on the roundabout approches.

Weather, traffic and roadworks have succeeded in all but eliminating direction signs on the Tarmac, leaving many drivers in a last-minute predicament.

Could I suggest, too, that lane instructions for drivers heading for the coast along the southern bypass are given in plenty of time, and certainly before they top the rise on the approach to Hardwick roundabout to discover the far left lane is not where they want to be.