A Driver

On 25/11/2019 14:32, Simon Mason wrote:
On Monday, November 25, 2019 at 1:54:05 PM UTC, Bod wrote:
he spokesperson said: ‘This means all the journeys were uninsured and
some passenger journeys took place with unlicensed drivers, one of which
had previously had their licence revoked by TfL.’

Along with the 2 million other drivers with no insurance.
Law abiding motorists, my backside.

I'll be fair to the private hire "industry" and say that "no insurance"
in that context usually means "inadequate insurance for hire and reward"
rather than the complete absence of a policy.

But the whole industry, UK-wide, needs to be re-examined and the system
tightened up - a lot.

On 25/11/2019 12:38, TMS320 wrote:
On 25/11/2019 12:10, JNugent wrote:
On 25/11/2019 08:28, TMS320 wrote:
On 25/11/2019 01:34, JNugent wrote:
On 25/11/2019 00:44, TMS320 wrote:
On 25/11/2019 00:15, JNugent wrote:
On 24/11/2019 23:50, TMS320 wrote:

On 24/11/2019 20:35, JNugent wrote:
On 24/11/2019 19:59, TMS320 wrote:

The hard part is to define what makes a "good driver".

A couple of elementary and essential characteristics would
probably be:

(a) will not drive a vehicle which does not comply with the
requirements of the law and in particular, is fitted with all
required lights and fully-working brakes (two separate systems
at that), and

(b) will never seek to make progress along a footway, the wrong
way in a one-way street or in an area where vehicles are
otherwise prohibited.

So that covers about 0.001%.

Of what?

Of being a good driver. A goldfish has a better memory than you.

Don't be so obtuse.

I had *already* said that there is a lot more to it than those two
things.

So did I.

I had said so as part of my first response (see emphasised passage
below). Despite that, you felt you had to say exactly the same thing
in order to appear "clever". You are seriously weird at times.

You obviously have a problem with being told that your "lot more" is
about 99.999%.

You obviously have a problem showing your alleged working out. If you
could, you would, but you can't, so you don't. Instead, you indulge in
your usual childishness.

But what a pity that some classes of road-users fail at the first
hurdle and cannot be guaranteed to even try to comply with those
two, eh?

And I'm not talking about pedestrians. Or drivers.

*****There are lots of other parts of any working definition.*****

Quite so. Why did you bother to reply?

Have a guess.
Here's a clue: my post was more closely on-topic for the NG.

If you didn't already know how much I value your opinions about
cyclists, it's zero.

That's the unsurprising thing about [some] cyclists: the truth
really hurts them. You'd think it would be cause for reflection and
self-perception. But it seems not.

The thing about some drivers is they can't see what a mess their own
house is in and try to put the blame on others.

Stamp your foot, why don't you?

it still won't mean that most cyclists are anything but a bunch of
lawless chavs with no idea of consideration for others.

Oh well, maybe something is beginning to dawn on you.

It dawned me a couple of decades that cyclists ain't what they used to be.

Behaving lawfully and legally (let alone considerately) went out with
cyclists at about the same time as bicycle-clips did.

On 25/11/2019 16:48, JNugent wrote:
On 25/11/2019 12:38, TMS320 wrote:
On 25/11/2019 12:10, JNugent wrote:
On 25/11/2019 08:28, TMS320 wrote:
On 25/11/2019 01:34, JNugent wrote:

You obviously have a problem with being told that your "lot more" is
about 99.999%.

You obviously have a problem showing your alleged working out. If you
could, you would, but you can't, so you don't. Instead, you indulge in
your usual childishness.

There are 307 numbered paragraphs in the Highway Code just for starters.
That gives us 0.3%/99.7% before we even start to consider practical
experience and skills.

If you didn't already know how much I value your opinions about
cyclists, it's zero.

That's the unsurprising thing about [some] cyclists: the truth
really hurts them. You'd think it would be cause for reflection and
self-perception. But it seems not.

The thing about some drivers is they can't see what a mess their own
house is in and try to put the blame on others.

Stamp your foot, why don't you?

it still won't mean that most cyclists are anything but a bunch of
lawless chavs with no idea of consideration for others.

Oh well, maybe something is beginning to dawn on you.

It dawned me a couple of decades that cyclists ain't what they used to be.

Behaving lawfully and legally (let alone considerately) went out with
cyclists at about the same time as bicycle-clips did.

Well, if something is beginning to dawn, I must be referring to
something other than that.