|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Indeterminate jail term for killer driver?
On 20 Sep, 09:47, "Brimstone" wrote:
Doug wrote: On 19 Sep, 15:56, Tony Dragon wrote: So why do you always state, that a motorist who has an accident, is guilty? Motorists don't have accidents, they lose control and crash and that is what makes them guilty. So what about when a motorist suffers a heart attack or the sudden onset of some other medical condition that prevents them retaining control Doug? Good question and a good reason for mandatory annual medicals. They are still guilty though, or at the very least their vulnerable victims should not be in any way to blame. -- UK Radical Campaigns www.zing.icom43.net A driving licence is a licence to kill. |
Ads |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Indeterminate jail term for killer driver?
Doug wrote:
On 20 Sep, 09:47, "Brimstone" wrote: Doug wrote: On 19 Sep, 15:56, Tony Dragon wrote: So why do you always state, that a motorist who has an accident, is guilty? Motorists don't have accidents, they lose control and crash and that is what makes them guilty. So what about when a motorist suffers a heart attack or the sudden onset of some other medical condition that prevents them retaining control Doug? Good question and a good reason for mandatory annual medicals. How does that prevent a heart attack or other condition from ocurring? They are still guilty though, or at the very least their vulnerable victims should not be in any way to blame. Guilty of what Doug? |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Indeterminate jail term for killer driver?
Doug wrote:
On 20 Sep, 09:47, "Brimstone" wrote: Doug wrote: On 19 Sep, 15:56, Tony Dragon wrote: So why do you always state, that a motorist who has an accident, is guilty? Motorists don't have accidents, they lose control and crash and that is what makes them guilty. So what about when a motorist suffers a heart attack or the sudden onset of some other medical condition that prevents them retaining control Doug? Good question and a good reason for mandatory annual medicals. They are still guilty though, or at the very least their vulnerable victims should not be in any way to blame. -- UK Radical Campaigns www.zing.icom43.net A driving licence is a licence to kill. Would annual medicals prevent heart attacks? -- Tony Dragon |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Indeterminate jail term for killer driver?
In uk.rec.cycling Tony Dragon wrote:
Doug wrote: On 20 Sep, 09:47, "Brimstone" wrote: Doug wrote: On 19 Sep, 15:56, Tony Dragon wrote: So why do you always state, that a motorist who has an accident, is guilty? Motorists don't have accidents, they lose control and crash and that is what makes them guilty. So what about when a motorist suffers a heart attack or the sudden onset of some other medical condition that prevents them retaining control Doug? Good question and a good reason for mandatory annual medicals. They are still guilty though, or at the very least their vulnerable victims should not be in any way to blame. -- UK Radical Campaigns www.zing.icom43.net A driving licence is a licence to kill. Would annual medicals prevent heart attacks? An aquaintance of mine died of a heart attack while walking out of the hospital, having been thoroughly tested and assured his heart was absolutely fine. And while I was in a hospital ward, a chap who was due to be discharged that day after a week's observation because they found nothing wrong with heart had a heart attack in between the lunch main course and the pudding. Luckily they were able to restart his heart. I believe nearly half of heart attacks happen to people who have no specific medical indicators of raised heart attack risk. Much bigger problem IMHO is falling asleep at the wheel. -- Chris Malcolm |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
Indeterminate jail term for killer driver?
On 21 Sep, 22:54, Chris Malcolm wrote:
In uk.rec.cycling Tony Dragon wrote: Doug wrote: On 20 Sep, 09:47, "Brimstone" wrote: Doug wrote: On 19 Sep, 15:56, Tony Dragon wrote: So why do you always state, that a motorist who has an accident, is guilty? Motorists don't have accidents, they lose control and crash and that is what makes them guilty. So what about when a motorist suffers a heart attack or the sudden onset of some other medical condition that prevents them retaining control Doug? Good question and a good reason for mandatory annual medicals. They are still guilty though, or at the very least their vulnerable victims should not be in any way to blame. -- UK Radical Campaigns www.zing.icom43.net A driving licence is a licence to kill. Would annual medicals prevent heart attacks? An aquaintance of mine died of a heart attack while walking out of the hospital, having been thoroughly tested and assured his heart was absolutely fine. And while I was in a hospital ward, a chap who was due to be discharged that day after a week's observation because they found nothing wrong with heart had a heart attack in between the lunch main course and the pudding. Luckily they were able to restart his heart. I believe nearly half of heart attacks happen to people who have no specific medical indicators of raised heart attack risk. Much bigger problem IMHO is falling asleep at the wheel. When you put it like that it is easy to see how dangerous driving actually is. In truth nowhere is safe on our roads and pavements and the totally innocent can be killed at any moment by a run-away driver. One wonders why driving tests are so lax, and taxation and justice so slight, as to allow so many people to get behind the wheel and then present a serious threat to others. Isn't it long overdue that this widespread menace should finally be reigned in and reduced to reasonable proportions, if killing people can ever be considered 'reasonable'? -- UK Radical Campaigns www.zing.icom43.net A driving licence is a licence to kill. |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Indeterminate jail term for killer driver?
