Stolen Bike
 

On 07/08/18 15:27, JNugent wrote:

Since horns are rarely, if ever, used for their legallt-intended
purpose, my view - for a long time - has been that rather than being
a C&U requirement, they should be banned except for the ones used on
official emergency vehicles.

I once used horn to try and stop a van driver from reversing
into me. The HC seems to allow that.

It's hard to escape the conclusion that you're just supposed to stop
in order to avoid a collision.

The original HC in the 1930's said "sounding your horn does not give you
right of way or absolve you from the duty of taking every precaution to
avoid an accident". Unfortunately this seems to have disappeared from
the modern version. "warn[ing] other road users of your presence" is not
particularly helpful.

The requirement that a horn should not be used when stationary
seems a bit strange because (offhand) I can't think of a circumstance
nowadays where the horn could be useful while moving. Perhaps the
requirement came from the days when motor vehicles were hard to control
and there were few of them so people were not used to their presence.
Now, people use roads with the full expectation that something big and
fast operated by a psychopath is round the next corner. Also, bulb air
horns were more acceptable than the nasty electric objects fitted today.

On a bicycle, the voice can be useful because the approach behind
pedestrians or horse riders is otherwise silent. When there is
insufficient clearance to get past without having their awareness I
always slow to match their speed before announcing my presence.

Stolen Bike
 

On 07/08/18 18:29, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Tue, 07 Aug 2018 15:27:28 +0100, JNugent wrote:

It is intended only to alert other road-users to one's presence.

Er no. It means "You ****ing arsehole, why the hell didn't you indicate?!"

A horn conveys no information so how are your targets supposed to know
what your problem is?

It is not intended to convey the message: "Get out of my way or there
might be a crash". I such circumstances, you are supposed to slow down
or stop.

I don't, I drive as close as possible to the vehicle without touching
them, this scares them into not doing it again,

Have you ever followed up the result of your education with the
individuals concerned?

Stolen Bike
 

On 08/08/2018 15:24, TMS320 wrote:
On 07/08/18 15:27, JNugent wrote:

Since horns are rarely, if ever, used for their legallt-intended
purpose, my view - for a long time - has been that rather than being
a C&U requirement, they should be banned except for the ones used on
official emergency vehicles.

I once used horn to try and stop a van driver from reversing
into me. The HC seems to allow that.

Alerting him to your presence is the specific purpose of a horn; that
much has been said already.

Using the horn for its proper purpose is a very rare occurrence.

It's hard to escape the conclusion that you're just supposed to stop
in order to avoid a collision.

The original HC in the 1930's said "sounding your horn does not give you
right of way or absolve you from the duty of taking every precaution to
avoid an accident". Unfortunately this seems to have disappeared from
the modern version. "warn[ing] other road users of your presence" is not
particularly helpful.

There's still the law about driving without due care and attention
and/or without due consideration for other road users.

The requirement that a horn should not be used when stationary
seems a bit strange because (offhand) I can't think of a circumstance
nowadays where the horn could be useful while moving. Perhaps the
requirement came from the days when motor vehicles were hard to control
and there were few of them so people were not used to their presence.
Now, people use roads with the full expectation that something big and
fast operated by a psychopath is round the next corner. Also, bulb air
horns were more acceptable than the nasty electric objects fitted today.

The obvious use whilst moving would be when approaching ths "summit" of
a hump-backed bridge or a sharp bend. A multi-storey car-park near here
had a down-ramp with a give way line at the bottom of it, with the
posibility of traffic approaching from the left. A sign on the wall said
"Sound Horn". I never did. There were houses near the location and the
occupants were as entitled to reasonable efforts to keep down noise as
anyone else is. Likewise, an Italian friend used to sound his car horn
on a hump-backed bridge near his village. But the bridge had a house
adjacent to it. He would never listen to my remonstrations; I gained the
impression that he

On a bicycle, the voice can be useful because the approach behind
pedestrians or horse riders is otherwise silent. When there is
insufficient clearance to get past without having their awareness I
always slow to match their speed before announcing my presence.

That sort of sounds OK and in keeping with the HC instructions on
motor-vehicle horns.

I still believe that it would be better if car-horns were simply banned.
The nuisance caused by mis-use far outweighs the weight of the odd
anecdotal case for their use for safety-related purposes.

Stolen Bike
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 15:24:28 +0100, TMS320 wrote:

On 07/08/18 15:27, JNugent wrote:

Since horns are rarely, if ever, used for their legallt-intended
purpose, my view - for a long time - has been that rather than being
a C&U requirement, they should be banned except for the ones used on
official emergency vehicles.

I once used horn to try and stop a van driver from reversing
into me. The HC seems to allow that.

It's hard to escape the conclusion that you're just supposed to stop
in order to avoid a collision.

The original HC in the 1930's said "sounding your horn does not give you
right of way or absolve you from the duty of taking every precaution to
avoid an accident". Unfortunately this seems to have disappeared from
the modern version. "warn[ing] other road users of your presence" is not
particularly helpful.

The requirement that a horn should not be used when stationary
seems a bit strange because (offhand) I can't think of a circumstance
nowadays where the horn could be useful while moving. Perhaps the
requirement came from the days when motor vehicles were hard to control
and there were few of them so people were not used to their presence.
Now, people use roads with the full expectation that something big and
fast operated by a psychopath is round the next corner. Also, bulb air
horns were more acceptable than the nasty electric objects fitted today.

On a bicycle, the voice can be useful because the approach behind
pedestrians or horse riders is otherwise silent. When there is
insufficient clearance to get past without having their awareness I
always slow to match their speed before announcing my presence.

Horses panic at anything, silent or not.

Stolen Bike
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 16:28:30 +0100, JNugent wrote:

On 08/08/2018 15:24, TMS320 wrote:
On 07/08/18 15:27, JNugent wrote:

Since horns are rarely, if ever, used for their legallt-intended
purpose, my view - for a long time - has been that rather than being
a C&U requirement, they should be banned except for the ones used on
official emergency vehicles.
I once used horn to try and stop a van driver from reversing
into me. The HC seems to allow that.

Alerting him to your presence is the specific purpose of a horn; that
much has been said already.

Using the horn for its proper purpose is a very rare occurrence.

Why do you believe it's wrong to inform a driver using your horn that he
just did something very dangerous? If it helps him not to do it again,
you've achieved something.

It's hard to escape the conclusion that you're just supposed to stop
in order to avoid a collision.
The original HC in the 1930's said "sounding your horn does not give
you right of way or absolve you from the duty of taking every
precaution to avoid an accident". Unfortunately this seems to have
disappeared from the modern version. "warn[ing] other road users of
your presence" is not particularly helpful.

