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

Tory MP in 4x4 fined for 'momentary lapse of concentration'



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #61  
Old February 5th 09, 12:30 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
JNugent[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,985
Default Tory MP in 4x4 fined for 'momentary lapse of concentration'

wrote:

[ ... ]

... a Land Rover is not a vehicle for central
London


Why not?
Ads
  #62  
Old February 5th 09, 12:38 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Marc[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,589
Default Tory MP in 4x4 fined for 'momentary lapse of concentration'

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
On Wed, 04 Feb 2009 20:23:23 +0000, Marc
said in
:

It's always worth pointing out that the judith is wrong, there maybe
someone reading the thread that hasn't met it yet, and they may think
that it has a (any) point.


Up to a point, Lord Copper. The usual result is that it becomes
incandescent with rage at the "****wits" who dare to contradict its
cherished illusions, and goes into Overtroll again. And I speak as
one who has been at fault in this regard many times.


That's the advantage of the random nature of the kill command, I'm not
tempted to take the **** out of every one of it's posts and I can choose
if I want to take the **** ( or not) when it does float to the top of
the bowl. If it replies then it's left hanging on the end of the thread
( much like a klingon)with it obvious to everyone that it's being
ignored, if it doesn't reply it looks as if it has run away. In either
case it never knows if I have read it's reply or not. Eventually it
might even tire of being taken the **** out of, without ever having a
chance to hit back.
  #63  
Old February 5th 09, 12:56 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
_[_9_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 209
Default Tory MP in 4x4 fined for 'momentary lapse of concentration'

Marc wrote:
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
On Wed, 04 Feb 2009 20:23:23 +0000, Marc
said in
:

It's always worth pointing out that the judith is wrong, there maybe
someone reading the thread that hasn't met it yet, and they may think
that it has a (any) point.


Up to a point, Lord Copper. The usual result is that it becomes
incandescent with rage at the "****wits" who dare to contradict its
cherished illusions, and goes into Overtroll again. And I speak as
one who has been at fault in this regard many times.


That's the advantage of the random nature of the kill command, I'm not
tempted to take the **** out of every one of it's posts and I can choose
if I want to take the **** ( or not) when it does float to the top of
the bowl. If it replies then it's left hanging on the end of the thread
( much like a klingon)with it obvious to everyone that it's being
ignored, if it doesn't reply it looks as if it has run away. In either
case it never knows if I have read it's reply or not. Eventually it
might even tire of being taken the **** out of, without ever having a
chance to hit back.


Have you always been an odious ****, or is it only behind the safety of
your monitor?
  #64  
Old February 5th 09, 01:18 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 139
Default Tory MP in 4x4 fined for 'momentary lapse of concentration'

On Wed, 04 Feb 2009 23:26:41 +0000, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
wrote:

On Wed, 04 Feb 2009 20:23:23 +0000, Marc
said in
:

It's always worth pointing out that the judith is wrong, there maybe
someone reading the thread that hasn't met it yet, and they may think
that it has a (any) point.


Up to a point, Lord Copper. The usual result is that it becomes
incandescent with rage at the "****wits" who dare to contradict its
cherished illusions, and goes into Overtroll again. And I speak as
one who has been at fault in this regard many times.

Guy


Hello again Guy - nice to see you back.

"been at fault in this regard many times": you mean like now with
your response. I thought you'd promised Trevor Panther that you
wouldn't get involved in such discussions; but you just can't stay
away can you?

You do have remarkable abilities Guy - I can assure you that I don't
go incandescent with rage; however, I suspect that from some of your
diatribes against me you certainly do so. I think you will not be
able to find a "rant" from me - but of course there have been quite a
number from you.

It is a pity that you're not speaking to me as you could have told me
what my "cherished illusions" are.

Have you taken my advice and sought medical help as I recommended some
time ago; I certainly believe that you have a medical problem. Has
depression been diagnosed? - you show all the symptoms.




judith

--
I encourage my children to wear helmets. (Guy Chapman)
I have never said that I encourage my children to wear helmets. (Guy
Chapman)
I would challenge judith to find the place where I said I encourage
my children to wear helmets. (Guy Chapman)
I pointed out the web page
He then quickly changed the web page - but "forgot" to change the date
of last amendment so it looked like the change had been there for
years.






  #65  
Old February 5th 09, 01:31 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 139
Default Tory MP in 4x4 fined for 'momentary lapse of concentration'

On Wed, 04 Feb 2009 23:38:49 +0000, Marc
wrote:

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
On Wed, 04 Feb 2009 20:23:23 +0000, Marc
said in
:

It's always worth pointing out that the judith is wrong, there maybe
someone reading the thread that hasn't met it yet, and they may think
that it has a (any) point.


Up to a point, Lord Copper. The usual result is that it becomes
incandescent with rage at the "****wits" who dare to contradict its
cherished illusions, and goes into Overtroll again. And I speak as
one who has been at fault in this regard many times.


That's the advantage of the random nature of the kill command, I'm not
tempted to take the **** out of every one of it's posts and I can choose
if I want to take the **** ( or not) when it does float to the top of
the bowl. If it replies then it's left hanging on the end of the thread
( much like a klingon)with it obvious to everyone that it's being
ignored, if it doesn't reply it looks as if it has run away. In either
case it never knows if I have read it's reply or not. Eventually it
might even tire of being taken the **** out of, without ever having a
chance to hit back.



Hello Round - good to see you joining in the "let's wind up the
trolls" session which the regulars here so love.

When did you think you took the **** out of me? - I must have missed
it.

(PS I hate to pick up on your English - but I do see my education of
you as quite important - as you do seem to be lacking one. Have a
read up on possessive apostrophes before the next lesson would you.)

(How are the extra-curricular activities coming along?)

PS There's a grammatical mistake in the above - can you spot it?


judith

--
I encourage my children to wear helmets. (Guy Chapman)
I have never said that I encourage my children to wear helmets. (Guy
Chapman)
I would challenge judith to find the place where I said I encourage
my children to wear helmets. (Guy Chapman)
I pointed out the web page
He then quickly changed the web page - but "forgot" to change the date
of last amendment so it looked like the change had been there for
years.
  #66  
Old February 5th 09, 01:35 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
judith
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,961
Default Tory MP in 4x4 fined for 'momentary lapse of concentration'

On Wed, 04 Feb 2009 23:30:25 +0000, JNugent
wrote:

wrote:

[ ... ]

... a Land Rover is not a vehicle for central
London


Why not?



Personal preference - that's all.

Fine on the farm.
  #67  
Old February 5th 09, 08:28 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Paul Weaver
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 138
Default Tory MP in 4x4 fined for 'momentary lapse of concentration'

On 4 Feb, 22:36, wrote:
On Wed, 4 Feb 2009 14:08:16 -0800 (PST), Paul Weaver



wrote:
On 4 Feb, 15:53, wrote:
On Wed, 4 Feb 2009 14:07:39 -0000, "Dave"


wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 4 Feb 2009 01:35:10 -0800 (PST), Squashme
wrote:


So it goes.


http://tinyurl.com/bm9ydc


Why wasn't the victim wearing body armour, you may ask?


Many thanks for posting that.


It does of course remind us all that cycling can be very dangerous.


Cycling is not dangerous.


What can be sometimes dangerous is the actions of the person riding it or as
is usually the case people around them.


This is without disputing that there are some accidents that are the fault
of cyclists - just like some pedestrian accidents are the fault of
pedestrians. Generally speaking many courts are of the opinion that a
motorist who hits a pedestrian is at majority fault even if the pedestrian
is not looking - yet the same is not always the case with a cyclist involved
with a motorist.


Dave


I disagree - cycling on road is dangerous - as the cyclist is so
dependant on the actions of others - irrespective as to how careful
the cyclist is being.


In the same way that pedestrians are vulnerable to cyclists on
pavements - irrespective as to how careful the pedestrian is being.


In the same way that pedestrians are vulnerable to motorists on
pavements - irrespective as to how careful the pedestrian is be


You are of course quite right - but not to the same degree of
magnitude *- *you are more likely to be hit by a bike on the pavement
than you are by a car.


Perhaps. Anecdotally, I've never been hit by a car on a pavement, I
have been hit by 2 bikes in the last year alone.

But you're more likely to be killed or seriously inhured from being
hit by car on a pavement though.
  #68  
Old February 5th 09, 09:55 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Dave Larrington
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,069
Default Tory MP in 4x4 fined for 'momentary lapse of concentration'

JNugent wrote:
OG wrote:

... You must surely be aware that
compusory wearing of helmets has no effect on head injury rates.


When was that tried?


"The following countries have mandatory helmet laws, in at least one
jurisdiction, for either minors only, or for all riders: Australia, Canada,
Finland, Iceland, Israel, Spain, Sweden, USA, and New Zealand. In the U.S.
37 states have mandatory helmet laws."

from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_helmet#Legislation

--
Dave Larrington
http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk
May the Lord have mercy on Stringy Bob.


  #69  
Old February 5th 09, 09:58 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Dave Larrington
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,069
Default Tory MP in 4x4 fined for 'momentary lapse of concentration'

judith wrote:
On Wed, 4 Feb 2009 08:45:58 -0800 (PST), Squashme
wrote:

On 4 Feb, 16:41, francis wrote:
On Feb 4, 3:43 pm, Martin wrote:



bugbear wrote:
wrote:
On Wed, 4 Feb 2009 01:35:10 -0800 (PST), Squashme
wrote:

So it goes.

http://tinyurl.com/bm9ydc

Why wasn't the victim wearing body armour, you may ask?

Many thanks for posting that.

It does of course remind us all that cycling can be very
dangerous.

I think you'll find it's being hit by a car
that's dangerous.

Being hit by an SUV is a lot more dangerous than being hit by an
average car. I wonder why the MP considers it acceptable to drive
a Land Rover through an area where lots of pedestrians congregate.
Surely if you have a collision such his one, and you are driving
an SUV, this should be taken into account and you should be held
even more liable than if you had been driving a small car.

Do we have SUV's in the UK?

Why should it not be acceptable for the MP concerned to drive a Land
Rover?
It could be argued that because of a higher driving position he
would be able to see better.


Yes, as a tory, he should be used to looking down upon people.
But, in practice ...

"Last October [2005] the BMJ published an American study showing that
4x4s were more dangerous to pedestrians than normal cars. Tests
showed that people who were hit by the vehicles in accidents were
four times more likely to die than those hit by other cars."





....... in America.


Please explain the difference between being hit by a two-and-a-half-tonne
4x4 in the USA and being hit by a two-and-a-half-tonne 4x4 in Parliament
Square.

--
Dave Larrington
http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk
I am the Disgruntled Employee; I am the New Face of Labour
Relations.


  #70  
Old February 5th 09, 10:02 AM posted to uk.rec.cycling
Dave Larrington
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,069
Default Tory MP in 4x4 fined for 'momentary lapse of concentration'

wrote:

A Range Rover is not a "cross-country" vehicle.


Then what's this one doing?

http://www.ajeepthing.com/images/lan...xperience2.jpg

--
Dave Larrington
http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk
Bandersnatch? I would never have guessed.


 




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
Three reasons to hate cameron, red light jumper, smoker AND a tory! spindrift UK 42 January 30th 08 05:15 PM
Tory leader NOTICES CROSSAN EV? U.S.piggybank UK 0 July 26th 06 09:16 PM
Tory Leadership Contender refutes cycling rumour? [email protected] UK 17 October 28th 05 10:02 AM
Tory T injured, Jeff J's Belgium Commuter.. hippy Australia 0 April 1st 05 01:59 AM
Time lapse dropology TonyMelton Unicycling 8 May 12th 04 12:16 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:57 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.