Doug wrote:
In truth nowhere is safe on our roads and pavements and the totally innocent can be killed at any moment by a run-away driver. One wonders why driving tests are so lax, and taxation and justice so slight, as to allow so many people to get behind the wheel and then present a serious threat to others. Isn't it long overdue that this widespread menace should finally be reigned in and reduced to reasonable proportions, if killing people can ever be considered 'reasonable'? How does any of that prevent someone suffering a heart attack whilst driving Doug? |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Indeterminate jail term for killer driver?
Doug wrote:
On 21 Sep, 22:54, Chris Malcolm wrote: In uk.rec.cycling Tony Dragon wrote: Doug wrote: On 20 Sep, 09:47, "Brimstone" wrote: Doug wrote: On 19 Sep, 15:56, Tony Dragon wrote: So why do you always state, that a motorist who has an accident, is guilty? Motorists don't have accidents, they lose control and crash and that is what makes them guilty. So what about when a motorist suffers a heart attack or the sudden onset of some other medical condition that prevents them retaining control Doug? Good question and a good reason for mandatory annual medicals. They are still guilty though, or at the very least their vulnerable victims should not be in any way to blame. -- UK Radical Campaigns www.zing.icom43.net A driving licence is a licence to kill. Would annual medicals prevent heart attacks? An aquaintance of mine died of a heart attack while walking out of the hospital, having been thoroughly tested and assured his heart was absolutely fine. And while I was in a hospital ward, a chap who was due to be discharged that day after a week's observation because they found nothing wrong with heart had a heart attack in between the lunch main course and the pudding. Luckily they were able to restart his heart. I believe nearly half of heart attacks happen to people who have no specific medical indicators of raised heart attack risk. Much bigger problem IMHO is falling asleep at the wheel. When you put it like that it is easy to see how dangerous driving actually is. In truth nowhere is safe on our roads and pavements and the totally innocent can be killed at any moment by a run-away driver. One wonders why driving tests are so lax, and taxation and justice so slight, as to allow so many people to get behind the wheel and then present a serious threat to others. Isn't it long overdue that this widespread menace should finally be reigned in and reduced to reasonable proportions, if killing people can ever be considered 'reasonable'? -- UK Radical Campaigns www.zing.icom43.net A driving licence is a licence to kill. Well that was an answer, nothing to do with heart attacks, but it was an answer. -- Tony Dragon |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Indeterminate jail term for killer driver?
Chris Malcolm wrote:
An aquaintance of mine died of a heart attack while walking out of the hospital, having been thoroughly tested and assured his heart was absolutely fine. And while I was in a hospital ward, a chap who was due to be discharged that day after a week's observation because they found nothing wrong with heart had a heart attack in between the lunch main course and the pudding. Luckily they were able to restart his heart. Yes, but was it in time for the pudding? You can't just leave us in suspense. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Indeterminate jail term for killer driver?
On 22 Sep, 08:07, "Brimstone" wrote:
Doug wrote: In truth nowhere is safe on our roads and pavements and the totally innocent can be killed at any moment by a run-away driver. One wonders why driving tests are so lax, and taxation and justice so slight, as to allow so many people to get behind the wheel and then present a serious threat to others. Isn't it long overdue that this widespread menace should finally be reigned in and reduced to reasonable proportions, if killing people can ever be considered 'reasonable'? How does any of that prevent someone suffering a heart attack whilst driving Doug? It minimises the number of people who are likely to kill as a result of a heart attack, obviously. You must agree that it is important to get as many killers as possible off our roads? -- UK Radical Campaigns www.zing.icom43.net A driving licence is a licence to kill. |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Indeterminate jail term for killer driver?
"Doug" wrote in message ... On 22 Sep, 08:07, "Brimstone" wrote: Doug wrote: In truth nowhere is safe on our roads and pavements and the totally innocent can be killed at any moment by a run-away driver. One wonders why driving tests are so lax, and taxation and justice so slight, as to allow so many people to get behind the wheel and then present a serious threat to others. Isn't it long overdue that this widespread menace should finally be reigned in and reduced to reasonable proportions, if killing people can ever be considered 'reasonable'? How does any of that prevent someone suffering a heart attack whilst driving Doug? It minimises the number of people who are likely to kill as a result of a heart attack, obviously. How does it do that Doug? Perfectly fit people suffer heart attacks with no warning at ll. You must agree that it is important to get as many killers as possible off our roads? In which vein Doug, when are you going to give up using the roads? You admitted that you're not fit enough to retain proper control of your bicycle. Imagine the consequences if you lost control and veered into the path of a car forcing the driver to swerve and knock over another cyclist. Could you live with yourself? |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Killer driver bailed. | Doug[_3_] | UK | 24 | September 19th 09 10:04 AM |
Another killer driver gets away with it. | Doug[_3_] | UK | 22 | September 9th 09 08:38 AM |
Driver who killed cyclist told to expect jail. | Simon Mason[_2_] | UK | 22 | February 3rd 08 09:17 PM |
[Fwd: Death driver jail term criticised] | Tony Raven[_2_] | UK | 55 | July 4th 07 10:59 PM |
Killer drivers to face longer jail terms? | Helen C Simmons | UK | 15 | February 5th 05 07:45 PM |