There should be a law against ramming.

On Mar 15, 7:44*am, Adrian wrote:
Doug gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

It is amazing how often motorists here are in denial about ramming.

There's a reason for that.

Yes, the obvious one, the dearly want immunity from punishment as they
are all possessors of car-weapons which can kill or seriously injure

They are shown videos of ramming

None of which have shown any such thing.

and reports of ramming

None of which have been both credible and from the UK.

Really! you should have payed better attention I have already
published this incident.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...ntral-12556275

Here is another one so now will you withdraw your claim that these
sources are not credible?

"Two teenage boys are being held on suspicion of attempted murder
after allegedly ramming a police car and sending an officer flying
over the bonnet.

A second armed police officer was dragged for around 6ft underneath a
car in Battersea, south London..."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...to-police.html

and yet still deny that it ever happens.

Come up with the evidence, then. I certainly don't deny it can happen,
and probably has happened.

That's very big of you.

However, I do deny that it's anywhere near as
frequent as you make out, and I do deny that it happens (except VERY
rarely) without extreme provocation on the part of the person rammed.

Where have I claimed how often it occurs? The fact that it happens AT
ALL is sufficient to treat it as a seriously unlawful use of a weapon.
Also since when has verbal or road blocking provocation justified a
violent physical attack with a car weapon on a provoker?

-- .
UK Radical Campaigns.(Recently updated).
http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

Doug gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

and reports of ramming

None of which have been both credible and from the UK.

Really! you should have payed better attention I have already published
this incident.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...ntral-12556275

You were originally talking about cyclists.

However, yes, that is indeed as you claim - albeit pedestrian rather than
cyclist - and I will gladly join you in roundly condemning the little
turd for his actions.

However, the injury was far from serious - 15minutes of a "dead leg" -
and the judge found that there was insufficient evidence to prove it was
deliberate.

Here is another one so now will you withdraw your claim that these
sources are not credible?

"Two teenage boys are being held on suspicion of attempted murder after
allegedly ramming a police car and sending an officer flying over the
bonnet.

A second armed police officer was dragged for around 6ft underneath a
car in Battersea, south London..."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...ys-held-after-
ramming-car-into-police.html

Again, no serious injuries. The occupants of the car should not have been
driving - a 14 & 15yo - and were very probably engaged in seriously
illegal activity at the time. Despite that being three years ago, I can
find no record of the trial, so don't know what the final convictions
were.

However, I do deny that it's anywhere near as frequent as you make out,
and I do deny that it happens (except VERY rarely) without extreme
provocation on the part of the person rammed.

Where have I claimed how often it occurs?

Just this morning, you said "it is a relatively common occurrence"
Message-ID: 403c360e-6ba1-4725-

"Doug" wrote in message
...
Previously you made the claim that...

"So there haven't been any killed by deliberate ramming then?"

Which was not only wrong but considerably stupid.

---

But given that the whole thread is a debate on whether or not to introduce a
law in the UK is it not a little odd to introduce a murder using a car that
occurred in the US?
If they are so common I would have expected you to find a case from the UK.
It makes as much sense as using shooting statistics from the US to validate
introducing a gun law in the UK or using stats from South Africa to justify
introducing a law in the UK about taking lions from the wild.

Andy

On Mon, 7 Mar 2011 00:40:25 -0800 (PST), Doug
wrote:

Some motorists on these newsgroups seem to imagine that there is a
level of provocation beyond which physical violence by ramming with a
car-weapon is fully justified, but only when that provocation is from
groups of cyclists.

You are completely wrong. Individual cyclists are fair game as well.

I rammed 2 of them on my way to work this morning. Very satisfying.
It was indeed fully justified as you say. They were practically
begging for it. I must get the sights on my car-weapon adjusted
though. I would have missed the second one if my passenger had not
had the foresight to open his door. My how we laughed! Another
cyclist stopped and called the police. He was under the ridiculously
mistaken belief that it was illegal to ram cyclists. The policeman
took one look at the pathetic lycra-clad individual wrapped in twisted
bicycle and burst out laughing as well. Good to know at least some
policemen have a sense of humour, eh, Doug? Those silly cycle helmets
aren't very strong, are they?

