A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » UK
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Angry driver on the wrong side of the road gets his comeuppance



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old July 1st 19, 11:22 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,574
Default Angry driver on the wrong side of the road gets his comeuppance

On 01/07/2019 17:54, Simon Jester wrote:

On Monday, July 1, 2019 at 5:30:33 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 01/07/2019 17:19, Simon Jester wrote:
On Monday, July 1, 2019 at 2:18:19 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:


[ ... ]

I have no adverse prejudice towards cyclists. I am happy to
acknowledge that a significant minority of them more or less
comply with the law.


The above statement shows how prejudiced you are.
It's like saying.
'I have nothing against Black people, some of them are almost as
good as White people.'


It's actually exactly like saying that some cyclists are law
abiding and that others (as it happens, these days, a majority)
are not.
That's what it's like saying. It is nothing at all like saying
anything to do with being black.


Thank you for proving my point.


Before you start ranting I do consider the anti-cyclist bias
equivalent to racism.


You can be as wrong and as stupid as you like, I can't stop you.
Being black (or Jewish or any other inherent characteristic) is
not a chosen behaviour. Being a chav scofflaw cyclist *is* a
chosen and deliberate behaviour. Your statement about what you
consider (that's perhaps putting it a bit high) doesn't change
that.


Enlisting in a particular religion is not a choice?


I would not previously have believed that you are so stupid as to
think that being black - or being Jewish - is a voluntary choice.


How is being Jewish NOT a voluntary choice?
I was raised as a Christian then I grew up and stopped believing in
fairy tales.


You aren't helping yourself. Stop digging.


I'm backing Jester on this one; you tried to conflate "professing a
religion" with "having a skin colour." Quite distinct.


Being Jewish is not "professing a religion", though it's easy to see why
some people make that mistake. Nevertheless, I'm surprised that you
didn't know that.
Telling the SS at the railway station that you were no longer practising
Judaeism didn't save you. Being Jewish is hereditary via the female side
and applies even to a completely non-religious Jew. You can look it up
if you like.


So you are saying there exists a Jewish gene?


No.


So it is not hereditary, merely a mindset.


Why does there have to be a particularly-identified gene or set of genes
in order to be hereditary?

Is there an Invisible Pink Unicorn gene?


Only on your planet.


Earth or Terra you mean.


Forget the playground stuff. This isn't your old nursery alma mater.

What happens when a Jew converts to Islam? Does their brain explode or simply rewire itself?


You'd better see whether you can find such a person to ask them.
BTW: If you're interested, you could always do a bit of reading rather
than just shooting aimlessly from the hip.
A good place to start:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_is_a_Jew%3F


Read it.


Is that an imperative (as in "You should read it")?

I had read it before I cited it.

Or was it a claim that you have read it?

If you have, you obviously haven't understood it.

Doesn't change the fact that being Jewish is not hereditary if an adult chooses to no longer be Jewish. No physical exam no matter how thorough can tell whether or not a person is Jewish. DNA can pinpoint ancestry but not fairy tale beliefs.


You refuse to believe that there is such a thing as a non-religious Jew,
do you?

Ads
  #62  
Old July 1st 19, 11:29 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,875
Default Angry driver on the wrong side of the road gets his comeuppance

On 01/07/2019 22:08, JNugent wrote:
On 01/07/2019 21:46, TMS320 wrote:
On 01/07/2019 14:20, JNugent wrote:
On 01/07/2019 10:54, TMS320 wrote:
On 01/07/2019 00:16, JNugent wrote:

Now, tell me why I should respect cyclists who break traffic law
constantly and repeatedly.

Why should I respect somebody that chooses to use a dangerous form
of transport (no matter how careful and law abiding the driver) and
believes he can tell others using a much safer form of transport
that their behaviour is dangerous.

Unlike you, I work on the basis that criticism of behaviour should
only go sideways and up, not down.

IOW, you make up whatever you need to in order to evade questions
whose answers are not advantageous to you.


In other words, criticism of behaviour should only go sideways and up,
not down.

How is doing otherwise advantageous to me?


That's the ticket. Create your own definitions within your own little
world. That way you think your "arguments" (yes, I know...) cannot be
beaten.


Whereas it is always your habit to obfuscate or change the subject (as
immediately above).

You have now played your hand. If you think my point of view is open to
argument then have a go. If you don't have a go then you can't beat it.
  #63  
Old July 1st 19, 11:56 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
jnugent
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 11,574
Default Angry driver on the wrong side of the road gets his comeuppance

On 01/07/2019 23:29, TMS320 wrote:
On 01/07/2019 22:08, JNugent wrote:
On 01/07/2019 21:46, TMS320 wrote:
On 01/07/2019 14:20, JNugent wrote:
On 01/07/2019 10:54, TMS320 wrote:
On 01/07/2019 00:16, JNugent wrote:

Now, tell me why I should respect cyclists who break traffic law
constantly and repeatedly.