There's still the law about driving without due care and attention
and/or without due consideration for other road users.

Vague bull**** to allow pigs to do you for anything they like when they
need the fines to pay for their doughnuts.

The requirement that a horn should not be used when stationary
seems a bit strange because (offhand) I can't think of a circumstance
nowadays where the horn could be useful while moving. Perhaps the
requirement came from the days when motor vehicles were hard to control
and there were few of them so people were not used to their presence.
Now, people use roads with the full expectation that something big and
fast operated by a psychopath is round the next corner. Also, bulb air
horns were more acceptable than the nasty electric objects fitted today.

The obvious use whilst moving would be when approaching ths "summit" of
a hump-backed bridge or a sharp bend. A multi-storey car-park near here
had a down-ramp with a give way line at the bottom of it, with the
posibility of traffic approaching from the left. A sign on the wall said
"Sound Horn". I never did. There were houses near the location and the
occupants were as entitled to reasonable efforts to keep down noise as
anyone else is. Likewise, an Italian friend used to sound his car horn
on a hump-backed bridge near his village. But the bridge had a house
adjacent to it. He would never listen to my remonstrations; I gained the
impression that he

At such difficult to see past obstructions, I just slow down. Horns
really aren't necessary.

On a bicycle, the voice can be useful because the approach behind
pedestrians or horse riders is otherwise silent. When there is
insufficient clearance to get past without having their awareness I
always slow to match their speed before announcing my presence.

That sort of sounds OK and in keeping with the HC instructions on
motor-vehicle horns.

I still believe that it would be better if car-horns were simply banned.
The nuisance caused by mis-use far outweighs the weight of the odd
anecdotal case for their use for safety-related purposes.

Utter bull****. If you make a mistake and are about to pull in front of
someone, you need to be told to stop.

Stolen Bike
 

On 08/08/18 16:28, JNugent wrote:
On 08/08/2018 15:24, TMS320 wrote:
On 07/08/18 15:27, JNugent wrote:

Since horns are rarely, if ever, used for their legallt-intended
purpose, my view - for a long time - has been that rather than being
a C&U requirement, they should be banned except for the ones used on
official emergency vehicles.

I once used horn to try and stop a van driver from reversing
into me. The HC seems to allow that.

Alerting him to your presence is the specific purpose of a horn; that
much has been said already.

It is a special case when stationary.

Using the horn for its proper purpose is a very rare occurrence.

It's hard to escape the conclusion that you're just supposed to stop
in order to avoid a collision.

The original HC in the 1930's said "sounding your horn does not give
you right of way or absolve you from the duty of taking every
precaution to avoid an accident". Unfortunately this seems to have
disappeared from the modern version. "warn[ing] other road users of
your presence" is not particularly helpful.

There's still the law about driving without due care and attention
and/or without due consideration for other road users.

The requirement that a horn should not be used when stationary
seems a bit strange because (offhand) I can't think of a circumstance
nowadays where the horn could be useful while moving. Perhaps the
requirement came from the days when motor vehicles were hard to
control and there were few of them so people were not used to their
presence. Now, people use roads with the full expectation that
something big and fast operated by a psychopath is round the next
corner. Also, bulb air horns were more acceptable than the nasty
electric objects fitted today.

The obvious use whilst moving would be when approaching ths "summit" of
a hump-backed bridge or a sharp bend.

Perhaps you mean something like this? It is is harder seen from a
driver's perspective than from a high mounted camera. No need. Adjust
speed according to what can be seen.

https://goo.gl/maps/9MSMX69BxzM2
https://goo.gl/maps/R48YMSxzjQk

Incidentally, the bridge has a 2t mgw limit so several drivers shown
here are breaking the rules - plus many others plus a council official
with a Range Rover that knows full well.

A multi-storey car-park near here
had a down-ramp with a give way line at the bottom of it, with the
posibility of traffic approaching from the left. A sign on the wall said
"Sound Horn". I never did.

Weird.

There were houses near the location and the
occupants were as entitled to reasonable efforts to keep down noise as
anyone else is.

Well done you.

Likewise, an Italian friend used to sound his car horn
on a hump-backed bridge near his village. But the bridge had a house
adjacent to it. He would never listen to my remonstrations; I gained the
impression that he

On a bicycle, the voice can be useful because the approach behind
pedestrians or horse riders is otherwise silent. When there is
insufficient clearance to get past without having their awareness I
always slow to match their speed before announcing my presence.

That sort of sounds OK and in keeping with the HC instructions on
motor-vehicle horns.

Except motor vehicles already make so much noise that they don't require
embellishment. Making pedestrians aware of my presence when I approach
behind them isn't needed in the car as it is on the bike.

I still believe that it would be better if car-horns were simply banned.
The nuisance caused by mis-use far outweighs the weight of the odd
anecdotal case for their use for safety-related purposes.

Indeed. At most, such "safety-related purposes" could only cover small
insurance claims and can't possibly have effect on personal safety.

If the horn was not so unpleasant, the administrators that defined the
90dbA standard understood physics and the pad on the steering wheel was
force sensing to allow the driver to add expression it might be more
acceptable.

Stolen Bike
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 15:24:39 +0100, TMS320 wrote:

On 07/08/18 18:29, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Tue, 07 Aug 2018 15:27:28 +0100, JNugent wrote:

It is intended only to alert other road-users to one's presence.
Er no. It means "You ****ing arsehole, why the hell didn't you
indicate?!"

A horn conveys no information so how are your targets supposed to know
what your problem is?

Well let me see, Mr Smith turns right at a roundabout without indicating,
and someone correctly pulls in front of him, then sounds their horn when
they see he's about to collide with them. He can then look up the highway
code or whatever and find out why the other car had the right of way.

It is not intended to convey the message: "Get out of my way or there
might be a crash". I such circumstances, you are supposed to slow down
or stop.
I don't, I drive as close as possible to the vehicle without touching
them, this scares them into not doing it again,

Have you ever followed up the result of your education with the
individuals concerned?

Yes, I often have people banging on my door yelling at me. I had a bus
driver sacked for doing just that, after not indicating and deciding he
had priority over cars at a junction.

Stolen Bike
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 12:56:59 +0100, JNugent wrote:

On 08/08/2018 09:41, Peter Keller wrote:
On 07.08.2018 16:27, JNugent wrote:
On 07/08/2018 09:17, Peter Keller wrote:
On 06.08.2018 20:02, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Mon, 06 Aug 2018 09:16:17 +0100, Bod wrote:


He can afford a car yet uses a bicycle, that's gross stupidity.
Thanks greatly for the excellent compliment coming from YOU.
My bike is an excellent convenient healthy exhilarating convenient
economical viable means of transport.
It really is a very great compliment to be called grossly stupid
by YOU.
Especially by YOU.
And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes.
After all I ride a bicycle.
And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are
the ****witted pits of humanity.
And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great
compliment.
We must be doing something right.

Cyclists v drivers? They're often the same people.

Much has been written about a war between cyclists and drivers, as
if the two groups were such polar opposites that they could never
cross in a Venn diagram. But according to new research, people who
cycle the most are likely to own at least two cars.

Regular cyclists – those who cycle at least once a week – are also
disproportionately likely to read broadsheet newspapers, be well
educated, have a household income of at least £50,000 per year and
shop at Waitrose, claims the latest Mintel report, Bicycles in the
UK 2010. In addition, they are twice as likely to be men as women..

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...ng-boom-survey

I guess the Guardian is wrong then, or cyclists wouldn't yell at
drivers all the time.
I don't yell at drivers all the time.
I use my voice like a car uses (or is supposed to use) a horn; as a
warning that unless someone does some kind of avoiding manoeuvre, a
clash may happen.

That is not the purpose of a motor vehicle horn.

It is intended only to alert other road-users to one's presence. It is
not intended to convey the message: "Get out of my way or there might
be a crash". I such circumstances, you are supposed to slow down or
stop.

Since horns are rarely, if ever, used for their legallt-intended
purpose, my view - for a long time - has been that rather than being a
C&U requirement, they should be banned except for the ones used on
official emergency vehicles.

Note, it is only an indecipherable shout; not an oath or plashemy or
foul language or insult or something.

It's hard to escape the conclusion that you're just supposed to stop
in order to avoid a collision.

That is why I said

Quote:

I use my voice like a car uses (or is supposed to use) a horn; as a warning that unless someone does some kind of avoiding manoeuvre, a clash may happen.

Stopping, slowing down, turning to avoid the other are avoidance
manoeuvres.
I like to let others know that I m there, also.

I appreciate what you say. The central point is that in UK C&U law at
least, there is no other alternative, additional or anciliary purpose
for a motor vehicle's horn. It is required only for giving warning of
the presence of that vehicle ("vehicle A") to which it is attached. It
has no function in the avoidance of collisions other than by alerting
other road-users to the presence of Vehicle A. It follows that its use
will be of value only where another road user was unaware of the
presence of the vehicle A. Where it is clear that a relevant other road
user is aware of vehicle A's presence on the highway, sounding its horn
cannot possibly remove or reduce the need for the vehicle to be slowed
or stopped by its driver or rider.

You say "unaware of presence", but you should add "unaware that it has
priority over you at the junction".

Stolen Bike
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 10:33:18 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Sat, 04 Aug 2018 12:44:54 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:

By all accounts, any interaction between a cyclist and a driver will
almost inevitably have the latter bleating that the cyclist 'doesn't
pay
road tax'. That this belief is so widespread, despite 'road tax'
having
been abolished over eight decades ago, means that it is not going to go
away any time soon. The sense of entitlement of the driver is
responsible for over 1,700 deaths every year in Britain.

Teach drivers that the roads do not belong to them. Beat it out of
them. Because that is the only way things are going to change.
Drivers
have to know that if they threaten the life or physical safety of
another road user, then they are going to get seriously injured.

I can get to my destination 10 times faster than you.

Not in any urban environment you can't.

I don't live in such ********s. This is the UK, not Indian slums.

I can carry 10 times as much luggage as you. I don't get all sweaty
getting there. Just because a minority **** up and kill people doesn't
automatically make all drivers bad.

And you kill ten times as many people as I do. Actually, more like eight
hundred and fifty times more.

I've never killed anyone, let alone injured them.

Stolen Bike
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 10:12:55 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Sat, 04 Aug 2018 11:24:10 +0100, Bod wrote:
On 04/08/2018 10:22, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee wrote:
Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:

I pay road tax

No you don't.

Correct.
Vehicle tax doesn't actually pay for our roads. Not directly,
anyway.
Our vehicle tax goes into the same pot as all our other tax, and
then
that money is distributed all over the place.

It's actually our council tax that pays for our roads and our local
infrastructure.

What the government does with it is irrelevant. If I drive a car, I
pay a
LOT of tax in fuel duty and road tax/tax disk.whatever OCD people want
to
call it. If I were to sell my car and only cycle, I'd pay neither.

Ah, another retard who invokes the 'Medway Handyman Paradigm'. The money
goes into the pot, and some of it will probably find its way to the
roads,
so by this ****ing spastic's 'reasoning', he 'pays for the roads'.

I wonder if people who smoke cigarettes get to jump the waiting list at
the
local NHS hospital....

As I just said, it doesn't matter where the money goes, car drivers pay a
lot more tax than cyclists.

Stolen Bike
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 09:44:19 +0100, Peter Keller
wrote:

On 07.08.2018 19:24, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Tue, 07 Aug 2018 09:17:53 +0100, Peter Keller
wrote:

On 06.08.2018 20:02, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Mon, 06 Aug 2018 09:16:17 +0100, Bod wrote:


He can afford a car yet uses a bicycle, that's gross stupidity.
Thanks greatly for the excellent compliment coming from YOU.
My bike is an excellent convenient healthy exhilarating convenient
economical viable means of transport.
It really is a very great compliment to be called grossly stupid
by YOU.
Especially by YOU.
And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes.
After all I ride a bicycle.
And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are
the ****witted pits of humanity.
And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great
compliment.
We must be doing something right.

Cyclists v drivers? They're often the same people.

Much has been written about a war between cyclists and drivers, as
if the two groups were such polar opposites that they could never
cross in a Venn diagram. But according to new research, people who
cycle the most are likely to own at least two cars.

Regular cyclists – those who cycle at least once a week – are also
disproportionately likely to read broadsheet newspapers, be well
educated, have a household income of at least £50,000 per year and
shop at Waitrose, claims the latest Mintel report, Bicycles in the
UK 2010. In addition, they are twice as likely to be men as women.

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...ng-boom-survey
I guess the Guardian is wrong then, or cyclists wouldn't yell at
drivers all the time.
I don't yell at drivers all the time.
I use my voice like a car uses (or is supposed to use) a horn; as a
warning that unless someone does some kind of avoiding manoeuvre, a
clash may happen.
Note, it is only an indecipherable shout; not an oath or plashemy or
foul language or insult or something.
Funny, I've never had to yell at a motorist on my bike, maybe you
should cycle more carefully?

I sometimes have to, but usually I find I am acknowledging their
courtesy.
Maybe that is why I am still alive and uninjured.

Why would you yell to acknowledge courtesy?

Stolen Bike
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 10:00:33 +0100, Bod wrote:


https://www.theguardian.com/environm...ng-boom-survey
I guess the Guardian is wrong then, or cyclists wouldn't yell at
drivers all the time.
I don't yell at drivers all the time.
I use my voice like a car uses (or is supposed to use) a horn; as a
warning that unless someone does some kind of avoiding manoeuvre, a
clash may happen.
Note, it is only an indecipherable shout; not an oath or plashemy or
foul language or insult or something.

Funny, I've never had to yell at a motorist on my bike, maybe you
should cycle more carefully?
I sometimes have to, but usually I find I am acknowledging their
courtesy.
Maybe that is why I am still alive and uninjured.

I've been cycling on and off for 64 years and never had a problem
with cars. I've have certainly never needed to shout at any drivers.

Then you're cycling too slowly.

Stolen Bike
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 09:47:18 +0100, Peter Keller
wrote:

On 07.08.2018 19:23, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Tue, 07 Aug 2018 17:58:57 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 07/08/2018 15:44, JNugent wrote:
On 07/08/2018 15:34, Bod wrote:
On 07/08/2018 15:28, JNugent wrote:
On 07/08/2018 09:20, Bod wrote:

Cyclists v drivers? They're often the same people.

Much has been written about a war between cyclists and drivers,
as if the two groups were such polar opposites that they could
never cross in a Venn diagram. But according to new research,
people who cycle the most are likely to own at least two cars.

Regular cyclists – those who cycle at least once a week – are
also disproportionately likely to read broadsheet newspapers, be
well educated, have a household income of at least £50,000 per
year and shop at Waitrose, claims the latest Mintel report,
Bicycles in the UK 2010. In addition, they are twice as likely
to be men as women.

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...ng-boom-survey
I just use a bike mostly because it is most convenient, I love
the fresh air and feeling of movement and exercise, and ....
Owning a car and being rich has nothing to do with it.

Of course, money is irellevant.

Is it?

So why did you mention it?

I didn't. I just showed you a report from a link, which was
basically the reporter's opinions.
That's an entertaining wriggle.

State where I mentioned money!
You quoted a foul mouthed **** faced whining little journalist.
Journalists should never ever be trusted.

That is why when I watch news programmes I concentrate on the rolling
ticker=tape at the bottom. That is just news without comment. I can do
without the comments and bloody interviews and all that.

Anybody who pays for news is contributing to the slimy little ****es. One
day soon they'll all go out of business.

Stolen Bike
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 09:45:07 +0100, Peter Keller
wrote:

On 07.08.2018 10:20, Bod wrote:

Cyclists v drivers? They're often the same people.

Much has been written about a war between cyclists and drivers, as if
the two groups were such polar opposites that they could never cross
in a Venn diagram. But according to new research, people who cycle
the most are likely to own at least two cars.

Regular cyclists – those who cycle at least once a week – are also
disproportionately likely to read broadsheet newspapers, be well
educated, have a household income of at least £50,000 per year and
shop at Waitrose, claims the latest Mintel report, Bicycles in the UK
2010. In addition, they are twice as likely to be men as women.

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...ng-boom-survey
I just use a bike mostly because it is most convenient, I love the
fresh air and feeling of movement and exercise, and ....
Owning a car and being rich has nothing to do with it.

Of course, money is irellevant.

Of course. Exactly.

I enjoy cycling in the countryside. Cycling on roads isn't enjoyable.

Stolen Bike
 

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 10:12:55 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Sat, 04 Aug 2018 11:24:10 +0100, Bod wrote:
On 04/08/2018 10:22, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee wrote:
Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:

I pay road tax

No you don't.

Correct.
Vehicle tax doesn't actually pay for our roads. Not directly,
anyway.
Our vehicle tax goes into the same pot as all our other tax, and
then
that money is distributed all over the place.

It's actually our council tax that pays for our roads and our local
infrastructure.

What the government does with it is irrelevant. If I drive a car, I
pay a
LOT of tax in fuel duty and road tax/tax disk.whatever OCD people want
to
call it. If I were to sell my car and only cycle, I'd pay neither.

Ah, another retard who invokes the 'Medway Handyman Paradigm'. The money
goes into the pot, and some of it will probably find its way to the
roads,
so by this ****ing spastic's 'reasoning', he 'pays for the roads'.

I wonder if people who smoke cigarettes get to jump the waiting list at
the
local NHS hospital....

As I just said, it doesn't matter where the money goes, car drivers pay a
lot more tax than cyclists.

And smokers 'pay a lot more tax' than non-smokers.

It still gives you sweet **** all where 'rights' are concerned.

Will there be anything else?

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

Stolen Bike
 

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 10:33:18 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Sat, 04 Aug 2018 12:44:54 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:

By all accounts, any interaction between a cyclist and a driver will
almost inevitably have the latter bleating that the cyclist 'doesn't
pay
road tax'. That this belief is so widespread, despite 'road tax'
having
been abolished over eight decades ago, means that it is not going to go
away any time soon. The sense of entitlement of the driver is
responsible for over 1,700 deaths every year in Britain.

Teach drivers that the roads do not belong to them. Beat it out of
them. Because that is the only way things are going to change.
Drivers
have to know that if they threaten the life or physical safety of
another road user, then they are going to get seriously injured.

I can get to my destination 10 times faster than you.

Not in any urban environment you can't.

I don't live in such ********s. This is the UK, not Indian slums.

I've ridden in London. I did an eight-mile trip faster than a taxi.

I can carry 10 times as much luggage as you. I don't get all sweaty
getting there. Just because a minority **** up and kill people doesn't
automatically make all drivers bad.

And you kill ten times as many people as I do. Actually, more like eight
hundred and fifty times more.

I've never killed anyone, let alone injured them.

Of course you have. You do so everytime you turn on your engine.

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

Stolen Bike
 

On 08/08/18 19:16, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 15:24:28 +0100, TMS320 wrote:

On a bicycle, the voice can be useful because the approach behind
pedestrians or horse riders is otherwise silent. When there is
insufficient clearance to get past without having their awareness I
always slow to match their speed before announcing my presence.

Horses panic at anything, silent or not.

I have only had a horse panic when it was a face on approach. When
approaching from behind the rider needs to know.

Stolen Bike
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 20:10:08 +0100, TMS320 wrote:

On 08/08/18 19:16, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 15:24:28 +0100, TMS320 wrote:

On a bicycle, the voice can be useful because the approach behind
pedestrians or horse riders is otherwise silent. When there is
insufficient clearance to get past without having their awareness I
always slow to match their speed before announcing my presence.
Horses panic at anything, silent or not.

I have only had a horse panic when it was a face on approach. When
approaching from behind the rider needs to know.

