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

Doug, was this you?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #41  
Old September 21st 09, 08:53 AM posted to uk.transport,uk.rec.cycling
Brimstone[_8_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,237
Default Doug, was this you?

Doug wrote:
On 21 Sep, 08:34, "Brimstone" wrote:
Doug wrote:
On 20 Sep, 14:09, John Wright wrote:
Doug wrote:
On 19 Sep, 13:51, Judith M Smith wrote:
On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 05:23:49 -0700 (PDT), BrianW


wrote:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...andorder/62070...
Are you *sure* you are not obsessed with him?


What is it - a sexual attraction?


Blackhead is blinded by obsessive love turned sour. So much so in
his confused state he has targeted the wrong person! There must
be a sexual component there surely?


Anyway, back on topic, I have been posting elsewhere about
discrimination against disabled cyclists and this case clearly
illustrates my point. Cars and mobility scooters on pavements are
much more dangerous that bicycles but all we seem to hear about is
cycling on pavements.


Cars don't drive on pavements unless something is seriously amiss
or there is a legal arrangement in place for them to drive over the
pavement.


Cyclists and mobility scooters appear to do it as a matter of
course.


But the least dangerous are cyclists.


Wrong again Doug. The least dangerous traffic are pedestrians.
Everything else can cause harm to others.

A car could easily run over a
small child and kill them even at very slow speed.


And a bicycle can knock down and kill an adult. Your point?

Dangerous cars are allowed on some pavements where disabled cyclists
are not.


What has cars being allowed got to do with bicycles not being?

I never cease to be amazed that motorists have been allowed to
street garage their cars 24/7 on public roads, often for free, but
allowing them legally on pavements is the giddy limit!


Places where they are legally allowed on the pavement are remarkably
few in the UK. I've never seen one.

There are plenty in London plus all the illegal ones too.


Which sounds like a good reason for not living in London.

You are
likely to find them where there are narrow, neighbourhood streets with
no front gardens or home garages.


You mean in the Catford slums?


It is obviously assumed by the government that everyone should have
the right to own a car regardless of the circumstances and harmful
impact on others and despite not having somewhere to keep one.


Where did you keep yours when you owned cars Doug?



Ads
  #42  
Old September 21st 09, 08:56 AM posted to uk.transport,uk.rec.cycling
Brimstone[_8_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,237
Default Doug, was this you?

Adrian wrote:
Same as everybody has the right to own a TV, house, pogo stick,
bicycle.

Please Dad, can I have a pogo stick, Dad. Can I please? It says here it's my
Yuman Right.



  #43  
Old September 21st 09, 09:10 AM posted to uk.transport,uk.rec.cycling
BrianW[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,005
Default Doug, was this you?

On 21 Sep, 07:19, Doug wrote:
On 20 Sep, 10:30, BrianW wrote:



On 20 Sep, 06:59, Doug wrote:


On 19 Sep, 13:51, Judith M Smith wrote: On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 05:23:49 -0700 (PDT), BrianW


wrote:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...andorder/62070...


Are you *sure* you are not obsessed with him?


What is it - a sexual attraction?


Blackhead is blinded by obsessive love turned sour. So much so in his
confused state he has targeted the wrong person! There must be a
sexual component there surely?


Yup, I'm in lurve with this old turd:


http://www.flickr.com/photos/8737107@N04/3742475633/


Next time you see him, Doug, would you tell him?


I think he probably knows and finds it embarrassing.


Oh, I'm *positive* "he" knows, Mr Bollen.
  #44  
Old September 21st 09, 09:44 AM posted to uk.transport,uk.rec.cycling
PeterG
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 366
Default Doug, was this you?

On Sep 21, 8:53*am, Adrian wrote:
Doug gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

Dangerous cars are allowed on some pavements where disabled cyclists are
not.


Give us ONE example. Just one.

It is obviously assumed by the government that everyone should have the
right to own a car regardless of the circumstances


Not quite.

Everybody should have the right to own a car provided it fulfils all the
relevant legal requirements. Of course they should. Why shouldn't they?
Same as everybody has the right to own a TV, house, pogo stick, bicycle.

How would you ration them?

and harmful impact on others


As well as MOT emission testing for existing cars and ever more stringent
emission requirements for new cars, there's umpty-seven driving laws
(some of which you've argued against the introduction of) to try to
minimise "harmful impact".

and despite not having somewhere to keep one.


Nope. Leave a car somewhere it's not legal to leave it, and you WILL get
fined. Fail to pay the fines, and it WILL get confiscated.

So - apart from any of those many, all completely incorrect, points - is
there ANY evidence to back up your claims?

Proper, hard evidence from credible sources.

You know the stuff - same as you demand off everybody who points out that
you're talking ********. Again.


I have now got in my head a picture of Doug on a pogo stick.


PeterG
  #45  
Old September 21st 09, 09:49 AM posted to uk.transport,uk.rec.cycling
Adrian
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,630
Default Doug, was this you?

PeterG gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:

I have now got in my head a picture of Doug on a pogo stick.


And Brimstone. Don't forget Brimstone.

Is there such a thing as a tandem pogo?
  #46  
Old September 21st 09, 09:52 AM posted to uk.transport,uk.rec.cycling
Bod[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 723
Default Doug, was this you?

Adrian wrote:
PeterG gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:

I have now got in my head a picture of Doug on a pogo stick.