Why should I respect somebody that chooses to use a dangerous form
of transport (no matter how careful and law abiding the driver) and
believes he can tell others using a much safer form of transport
that their behaviour is dangerous.

Unlike you, I work on the basis that criticism of behaviour should
only go sideways and up, not down.

IOW, you make up whatever you need to in order to evade questions
whose answers are not advantageous to you.

In other words, criticism of behaviour should only go sideways and
up, not down.

How is doing otherwise advantageous to me?


That's the ticket. Create your own definitions within your own little
world. That way you think your "arguments" (yes, I know...) cannot be
beaten.


Whereas it is always your habit to obfuscate or change the subject (as
immediately above).

You have now played your hand. If you think my point of view is open to
argument then have a go. If you don't have a go then you can't beat it.


It isn't easy to beat "arguments" couched in meaningless terms and
founded upon meaningless "principles".

Participants in argument have to operate from a common premise or set of
premises. Your premises are decidedly odd (whatever "criticism of
behaviour up, down and sideways" might mean).
  #64  
Old July 2nd 19, 10:42 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,875
Default Angry driver on the wrong side of the road gets his comeuppance

On 01/07/2019 23:56, JNugent wrote:
On 01/07/2019 23:29, TMS320 wrote:
On 01/07/2019 22:08, JNugent wrote:
On 01/07/2019 21:46, TMS320 wrote:
On 01/07/2019 14:20, JNugent wrote:
On 01/07/2019 10:54, TMS320 wrote:
On 01/07/2019 00:16, JNugent wrote:

Now, tell me why I should respect cyclists who break traffic law
constantly and repeatedly.

Why should I respect somebody that chooses to use a dangerous form
of transport (no matter how careful and law abiding the driver)
and believes he can tell others using a much safer form of
transport that their behaviour is dangerous.

Unlike you, I work on the basis that criticism of behaviour should
only go sideways and up, not down.

IOW, you make up whatever you need to in order to evade questions
whose answers are not advantageous to you.

In other words, criticism of behaviour should only go sideways and
up, not down.

How is doing otherwise advantageous to me?

That's the ticket. Create your own definitions within your own little
world. That way you think your "arguments" (yes, I know...) cannot be
beaten.


Whereas it is always your habit to obfuscate or change the subject (as
immediately above).

You have now played your hand. If you think my point of view is open
to argument then have a go. If you don't have a go then you can't beat
it.


It isn't easy to beat "arguments" couched in meaningless terms and
founded upon meaningless "principles".


I told you my stand point. There is no "argument" that can change my
change my mind about it.

Or for thinking that your attitude is wrong. You have seen other recent
posts, I won't repeat it.

Participants in argument have to operate from a common premise or set of
premises. Your premises are decidedly odd (whatever "criticism of
behaviour up, down and sideways" might mean).


You often tell people what you think they mean - which does not resemble
anything they wrote. You do understand it but you can't twist it.
  #65  
Old July 2nd 19, 10:50 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Kerr-Mudd,John[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 374
Default Angry driver on the wrong side of the road gets his comeuppance

On Mon, 01 Jul 2019 20:46:54 GMT, TMS320 wrote:

On 01/07/2019 12:39, MrCheerful wrote:
On 01/07/2019 11:43, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
On Mon, 01 Jul 2019 10:18:58 GMT, TMS320 wrote:

On 01/07/2019 10:55, MrCheerful wrote:
On 01/07/2019 10:40, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:

Why do big box drivers ignore speed limits?

Why do cyclists ignore all the rules of both the road and common
sense?

Remarkable, but not surprising, that motorists love to dodge the
question.

You have a favourite statistic (even though it is meaningless, but
let's run with it), that cyclists harm the same number of
pedestrians per vehicle mile as drivers. In other words, all this
alleged law breaking by cyclists creates no additional harm. There
is no possible moral argument for demanding that the individual's
choice should produce a different outcome.

The drivers know it's bad (pollution deathrate etc) but mustn't let
themselves know this, so feel threatened by anything that shows them
in a bad light. It's a denial thing.



I can guarantee that if I were to take a short journey locally, 99
percent of the cyclists will be breaking one or many laws,


Even if this is right, so what?

How many motorists did they kill?

despite their
tiny numbers (probably a dozen in a three mile journey).ツ* Whereas
the vast majority of the hundreds of motor vehicles seen in the same
distance will not be noticeably breaking laws and are easily traced
and apprehended if they do.


Whereas 100% of drivers are a significant source of danger to
pedestrians. Before they break any laws.

I also note that despite this being a cycling group you continually
try to move it to a driving group, why is that?ツ* are you too
embarassed to admit that uk cyclists are a terrible shower of
scofflaws?


What do you expect?


When idiots come in this group slagging off cyclists, what do you expect?



--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.
  #66  
Old July 2nd 19, 10:53 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Kerr-Mudd,John[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 374
Default Angry driver on the wrong side of the road gets his comeuppance

On Mon, 01 Jul 2019 16:54:57 GMT, Simon Jester
wrote:

On Monday, July 1, 2019 at 5:30:33 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 01/07/2019 17:19, Simon Jester wrote:
On Monday, July 1, 2019 at 2:18:19 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 01/07/2019 10:40, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
On Mon, 01 Jul 2019 00:55:10 GMT, JNugent
wrote:

On 01/07/2019 01:24, Simon Jester wrote:
On Monday, July 1, 2019 at 12:16:05 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 30/06/2019 22:23, Simon Jester wrote:

On Sunday, June 30, 2019 at 8:40:07 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 30/06/2019 16:46, Simon Jester wrote:
On Sunday, June 30, 2019 at 3:43:09 PM UTC+1, JNugent
wrote:


[Discussion diverted to religion and ethnicity; typical troll tactic.]

PDFTT.



--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.
  #67  
Old July 2nd 19, 11:03 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Kerr-Mudd,John[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 374
Default Angry driver on the wrong side of the road gets his comeuppance

On Mon, 01 Jul 2019 16:13:47 GMT, Simon Jester
wrote:

On Monday, July 1, 2019 at 4:51:29 PM UTC+1, budstaff wrote:
On Monday, 1 July 2019 01:55:11 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 01/07/2019 01:24, Simon Jester wrote:
On Monday, July 1, 2019 at 12:16:05 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 30/06/2019 22:23, Simon Jester wrote:

On Sunday, June 30, 2019 at 8:40:07 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 30/06/2019 16:46, Simon Jester wrote:
On Sunday, June 30, 2019 at 3:43:09 PM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:

I have no adverse prejudice towards cyclists. I am happy to
acknowledge that a significant minority of them more or less
comply with the law.

The above statement shows how prejudiced you are.

It's like saying.
'I have nothing against Black people, some of them are almost
as good as White people.'

It's actually exactly like saying that some cyclists are law
abiding and that others (as it happens, these days, a
majority) are not.

That's what it's like saying. It is nothing at all like saying
anything to do with being black.

Thank you for proving my point.

Before you start ranting I do consider the anti-cyclist bias
equivalent to racism.

You can be as wrong and as stupid as you like, I can't stop
you.

Being black (or Jewish or any other inherent characteristic)
is not a chosen behaviour. Being a chav scofflaw cyclist *is*
a chosen and deliberate behaviour. Your statement about what
you consider (that's perhaps putting it a bit high) doesn't
change that.

Enlisting in a particular religion is not a choice?

I would not previously have believed that you are so stupid as
to think that being black - or being Jewish - is a voluntary
choice.

How is being Jewish NOT a voluntary choice?
I was raised as a Christian then I grew up and stopped believing
in fairy tales.

You aren't helping yourself. Stop digging.

But you said it, so you must be.

Now, tell me why I should respect cyclists who break traffic law
constantly and repeatedly.

How do you feel about motorists who break speed limits?

What does it have to do with the way that cyclists behave (most of
'em)?


As this veered into religion, let him who is without sin cast the
first stone.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CbgqtvJOJus

I felt sure that would be
https://youtu.be/FQ5YU_spBw0

--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.
  #68  
Old July 2nd 19, 12:05 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
MrCheerful
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,757
Default Angry driver on the wrong side of the road gets his comeuppance

On 02/07/2019 10:50, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
On Mon, 01 Jul 2019 20:46:54 GMT, TMS320 wrote:

On 01/07/2019 12:39, MrCheerful wrote:
On 01/07/2019 11:43, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
On Mon, 01 Jul 2019 10:18:58 GMT, TMS320 wrote:

On 01/07/2019 10:55, MrCheerful wrote:
On 01/07/2019 10:40, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:

Why do big box drivers ignore speed limits?

Why do cyclists ignore all the rules of both the road and common
sense?

Remarkable, but not surprising, that motorists love to dodge the
question.

You have a favourite statistic (even though it is meaningless, but
let's run with it), that cyclists harm the same number of
pedestrians per vehicle mile as drivers. In other words, all this
alleged law breaking by cyclists creates no additional harm. There
is no possible moral argument for demanding that the individual's
choice should produce a different outcome.