A horse noticed my 3.5 litre V8 Range Rover approaching from behind. The
rider was very annoyed when I overtook in 1st gear.

Stolen Bike
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 19:29:02 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 10:33:18 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Sat, 04 Aug 2018 12:44:54 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:

By all accounts, any interaction between a cyclist and a driver will
almost inevitably have the latter bleating that the cyclist 'doesn't
pay
road tax'. That this belief is so widespread, despite 'road tax'
having
been abolished over eight decades ago, means that it is not going to
go
away any time soon. The sense of entitlement of the driver is
responsible for over 1,700 deaths every year in Britain.

Teach drivers that the roads do not belong to them. Beat it out of
them. Because that is the only way things are going to change.
Drivers
have to know that if they threaten the life or physical safety of
another road user, then they are going to get seriously injured.

I can get to my destination 10 times faster than you.

Not in any urban environment you can't.

I don't live in such ********s. This is the UK, not Indian slums.

I've ridden in London. I did an eight-mile trip faster than a taxi.

Don't live in London then. Why would you want to live in a slum? If your
nearest neighbour is within shouting distance, you need to move further
into the countryside.

I can carry 10 times as much luggage as you. I don't get all sweaty
getting there. Just because a minority **** up and kill people
doesn't
automatically make all drivers bad.

And you kill ten times as many people as I do. Actually, more like
eight
hundred and fifty times more.

I've never killed anyone, let alone injured them.

Of course you have. You do so everytime you turn on your engine.

Oh go eat some tree bark.

Stolen Bike
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 19:28:02 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 10:12:55 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Sat, 04 Aug 2018 11:24:10 +0100, Bod wrote:
On 04/08/2018 10:22, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee wrote:
Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:

I pay road tax

No you don't.

Correct.
Vehicle tax doesn't actually pay for our roads. Not directly,
anyway.
Our vehicle tax goes into the same pot as all our other tax, and
then
that money is distributed all over the place.

It's actually our council tax that pays for our roads and our local
infrastructure.

What the government does with it is irrelevant. If I drive a car, I
pay a
LOT of tax in fuel duty and road tax/tax disk.whatever OCD people want
to
call it. If I were to sell my car and only cycle, I'd pay neither.

Ah, another retard who invokes the 'Medway Handyman Paradigm'. The
money
goes into the pot, and some of it will probably find its way to the
roads,
so by this ****ing spastic's 'reasoning', he 'pays for the roads'.

I wonder if people who smoke cigarettes get to jump the waiting list at
the
local NHS hospital....

As I just said, it doesn't matter where the money goes, car drivers pay
a
lot more tax than cyclists.

And smokers 'pay a lot more tax' than non-smokers.

It still gives you sweet **** all where 'rights' are concerned.

It gives us the right to blow it in your face you silly little pansy.

Stolen Bike
 

On 08/08/18 19:21, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 15:24:39 +0100, TMS320 wrote:
On 07/08/18 18:29, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Tue, 07 Aug 2018 15:27:28 +0100, JNugent
wrote:

It is intended only to alert other road-users to one's
presence.
Er no. It means "You ****ing arsehole, why the hell didn't you
indicate?!"

A horn conveys no information so how are your targets supposed to
know what your problem is?

Well let me see, Mr Smith turns right at a roundabout without
indicating, and someone correctly pulls in front of him, then sounds
their horn when they see he's about to collide with them. He can
then look up the highway code or whatever and find out why the other
car had the right of way.

Just because Mr Smith is not indicating right it is not correct for AN
Other to pull out on a whim. Too many hims and thems. Explain who is
doing what and who ends up in front of whom.

It is not intended to convey the message: "Get out of my way
or there might be a crash". I such circumstances, you are
supposed to slow down or stop.
I don't, I drive as close as possible to the vehicle without
touching them, this scares them into not doing it again,

Have you ever followed up the result of your education with the
individuals concerned?

Yes, I often have people banging on my door yelling at me. I had a
bus driver sacked for doing just that, after not indicating and
deciding he had priority over cars at a junction.

So the answer is that you don't know that your education works.

Stolen Bike
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 19:20:56 +0100, TMS320 wrote:

On 08/08/18 16:28, JNugent wrote:
On 08/08/2018 15:24, TMS320 wrote:
On 07/08/18 15:27, JNugent wrote:

Since horns are rarely, if ever, used for their legallt-intended
purpose, my view - for a long time - has been that rather than being
a C&U requirement, they should be banned except for the ones used on
official emergency vehicles.

I once used horn to try and stop a van driver from reversing
into me. The HC seems to allow that.
Alerting him to your presence is the specific purpose of a horn; that
much has been said already.

It is a special case when stationary.

Why are you making so much fuss about the "correct use of a horn"? OCD is
a DISORDER. Get it fixed.

Using the horn for its proper purpose is a very rare occurrence.

It's hard to escape the conclusion that you're just supposed to stop
in order to avoid a collision.

The original HC in the 1930's said "sounding your horn does not give
you right of way or absolve you from the duty of taking every
precaution to avoid an accident". Unfortunately this seems to have
disappeared from the modern version. "warn[ing] other road users of
your presence" is not particularly helpful.
There's still the law about driving without due care and attention
and/or without due consideration for other road users.

The requirement that a horn should not be used when stationary
seems a bit strange because (offhand) I can't think of a circumstance
nowadays where the horn could be useful while moving. Perhaps the
requirement came from the days when motor vehicles were hard to
control and there were few of them so people were not used to their
presence. Now, people use roads with the full expectation that
something big and fast operated by a psychopath is round the next
corner. Also, bulb air horns were more acceptable than the nasty
electric objects fitted today.
The obvious use whilst moving would be when approaching ths "summit"
of a hump-backed bridge or a sharp bend.

Perhaps you mean something like this? It is is harder seen from a
driver's perspective than from a high mounted camera. No need. Adjust
speed according to what can be seen.

https://goo.gl/maps/9MSMX69BxzM2
https://goo.gl/maps/R48YMSxzjQk

Incidentally, the bridge has a 2t mgw limit so several drivers shown
here are breaking the rules - plus many others plus a council official
with a Range Rover that knows full well.

WTF are you on about? I can clearly see what's coming the other way, that
is not a blind bridge whatsoever. Unless it's because the camera is
higher up than most drivers.

A multi-storey car-park near here had a down-ramp with a give way line
at the bottom of it, with the posibility of traffic approaching from
the left. A sign on the wall said "Sound Horn". I never did.

Weird.

The only time I've ever seen that is in France, in a tunnel in the alps,
it said something like "soundez obliatoire" with a diagram of a horn.

There were houses near the location and the occupants were as entitled
to reasonable efforts to keep down noise as anyone else is.

Well done you.

Likewise, an Italian friend used to sound his car horn on a hump-backed
bridge near his village. But the bridge had a house adjacent to it. He
would never listen to my remonstrations; I gained the impression that he

On a bicycle, the voice can be useful because the approach behind
pedestrians or horse riders is otherwise silent. When there is
insufficient clearance to get past without having their awareness I
always slow to match their speed before announcing my presence.
That sort of sounds OK and in keeping with the HC instructions on
motor-vehicle horns.

Except motor vehicles already make so much noise that they don't require
embellishment. Making pedestrians aware of my presence when I approach
behind them isn't needed in the car as it is on the bike.

Some modern cars are very quiet when driving slowly. I've often crossed a
road thinking there's nothing coming when there is. I thought they were
electric cars, but some petrol vehicles seem to make virtually no noise
now when travelling at 20mph. Not that anyone should ever drive that
slowly.

I still believe that it would be better if car-horns were simply
banned. The nuisance caused by mis-use far outweighs the weight of the
odd anecdotal case for their use for safety-related purposes.

Indeed. At most, such "safety-related purposes" could only cover small
insurance claims and can't possibly have effect on personal safety.

If the horn was not so unpleasant, the administrators that defined the
90dbA standard understood physics and the pad on the steering wheel was
force sensing to allow the driver to add expression it might be more
acceptable.

What do you mean? Are you suggesting it should be louder if you press
harder?

On that subject, why are horns so hard to find? I've often tried to hoot
at someone and failed to find the precise part at which you must press the
wheel to make the noise. The other thing hard to find is the hazard
warning lights, there's no standard at all for the position of the
switch. I once rented a van where the switch was actually on the
ceiling! They'd also replaced the rearview mirror (which obviously
wouldn't work with a van with no back window) with a satnav. I was not
told it was a satnav - for my whole journey it functioned as a very large
clock.

Stolen Bike
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 20:41:27 +0100, TMS320 wrote:

On 08/08/18 19:21, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 15:24:39 +0100, TMS320 wrote:
On 07/08/18 18:29, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Tue, 07 Aug 2018 15:27:28 +0100, JNugent wrote:

It is intended only to alert other road-users to one's presence.
Er no. It means "You ****ing arsehole, why the hell didn't you
indicate?!"
A horn conveys no information so how are your targets supposed to
know what your problem is?
Well let me see, Mr Smith turns right at a roundabout without
indicating, and someone correctly pulls in front of him, then sounds
their horn when they see he's about to collide with them. He can then
look up the highway code or whatever and find out why the other car had
the right of way.

Just because Mr Smith is not indicating right it is not correct for AN
Other to pull out on a whim. Too many hims and thems. Explain who is
doing what and who ends up in front of whom.

If you don't indicate right at a roundabout, you do not have the right to
turn right. WTF are you doing turning without informing other road users
as to where you intend to go?

It is not intended to convey the message: "Get out of my way
or there might be a crash". I such circumstances, you are supposed
to slow down or stop.
I don't, I drive as close as possible to the vehicle without touching
them, this scares them into not doing it again,
Have you ever followed up the result of your education with the
individuals concerned?
Yes, I often have people banging on my door yelling at me. I had a bus
driver sacked for doing just that, after not indicating and deciding he
had priority over cars at a junction.

So the answer is that you don't know that your education works.

Try that again in English.

Stolen Bike
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 19:29:02 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 10:33:18 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Sat, 04 Aug 2018 12:44:54 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:

By all accounts, any interaction between a cyclist and a driver will
almost inevitably have the latter bleating that the cyclist 'doesn't
pay
road tax'. That this belief is so widespread, despite 'road tax'
having
been abolished over eight decades ago, means that it is not going to
go
away any time soon. The sense of entitlement of the driver is
responsible for over 1,700 deaths every year in Britain.

Teach drivers that the roads do not belong to them. Beat it out of
them. Because that is the only way things are going to change.
Drivers
have to know that if they threaten the life or physical safety of
another road user, then they are going to get seriously injured.

I can get to my destination 10 times faster than you.

Not in any urban environment you can't.

I don't live in such ********s. This is the UK, not Indian slums.

I've ridden in London. I did an eight-mile trip faster than a taxi.

Surely someone such as yourself who enjoys cycling should enjoy the fresh
air and countryside, not built up cities? I look forward to the day oil
runs out and we go back to a simpler more natural way of living.

Stolen Bike
 

On 08/08/18 20:44, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 20:41:27 +0100, TMS320 wrote:

On 08/08/18 19:21, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 15:24:39 +0100, TMS320 wrote:
On 07/08/18 18:29, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Tue, 07 Aug 2018 15:27:28 +0100, JNugent wrote:

It is intended only to alert other road-users to one's presence.
Er no. It means "You ****ing arsehole, why the hell didn't you
indicate?!"
*A horn conveys no information so how are your targets supposed to
know what your problem is?
*Well let me see, Mr Smith turns right at a roundabout without
indicating, and someone correctly pulls in front of him, then sounds
their horn when they see he's about to collide with them.* He can
then look up the highway code or whatever and find out why the other
car had the right of way.

Just because Mr Smith is not indicating right it is not correct for AN
Other to pull out on a whim. Too many hims and thems. Explain who is
doing what and who ends up in front of whom.

If you don't indicate right at a roundabout, you do not have the right
to turn right.* WTF are you doing turning without informing other road
users as to where you intend to go?

When following marked lanes indication is not necessary. Indication is
only useful when making lane changes or where there is ambiguity. And I
live in the south east where most people adapt to cope with each others'
behaviour without going into a hissy fit at every opportunity.

Please explain your scenario in more detail.

It is not intended to convey the message: "Get out of my way
or there might be a crash". I such circumstances, you are supposed
to slow down or stop.
I don't, I drive as close as possible to the vehicle without
touching them, this scares them into not doing it again,
*Have you ever followed up the result of your education with the
individuals concerned?
*Yes, I often have people banging on my door yelling at me. I had a
bus driver sacked for doing just that, after not indicating and
deciding he had priority over cars at a junction.

So the answer is that you don't know that your education works.

Try that again in English.

It's good enough.

Stolen Bike
 

On 08/08/18 20:21, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 20:10:08 +0100, TMS320 wrote:

On 08/08/18 19:16, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 15:24:28 +0100, TMS320 wrote:

On a bicycle, the voice can be useful because the approach behind
pedestrians or horse riders is otherwise silent. When there is
insufficient clearance to get past without having their awareness I
always slow to match their speed before announcing my presence.
*Horses panic at anything, silent or not.

I have only had a horse panic when it was a face on approach. When
approaching from behind the rider needs to know.