And Brimstone. Don't forget Brimstone.

Is there such a thing as a tandem pogo?


Now,'that' would be amusing to see.

Bod
  #47  
Old September 21st 09, 09:57 AM posted to uk.transport,uk.rec.cycling
Bod[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 723
Default Doug, was this you?

Bod wrote:
Adrian wrote:
PeterG gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying:

I have now got in my head a picture of Doug on a pogo stick.


And Brimstone. Don't forget Brimstone.

Is there such a thing as a tandem pogo?


Now,'that' would be amusing to see.

Bod


Here's a pic of Doug practising his pogo technique:

http://papaherman.files.wordpress.co...o-stick-11.jpg

Bod
  #48  
Old September 21st 09, 10:09 AM posted to uk.transport,uk.rec.cycling
BrianW[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,005
Default Doug, was this you?

On 21 Sep, 08:53, "Brimstone" wrote:

It is obviously assumed by the government that everyone should have
the right to own a car regardless of the circumstances and harmful
impact on others and despite not having somewhere to keep one.


Where did you keep yours when you owned cars Doug?-


Gollum actually dumped his Land Rover by the sie of the road when it
finally gave up the ghost. What a revolting, hypocritical old turd he
is.
  #49  
Old September 21st 09, 10:37 AM posted to uk.transport,uk.rec.cycling
Keitht
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,631
Default Doug, was this you?

Matt B wrote:
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
On Thu, 17 Sep 2009 23:14:55 +0100, Matt B
wrote:

Ask your council what is the main cause of damage to pavements.


And they'll inevitably say "cars" - rather than admit the true
reason. The real reason is usually poor installation.


No, the real reason is that it's cars (and lorries).

The evidence is that they are /also/ damaged in places where cars
cannot physically get. Take a look next time you are walking on
one. There will be cracked and uneven slabs behind telephone boxes,
in-between the two poles of road signs, behind bollards, up steps,
behind and between planters, under benches...


That would make sense if it were suggested that cars are the only
source of damage. They are not.

To blame cars is to attempt to create a scapegoat for bad workmanship
and poor maintenance.


No, you only need to look at the buiding standards for a motor road
and a pavement to realise that pavements are not built to take motor
traffic. You appear to want pavements to be built to motor road
standards. Are you willing to pay the extra in your taxes for that,
just so that the drivers who illegally mount the pavement don't damage
it so badly?


There is a difference between constant and high-speed motor traffic use
- particularly involving trucks and buses, and the occasional incursion
onto a pavement by a light vehicle. Road building standards cater for
the former, and a /correctly/ laid pavement should be expected to
tolerate the latter.

I expect my tax money to be spend wisely, and for pavements laid using
it to be able to withstand the odd Post Office van, council road repair
or sweeper vehicle being driven on it, without suffering any harm.

Cars cannot be blamed for damaged pavements.

********.

The standards for ordinary pavement sub-surface is completely different
from occasional vehicle use and footway use.
Your expectations of councils spending money on things they are not
supposed to encourage (or can ticket drivers for) are rather wide.
Is it not possible for Post Office drivers to use the road like ordinary
people?


They've just finished re-doing the pavement near where I live.
We were asked about wanting to have pavement crossings as these would
require a bit of dosh from the residents in order to upgrade the
sub-surface from foot traffic to vehicular traffic.
Car drivers ignore the double-yellow and park half up on the pavement
and already there are cracked slabs.
I don't think it's the baby-buggies doing it or the pavement cyclists or
people with heavy bags of shopping - that tends to leave only the car
drivers and thier selfish habits of saying '**** you' to anyone else.
You are right it's notthe cars - just the drivers who don't give a toss
until thier dear old mum(tm) goes over.


--

Come to Dave & Boris - your cycle security experts.
  #50  
Old September 21st 09, 10:42 AM posted to uk.transport,uk.rec.cycling
Keitht
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,631
Default Doug, was this you?

Judith M Smith wrote:
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 16:55:57 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 14:09:33 +0100, John Wright
wrote:

Cars don't drive on pavements unless something is seriously amiss or
there is a legal arrangement in place for them to drive over the pavement.

I think you'll find on investigation that that is what is technically
known as "complete ********".

The most common reason for car drivers using the pavement is to park
on it, but they also use it to get round queues at traffic lights and
in other situations. That's whe there are bollards on the pavement
edge near my house, and bollards up the pavement along the North
Circular Road, to name just two locations.

Ask your council what is the main cause of damage to pavements.


Who do we ask to find out how many pedestrians are hit by cyclists on
pavements and how many are hit by cars?


Who do we ask to find out how many people are forced to walk in the road
to get round cars parked on pavements?
Who do we ask to find out how much extra is lumped on our council tax to
pay for broken pavements caused by cars?
Who do we ask to find out how many kids are scared at having to walk in
the road just because someone 'popped in to the shop'?



--

Come to Dave & Boris - your cycle security experts.
 




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
This should please Doug Steve Firth UK 261 August 26th 09 10:20 PM
Doug PeterG UK 18 June 28th 09 11:23 AM
Roll in the Doug $$$ Stephen Baker Mountain Biking 0 October 25th 04 10:54 AM
Old Doug Fattic drako Marketplace 0 October 3rd 04 02:45 AM
Old Doug Fattic drako Marketplace 4 October 2nd 04 09:11 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:03 PM.


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