The drivers know it's bad (pollution deathrate etc) but mustn't let
themselves know this, so feel threatened by anything that shows them
in a bad light. It's a denial thing.



I can guarantee that if I were to take a short journey locally, 99
percent of the cyclists will be breaking one or many laws,


Even if this is right, so what?

How many motorists did they kill?

despite their
tiny numbers (probably a dozen in a three mile journey).テつ* Whereas
the vast majority of the hundreds of motor vehicles seen in the same
distance will not be noticeably breaking laws and are easily traced
and apprehended if they do.


Whereas 100% of drivers are a significant source of danger to
pedestrians. Before they break any laws.

I also note that despite this being a cycling group you continually
try to move it to a driving group, why is that?テつ* are you too
embarassed to admit that uk cyclists are a terrible shower of
scofflaws?


What do you expect?


When idiots come in this group slagging off cyclists, what do you expect?




So, logically, if you want to slag off car drivers, then surely you
would go to a driving group?
  #69  
Old July 2nd 19, 12:50 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
TMS320
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,875
Default Angry driver on the wrong side of the road gets his comeuppance

On 02/07/2019 12:05, MrCheerful wrote:
On 02/07/2019 10:50, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
On Mon, 01 Jul 2019 20:46:54 GMT, TMS320 wrote:

On 01/07/2019 12:39, MrCheerful wrote:
On 01/07/2019 11:43, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
On Mon, 01 Jul 2019 10:18:58 GMT, TMS320 wrote:

On 01/07/2019 10:55, MrCheerful wrote:
On 01/07/2019 10:40, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:

Why do big box drivers ignore speed limits?

Why do cyclists ignore all the rules of both the road and common
sense?

Remarkable, but not surprising, that motorists love to dodge the
question.

You have a favourite statistic (even though it is meaningless, but
let's run with it), that cyclists harm the same number of
pedestrians per vehicle mile as drivers. In other words, all this
alleged law breaking by cyclists creates no additional harm. There
is no possible moral argument for demanding that the individual's
choice should produce a different outcome.

The drivers know it's bad (pollution deathrate etc) but mustn't let
themselves know this, so feel threatened by anything that shows them
in a bad light. It's a denial thing.



I can guarantee that if I were to take a short journey locally, 99
percent of the cyclists will be breaking one or many laws,

Even if this is right, so what?

How many motorists did they kill?

despite their
tiny numbers (probably a dozen in a three mile journey).テつ* Whereas
the vast majority of the hundreds of motor vehicles seen in the same
distance will not be noticeably breaking laws and are easily traced
and apprehended if they do.

Whereas 100% of drivers are a significant source of danger to
pedestrians. Before they break any laws.

I also note that despite this being a cycling group you continually
try to move it to a driving group, why is that?テつ* are you too
embarassed to admit that uk cyclists are a terrible shower of
scofflaws?

What do you expect?

When idiots come in this group slagging off cyclists, what do you expect?


So, logically, if you want to slag off car drivers, then surely you
would go to a driving group?


It depends on how the slagging off is couched. Most of what ypu describe
is second hand (something you thought you saw happening at a distance)
or third hand (a newspaper report). Cyclists are evil because they don't
obey laws, innit.

Well, drivers are a significant cause of actual harm. Don't be so smug.
  #70  
Old July 2nd 19, 01:33 PM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Kerr-Mudd,John[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 374
Default Angry driver on the wrong side of the road gets his comeuppance

On Tue, 02 Jul 2019 11:05:55 GMT, MrCheerful
wrote:

On 02/07/2019 10:50, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
On Mon, 01 Jul 2019 20:46:54 GMT, TMS320 wrote:

so-called "Mr" so-called "Cheerful":

I also note that despite this being a cycling group you continually
try to move it to a driving group, why is that?テつ* are you too
embarassed to admit that uk cyclists are a terrible shower of
scofflaws?

What do you expect?


When idiots come in this group slagging off cyclists, what do you
expect?




So, logically, if you want to slag off car drivers, then surely you
would go to a driving group?


I guess some might.
But this group is for cyclists. DKUATB.

--
Bah, and indeed, Humbug.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Moment driver knocks cyclist off bike on wrong side of road in hitand run (video) Bod[_5_] UK 2 June 5th 19 09:05 PM
Terminator on the wrong side of the road Alycidon UK 3 January 22nd 16 10:27 AM
cycling on the wrong side of the road wafflycat[_2_] UK 21 July 26th 08 09:28 PM
wrong-way sidewalk rider gets comeuppance Ben Pfaff General 51 October 10th 05 10:14 PM
Wrong Side Of The Road winnard Social Issues 33 August 10th 05 03:22 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:07 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ゥ2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.