Thieving cyclist gets caught and owned by car driver

I thought cyclists were super fit, one punch killers? So much for cycles
being the quick way to get through traffic as well, the car easily
caught the cyclist despite the cyclist using the pavement to try to escape.

http://www.vancouversun.com/Vancouve...009/story.html

"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
...

I thought cyclists were super fit, one punch killers?

lol, more like malnourished cry-baby weaklings who show themselves up for
what they really are when they can't pedal fast enough to evade their
victims. Time and time again we see them done over (easily) by *adult male*
pedestrians and motorists, no wonder they usually pick on women, children
and the elderly.

On 29/01/2014 09:56, Mrcheerful wrote:
I thought cyclists were super fit, one punch killers? So much for cycles
being the quick way to get through traffic as well, the car easily
caught the cyclist despite the cyclist using the pavement to try to escape.

http://www.vancouversun.com/Vancouve...009/story.html


"Fincham said the driver and cyclist got in an argument over right of
way on the Dunsmuir bike lane and “allegedly the cyclist reached in to
the driver’s car and grabbed some personal belongings.”

So as well as being a sponging freeloader, the cyclist was also a thief.

He probably wouldn't have attempted that theft if cyclists were properly
regulated & easily identified.

I wonder if Mr Crispin has any comments to make?

I'd understand if he didn't.





--
Dave - Cyclists VORC
Bicycles are for Children. Like masturbation, something you should grow
out of.
There is something seriously sick and stunted about grown men who want
to ride a bike."

On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 18:03:43 +0000, Dave- Cyclists VORC
wrote:

On 29/01/2014 09:56, Mrcheerful wrote:
I thought cyclists were super fit, one punch killers? So much for cycles
being the quick way to get through traffic as well, the car easily
caught the cyclist despite the cyclist using the pavement to try to escape.

http://www.vancouversun.com/Vancouve...009/story.html


"Fincham said the driver and cyclist got in an argument over right of
way on the Dunsmuir bike lane and “allegedly the cyclist reached in to
the driver’s car and grabbed some personal belongings.”

So as well as being a sponging freeloader, the cyclist was also a thief.

He probably wouldn't have attempted that theft if cyclists were properly
regulated & easily identified.

I wonder if Mr Crispin has any comments to make?

I'd understand if he didn't.

I think you mean, either:

I wonder if Mr Crispin *had* any comments to make?

I'd understand if he didn't.

or,

I wonder if Mr Crispin has any comments to make?

I'd understand it if he *doesn't*.

On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 18:14:17 +0000, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 18:03:43 +0000, Dave- Cyclists VORC
wrote:

On 29/01/2014 09:56, Mrcheerful wrote:
I thought cyclists were super fit, one punch killers? So much for cycles
being the quick way to get through traffic as well, the car easily
caught the cyclist despite the cyclist using the pavement to try to escape.

http://www.vancouversun.com/Vancouve...009/story.html


"Fincham said the driver and cyclist got in an argument over right of
way on the Dunsmuir bike lane and “allegedly the cyclist reached in to
the driver’s car and grabbed some personal belongings.”

So as well as being a sponging freeloader, the cyclist was also a thief.

He probably wouldn't have attempted that theft if cyclists were properly
regulated & easily identified.

I wonder if Mr Crispin has any comments to make?

I'd understand if he didn't.

I think you mean, either:

I wonder if Mr Crispin *had* any comments to make?

I'd understand if he didn't.

or,

I wonder if Mr Crispin has any comments to make?

I'd understand it if he *doesn't*.


Is that the best that you can do in a cycling newsgroup?


Judith

On 29/01/2014 18:14, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 18:03:43 +0000, Dave- Cyclists VORC
wrote:

On 29/01/2014 09:56, Mrcheerful wrote:
I thought cyclists were super fit, one punch killers? So much for cycles
being the quick way to get through traffic as well, the car easily
caught the cyclist despite the cyclist using the pavement to try to escape.

http://www.vancouversun.com/Vancouve...009/story.html


"Fincham said the driver and cyclist got in an argument over right of
way on the Dunsmuir bike lane and “allegedly the cyclist reached in to
the driver’s car and grabbed some personal belongings.”

So as well as being a sponging freeloader, the cyclist was also a thief.

He probably wouldn't have attempted that theft if cyclists were properly
regulated & easily identified.

I wonder if Mr Crispin has any comments to make?

I'd understand if he didn't.

I think you mean, either:

I wonder if Mr Crispin *had* any comments to make?
I'd understand if he didn't.

or,
I wonder if Mr Crispin has any comments to make?

I'd understand it if he *doesn't*.

Actually, neither of you is completely right.

It should strictly run: "I wonder whether... ".

That's because "if" is not a synonym for "whether", even if it is
commonly misused as though it were.

[See how I used "if" correctly there?]

On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 19:00:46 +0000, JNugent
wrote:

On 29/01/2014 18:14, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 18:03:43 +0000, Dave- Cyclists VORC
wrote:

On 29/01/2014 09:56, Mrcheerful wrote:
I thought cyclists were super fit, one punch killers? So much for cycles
being the quick way to get through traffic as well, the car easily
caught the cyclist despite the cyclist using the pavement to try to escape.

http://www.vancouversun.com/Vancouve...009/story.html


"Fincham said the driver and cyclist got in an argument over right of
way on the Dunsmuir bike lane and “allegedly the cyclist reached in to
the driver’s car and grabbed some personal belongings.”