A horse noticed my 3.5 litre V8 Range Rover approaching from behind.
The rider was very annoyed when I overtook in 1st gear.

I expect you took great pleasure from it.

Stolen Bike
 

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 9:00:43 PM UTC+1, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
I look forward to the day oil
runs out and we go back to a simpler more natural way of living.

What about my BP shares and pension?

Stolen Bike
 

On 08/08/18 20:43, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 19:20:56 +0100, TMS320 wrote:


It is a special case when stationary.

Why are you making so much fuss about the "correct use of a horn"?
OCD is a DISORDER. Get it fixed.

Why do you make so much fuss about "correct use of a indicators"? OCD
is a DISORDER. Get it fixed.

Perhaps you mean something like this? It is is harder seen from a
driver's perspective than from a high mounted camera. No need.
Adjust speed according to what can be seen.

https://goo.gl/maps/9MSMX69BxzM2 https://goo.gl/maps/R48YMSxzjQk

Incidentally, the bridge has a 2t mgw limit so several drivers
shown here are breaking the rules - plus many others plus a council
official with a Range Rover that knows full well.

WTF are you on about? I can clearly see what's coming the other way,
that is not a blind bridge whatsoever. Unless it's because the
camera is higher up than most drivers.

Cast your eyes up a few lines...

If the horn was not so unpleasant, the administrators that defined
the 90dbA standard understood physics and the pad on the steering
wheel was force sensing to allow the driver to add expression it
might be more acceptable.

What do you mean? Are you suggesting it should be louder if you
press harder?

Quieter if tapped softly.

Stolen Bike
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 21:17:51 +0100, TMS320 wrote:

On 08/08/18 20:43, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 19:20:56 +0100, TMS320 wrote:

It is a special case when stationary.
Why are you making so much fuss about the "correct use of a horn"?
OCD is a DISORDER. Get it fixed.

Why do you make so much fuss about "correct use of a indicators"? OCD
is a DISORDER. Get it fixed.

Perhaps you mean something like this? It is is harder seen from a
driver's perspective than from a high mounted camera. No need.
Adjust speed according to what can be seen.
https://goo.gl/maps/9MSMX69BxzM2 https://goo.gl/maps/R48YMSxzjQk
Incidentally, the bridge has a 2t mgw limit so several drivers
shown here are breaking the rules - plus many others plus a council
official with a Range Rover that knows full well.
WTF are you on about? I can clearly see what's coming the other way,
that is not a blind bridge whatsoever. Unless it's because the
camera is higher up than most drivers.

Cast your eyes up a few lines...

Try waffling less. So what was your point? I never hoot at those. I
just slow down.

If the horn was not so unpleasant, the administrators that defined
the 90dbA standard understood physics and the pad on the steering
wheel was force sensing to allow the driver to add expression it
might be more acceptable.
What do you mean? Are you suggesting it should be louder if you
press harder?

Quieter if tapped softly.

That would just make them go unnoticed. A horn should always be as loud
as possible to inform the arsehole that he failed to drive correctly.

Stolen Bike
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 21:13:27 +0100, wrote:

On Wednesday, August 8, 2018 at 9:00:43 PM UTC+1, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife
wrote:
I look forward to the day oil
runs out and we go back to a simpler more natural way of living.

What about my BP shares and pension?

Why did you work for the evil oil company if you're a naturalist cyclist?

Stolen Bike
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 21:12:01 +0100, TMS320 wrote:

On 08/08/18 20:21, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 20:10:08 +0100, TMS320 wrote:

On 08/08/18 19:16, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 15:24:28 +0100, TMS320 wrote:

On a bicycle, the voice can be useful because the approach behind
pedestrians or horse riders is otherwise silent. When there is
insufficient clearance to get past without having their awareness I
always slow to match their speed before announcing my presence.
Horses panic at anything, silent or not.

I have only had a horse panic when it was a face on approach. When
approaching from behind the rider needs to know.
A horse noticed my 3.5 litre V8 Range Rover approaching from behind.
The rider was very annoyed when I overtook in 1st gear.

I expect you took great pleasure from it.

It was an automatic. It engaged 1st of its own accord. Yeah ok, I
pressed the pedal quite hard, but only to get past the horse before
something came the other way, so I could give it a wide berth. I forgot
how loud the engine could be.

Stolen Bike
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 21:09:45 +0100, TMS320 wrote:

On 08/08/18 20:44, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 20:41:27 +0100, TMS320 wrote:

On 08/08/18 19:21, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 15:24:39 +0100, TMS320 wrote:
On 07/08/18 18:29, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Tue, 07 Aug 2018 15:27:28 +0100, JNugent
wrote:

It is intended only to alert other road-users to one's presence.
Er no. It means "You ****ing arsehole, why the hell didn't you
indicate?!"
A horn conveys no information so how are your targets supposed to
know what your problem is?
Well let me see, Mr Smith turns right at a roundabout without
indicating, and someone correctly pulls in front of him, then sounds
their horn when they see he's about to collide with them. He can
then look up the highway code or whatever and find out why the other
car had the right of way.

Just because Mr Smith is not indicating right it is not correct for AN
Other to pull out on a whim. Too many hims and thems. Explain who is
doing what and who ends up in front of whom.
If you don't indicate right at a roundabout, you do not have the right
to turn right. WTF are you doing turning without informing other road
users as to where you intend to go?

When following marked lanes indication is not necessary. Indication is
only useful when making lane changes or where there is ambiguity. And I
live in the south east where most people adapt to cope with each others'
behaviour without going into a hissy fit at every opportunity.

Please explain your scenario in more detail.

Now think of a roundabout without lanes. Or maybe one with two entry
lanes and three exits. And don't assume that cars at the other side can
tell what lane you're in. No indicator means you're going straight ahead,
end of story.

It is not intended to convey the message: "Get out of my way
or there might be a crash". I such circumstances, you are supposed
to slow down or stop.
I don't, I drive as close as possible to the vehicle without
touching them, this scares them into not doing it again,
Have you ever followed up the result of your education with the
individuals concerned?
Yes, I often have people banging on my door yelling at me. I had a
bus driver sacked for doing just that, after not indicating and
deciding he had priority over cars at a junction.

So the answer is that you don't know that your education works.
Try that again in English.

It's good enough.

I told you that a bus driver was sacked due to his inabilities. And you
reply with the nonsense, "So the answer is that you don't know that your
education works" - what is that supposed to mean?

Stolen Bike
 

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 19:28:02 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:
Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:

I wonder if people who smoke cigarettes get to jump the waiting list
at the local NHS hospital....

As I just said, it doesn't matter where the money goes, car drivers pay
a lot more tax than cyclists.

And smokers 'pay a lot more tax' than non-smokers.

It still gives you sweet **** all where 'rights' are concerned.

It gives us the right to blow it in your face you silly little pansy.

That was easy.

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

Stolen Bike
 

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 19:29:02 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:
Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 10:33:18 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:

Teach drivers that the roads do not belong to them. Beat it out of
them. Because that is the only way things are going to change.
Drivers have to know that if they threaten the life or physical
safety of another road user, then they are going to get seriously
injured.

I can get to my destination 10 times faster than you.

Not in any urban environment you can't.

I don't live in such ********s. This is the UK, not Indian slums.

I've ridden in London. I did an eight-mile trip faster than a taxi.

Surely someone such as yourself who enjoys cycling should enjoy the fresh
air and countryside, not built up cities? I look forward to the day oil
runs out and we go back to a simpler more natural way of living.

Did 'any urban environment' confuse you?

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

Stolen Bike
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 23:16:19 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 19:29:02 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:
Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 10:33:18 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:

Teach drivers that the roads do not belong to them. Beat it out of
them. Because that is the only way things are going to change.
Drivers have to know that if they threaten the life or physical
safety of another road user, then they are going to get seriously
injured.

I can get to my destination 10 times faster than you.

Not in any urban environment you can't.

I don't live in such ********s. This is the UK, not Indian slums.

I've ridden in London. I did an eight-mile trip faster than a taxi.

Surely someone such as yourself who enjoys cycling should enjoy the
fresh
air and countryside, not built up cities? I look forward to the day oil
runs out and we go back to a simpler more natural way of living.

Did 'any urban environment' confuse you?

No, what makes you think it did?

I don't live or go to places urban enough to drive slower than a cyclist.

Stolen Bike
 

On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 23:14:12 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 08 Aug 2018 19:28:02 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:
Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:

I wonder if people who smoke cigarettes get to jump the waiting list
at the local NHS hospital....

As I just said, it doesn't matter where the money goes, car drivers
pay
a lot more tax than cyclists.

And smokers 'pay a lot more tax' than non-smokers.

It still gives you sweet **** all where 'rights' are concerned.

It gives us the right to blow it in your face you silly little pansy.

That was easy.

Can't your lungs handle carbon particulates? I'm sure you could used to
it if you tried.

Everyone KEEPS having Endless Fun Beating the Shit out of PoorHelpless Gay Goran Razovic! LOL
 

On Mon, 06 Aug 2018 20:03:19 +0100, David wrote:



"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
...

On Mon, 06 Aug 2018 10:38:00 +0100, David wrote:



"%" wrote in message ... On
2018-08-01 9:00 AM, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 16:25:42 +0100, David wrote:



"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 13:13:03 +0100, David wrote:



"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 05:58:59 +0100, David wrote:

its debbie's foot

Who is Debbie and how many feet is her foot?

9

Doesn't that make her tread on her own toes?

I wear a 10 1/2.
Size is not equal to length of foot in feet.

yes it is

Do you have $34?

I'm in the original country, where we use £.

I have a link.

That's a very arbitrary comment.

Everyone KEEPS having Endless Fun Beating the Shit out of PoorHelpless Gay Goran Razovic! LOL
 

On Mon, 06 Aug 2018 19:09:22 +0100, % wrote:

On 2018-08-06 11:03 AM, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Mon, 06 Aug 2018 10:38:50 +0100, David wrote:



"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
...

On Thu, 02 Aug 2018 15:22:34 +0100, David wrote:



"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
...

On Thu, 02 Aug 2018 00:23:56 +0100, % wrote:

On 2018-08-01 3:52 PM, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 19:22:26 +0100, David wrote:



"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 17:03:08 +0100, % wrote:

On 2018-08-01 9:00 AM, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 16:25:42 +0100, David
wrote:



"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 13:13:03 +0100, David
wrote:



"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 05:58:59 +0100, David
wrote:

its debbie's foot

Who is Debbie and how many feet is her foot?

9

Doesn't that make her tread on her own toes?

I wear a 10 1/2.
Size is not equal to length of foot in feet.

yes it is

Anyone with a 10.5 foot foot would only be able to get work as a
clown.

my foot size is 10 1/2" in size
" isn't feet.
' is feet.


i foot is one foot ,
two feet is two feet ,
when you catch a fish ,
one foot is three feet

There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore looking
like
an idiot.

I have excitement.

Is your rod erect?

what kind of rod?
I don't want to examine your tool that closely.


try some bait on the end on your line

What am I going to catch with it?

Everyone KEEPS having Endless Fun Beating the Shit out of Poor Helpless Gay Goran Razovic! LOL
 

"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
...

On Mon, 06 Aug 2018 20:03:19 +0100, David wrote:



"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
...

On Mon, 06 Aug 2018 10:38:00 +0100, David wrote:



"%" wrote in message ... On
2018-08-01 9:00 AM, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 16:25:42 +0100, David wrote:



"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 13:13:03 +0100, David wrote:



"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 05:58:59 +0100, David wrote:

its debbie's foot

Who is Debbie and how many feet is her foot?

9

Doesn't that make her tread on her own toes?

I wear a 10 1/2.
Size is not equal to length of foot in feet.

yes it is

Do you have $34?

I'm in the original country, where we use £.

I have a link.

That's a very arbitrary comment.

its my website, www.saintdavid.me

Everyone KEEPS having Endless Fun Beating the Shit out of Poor Helpless Gay Goran Razovic! LOL
 

"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
...

On Mon, 06 Aug 2018 10:38:50 +0100, David wrote:



"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
...

On Thu, 02 Aug 2018 15:22:34 +0100, David wrote:



"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
...

On Thu, 02 Aug 2018 00:23:56 +0100, % wrote:

On 2018-08-01 3:52 PM, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 19:22:26 +0100, David wrote:



"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 17:03:08 +0100, % wrote:

On 2018-08-01 9:00 AM, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 16:25:42 +0100, David
wrote:



"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 13:13:03 +0100, David
wrote:



"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
...

On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 05:58:59 +0100, David
wrote:

its debbie's foot

Who is Debbie and how many feet is her foot?

9

Doesn't that make her tread on her own toes?

I wear a 10 1/2.
Size is not equal to length of foot in feet.

yes it is

Anyone with a 10.5 foot foot would only be able to get work as a
clown.

my foot size is 10 1/2" in size
" isn't feet.
' is feet.


i foot is one foot ,
two feet is two feet ,
when you catch a fish ,
one foot is three feet

There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore looking
like
an idiot.

I have excitement.

Is your rod erect?

what kind of rod?

I don't want to examine your tool that closely.

I kind of just said that. I apologize if it is too loosely.