You appear to have a lot of experience in this matter, Doug. Could
you recommend a good cleaner to remove blood from my bumper?

--
Cynic

On Mar 15, 1:17*pm, Doug wrote:
and reports of ramming

None of which have been both credible and from the UK.

Really! you should have payed better attention I have already
published this incident.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...ntral-12556275

Here is another one so now will you withdraw your claim that these
sources are not credible?

"Two teenage boys are being held on suspicion of attempted murder
after allegedly ramming a police car and sending an officer flying
over the bonnet.

A second armed police officer was dragged for around 6ft underneath a
car in Battersea, south London..."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-held-after-ra...

Once again, good old Doug undermines his argument with his own
sources. First source: apparent deliberate ramming, driver charged
with "assault, dangerous driving, and careless driving". Second
source, apparent deliberate ramming, driver held on suspicion of
attempted murder.

Given the arrests/charges made, why would you want any different laws,
Doug? The second one *was* arrested for attempted murder, just as you
say should be the case. What do you want - for them to be strung up
from the nearest tree without trial?

"Doug" wrote in message
...
On Mar 15, 7:44 am, Adrian wrote:
Doug gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

Some motorists on these newsgroups seem to imagine that there is a
level of provocation beyond which physical violence by ramming with a
car-weapon is fully justified, but only when that provocation is from
groups of cyclists.


Really! you should have payed better attention I have already
published this incident.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...ntral-12556275

Here is another one so now will you withdraw your claim that these
sources are not credible?

"Two teenage boys are being held on suspicion of attempted murder
after allegedly ramming a police car and sending an officer flying
over the bonnet.

A second armed police officer was dragged for around 6ft underneath a
car in Battersea, south London..."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...to-police.html

and yet still deny that it ever happens.

Come up with the evidence, then. I certainly don't deny it can happen,
and probably has happened.

That's very big of you.

However, I do deny that it's anywhere near as
frequent as you make out, and I do deny that it happens (except VERY
rarely) without extreme provocation on the part of the person rammed.

Where have I claimed how often it occurs? The fact that it happens AT
ALL is sufficient to treat it as a seriously unlawful use of a weapon.
Also since when has verbal or road blocking provocation justified a
violent physical attack with a car weapon on a provoker?

why are you now transferring to reports of cars being rammed?your thread is
about cyclists being rammed.

On Mar 15, 11:14*pm, Phil W Lee wrote:
Adrian considered 15 Mar 2011 07:44:51 GMT the
perfect time to write:



Doug gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

It is amazing how often motorists here are in denial about ramming.

There's a reason for that.

They are shown videos of ramming

None of which have shown any such thing.

and reports of ramming

None of which have been both credible and from the UK.

and yet still deny that it ever happens.

Come up with the evidence, then. I certainly don't deny it can happen,
and probably has happened. However, I do deny that it's anywhere near as
frequent as you make out, and I do deny that it happens (except VERY
rarely) without extreme provocation on the part of the person rammed.

I know personally of several cases, involving different people, and
zero provocation, unless (as a good little moton) you regard simply
using the roads with a slower vehicle "extreme provocation".
One was even captured in full detail on an independent cctv, and the
police STILL wouldn't report the (taxi) driver for prosecution.

I think they actually prefer us to sort it out ourselves - they are
always telling us to lock it, although I think a typical D-lock is
rather underpowered for defending against even a 2 ton vehicle, never
mind a 44 ton one.


Well if you report it, it must be true.

Did you think using the word 'moton' would do anything other than make
people laugh at you?

"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
...

why are you now transferring to reports of cars being rammed?your thread
is about cyclists being rammed.

you hear that scraping noise?
That's the sound of goalposts being shifted, it commonly happens in Doug
threads.

Andy

On Mar 15, 1:30*pm, Adrian wrote:
Doug gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

and reports of ramming
None of which have been both credible and from the UK.
Really! you should have payed better attention I have already published
this incident.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...ntral-12556275

You were originally talking about cyclists.

This is about deliberate ramming, not just the ramming of cyclists.

However, yes, that is indeed as you claim - albeit pedestrian rather than
cyclist - and I will gladly join you in roundly condemning the little
turd for his actions.

You say 'roundly' and then proceed to make excuses for him.

However, the injury was far from serious - 15minutes of a "dead leg" -
and the judge found that there was insufficient evidence to prove it was
deliberate.

Here is another one so now will you withdraw your claim that these
sources are not credible?

"Two teenage boys are being held on suspicion of attempted murder after
allegedly ramming a police car and sending an officer flying over the
bonnet.

A second armed police officer was dragged for around 6ft underneath a
car in Battersea, south London..."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...ys-held-after-

ramming-car-into-police.html

Again, no serious injuries. The occupants of the car should not have been
driving - a 14 & 15yo - and were very probably engaged in seriously
illegal activity at the time. Despite that being three years ago, I can
find no record of the trial, so don't know what the final convictions
were.

Are you trying to claim the sources are not credible? Your feeble
excuses for ramming make no difference. It doesn't matter how serious
the injuries were, the crime is the same, the intentional use of a
weapon to case physical harm to a person.


However, I do deny that it's anywhere near as frequent as you make out,
and I do deny that it happens (except VERY rarely) without extreme
provocation on the part of the person rammed.
Where have I claimed how often it occurs?

Just this morning, you said "it is a relatively common occurrence"

So what do you think the word 'relative' means, semanticist?

Message-ID: 403c360e-6ba1-4725-


-- .
UK Radical Campaigns.(Recently updated).
http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.

Doug gurgled happily, sounding much like they were
saying:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...ntral-12556275

You were originally talking about cyclists.

This is about deliberate ramming, not just the ramming of cyclists.

Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle.

However, yes, that is indeed as you claim - albeit pedestrian rather
than cyclist - and I will gladly join you in roundly condemning the
little turd for his actions.

You say 'roundly' and then proceed to make excuses for him.

No, I do not. I proceed to point out yet more differences between this
case and what you were trying to prove.

However, the injury was far from serious - 15minutes of a "dead leg" -
and the judge found that there was insufficient evidence to prove it
was deliberate.

Again, no serious injuries. The occupants of the car should not have
been driving - a 14 & 15yo - and were very probably engaged in
seriously illegal activity at the time. Despite that being three years
ago, I can find no record of the trial, so don't know what the final
convictions were.

Are you trying to claim the sources are not credible?

No, else I would have said so explicitly.

Your feeble excuses for ramming

They're so feeble that I didn't actually make them.

make no difference. It doesn't matter how serious the injuries were,
the crime is the same, the intentional use of a weapon to case physical
harm to a person.

Correct. I didn't say otherwise. What I _did_ say was that they did not
fully live up to your claims of them.

You claim that deliberate, unprovoked ramming of innocent cyclists is "a
relatively common occurrence".

Prove it. Five credible sources reporting cases of unprovoked and
deliberate ramming of innocent cyclists in the last decade, in the UK,
occasioning serious injury or death.

So far you've found one that was found by the judge not be deliberate,
and didn't include a serious injury or a bicycle; and one (with no
apparent reported outcome) that also didn't involve a bicycle and
occurred in the attempt to evade capture for other serious crimes.

However, I do deny that it's anywhere near as frequent as you make
out, and I do deny that it happens (except VERY rarely) without
extreme provocation on the part of the person rammed.

Where have I claimed how often it occurs?

Just this morning, you said "it is a relatively common occurrence"

So what do you think the word 'relative' means, semanticist?

I think it means that it's common enough that you should have no
difficulty producing five credible sources reporting cases of unprovoked
and deliberate ramming of innocent cyclists in the last decade, in the UK.

Tell you what, how about you start with two, if five's too hard?