So as well as being a sponging freeloader, the cyclist was also a thief.

He probably wouldn't have attempted that theft if cyclists were properly
regulated & easily identified.

I wonder if Mr Crispin has any comments to make?

I'd understand if he didn't.

I think you mean, either:

I wonder if Mr Crispin *had* any comments to make?
I'd understand if he didn't.

or,
I wonder if Mr Crispin has any comments to make?

I'd understand it if he *doesn't*.

Actually, neither of you is completely right.

It should strictly run: "I wonder whether... ".

That's because "if" is not a synonym for "whether", even if it is
commonly misused as though it were.

[See how I used "if" correctly there?]

You are correct, but it's no good trying to teach Medwit to run before
he can walk.

On 29/01/2014 18:14, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 18:03:43 +0000, Dave- Cyclists VORC
wrote:

On 29/01/2014 09:56, Mrcheerful wrote:
I thought cyclists were super fit, one punch killers? So much for cycles
being the quick way to get through traffic as well, the car easily
caught the cyclist despite the cyclist using the pavement to try to escape.

http://www.vancouversun.com/Vancouve...009/story.html


"Fincham said the driver and cyclist got in an argument over right of
way on the Dunsmuir bike lane and “allegedly the cyclist reached in to
the driver’s car and grabbed some personal belongings.”

So as well as being a sponging freeloader, the cyclist was also a thief.

He probably wouldn't have attempted that theft if cyclists were properly
regulated & easily identified.

I wonder if Mr Crispin has any comments to make?

I'd understand if he didn't.

I think you mean, either:

I wonder if Mr Crispin *had* any comments to make?

I'd understand if he didn't.

or,

I wonder if Mr Crispin has any comments to make?

I'd understand it if he *doesn't*.

Another off topic post.

I suggest you try uk.rec.pedantic****

--
Dave - Cyclists VORC
Bicycles are for Children. Like masturbation, something you should grow
out of.
There is something seriously sick and stunted about grown men who want
to ride a bike."

On 29/01/2014 19:08, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 19:00:46 +0000, JNugent
wrote:

On 29/01/2014 18:14, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 18:03:43 +0000, Dave- Cyclists VORC
wrote:

On 29/01/2014 09:56, Mrcheerful wrote:
I thought cyclists were super fit, one punch killers? So much for cycles
being the quick way to get through traffic as well, the car easily
caught the cyclist despite the cyclist using the pavement to try to escape.

http://www.vancouversun.com/Vancouve...009/story.html


"Fincham said the driver and cyclist got in an argument over right of
way on the Dunsmuir bike lane and “allegedly the cyclist reached in to
the driver’s car and grabbed some personal belongings.”

So as well as being a sponging freeloader, the cyclist was also a thief.

He probably wouldn't have attempted that theft if cyclists were properly
regulated & easily identified.

I wonder if Mr Crispin has any comments to make?

I'd understand if he didn't.

I think you mean, either:

I wonder if Mr Crispin *had* any comments to make?
I'd understand if he didn't.

or,
I wonder if Mr Crispin has any comments to make?

I'd understand it if he *doesn't*.

Actually, neither of you is completely right.

It should strictly run: "I wonder whether... ".

That's because "if" is not a synonym for "whether", even if it is
commonly misused as though it were.

[See how I used "if" correctly there?]

You are correct, but it's no good trying to teach Medwit to run before
he can walk.

Still no comment on cycling matters then?

--
Dave - Cyclists VORC
Bicycles are for Children. Like masturbation, something you should grow
out of.
There is something seriously sick and stunted about grown men who want
to ride a bike."

On 29/01/2014 19:08, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 19:00:46 +0000, JNugent
wrote:

On 29/01/2014 18:14, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jan 2014 18:03:43 +0000, Dave- Cyclists VORC
wrote:

On 29/01/2014 09:56, Mrcheerful wrote:
I thought cyclists were super fit, one punch killers? So much for cycles
being the quick way to get through traffic as well, the car easily
caught the cyclist despite the cyclist using the pavement to try to escape.

http://www.vancouversun.com/Vancouve...009/story.html


"Fincham said the driver and cyclist got in an argument over right of
way on the Dunsmuir bike lane and “allegedly the cyclist reached in to
the driver’s car and grabbed some personal belongings.”

So as well as being a sponging freeloader, the cyclist was also a thief.

He probably wouldn't have attempted that theft if cyclists were properly
regulated & easily identified.

I wonder if Mr Crispin has any comments to make?

I'd understand if he didn't.

I think you mean, either:

I wonder if Mr Crispin *had* any comments to make?
I'd understand if he didn't.

or,
I wonder if Mr Crispin has any comments to make?

I'd understand it if he *doesn't*.

Actually, neither of you is completely right.

It should strictly run: "I wonder whether... ".

That's because "if" is not a synonym for "whether", even if it is
commonly misused as though it were.

[See how I used "if" correctly there?]

You are correct, but it's no good trying to teach Medwit to run before
he can walk.

Written by the halfwit who wrote;

"I can understand you reluctance to answer."

Ha ha ha ha ha ha!

Now do try to concentrate. This is a cycling NG.

--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk