You couldn't make it up!

Another scummy motorist bites the dust:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/suffolk/8035511.stm

Bear in mind that this was on a duel carriageway where, presumably, cyclist
could have been travelling. What chance do any of us stand against such
lunatics?

"Brian Robertson" wrote in message
...
Another scummy motorist bites the dust:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/suffolk/8035511.stm

Bear in mind that this was on a duel carriageway where, presumably,
cyclist could have been travelling. What chance do any of us stand against
such lunatics?





In fairness, the stretch of road they are referring to is a straight dual
carriageway, surrounded by miles of fields, that has literally miles of
clear visibility and little traffic at that time of night.

Let's not confuse this with a "safety" issue which it is not. He had the
audacity to drive at a common and sensible speed but outside of the
parameters the state technocracy could accommodate.

I used to "do the ton" on that road but now I have bikes on my roof so stick
to 70 for stability and fuel conservation reasons.

His crime was in challenging State paternalistic dogma, not of recklessness.

Brian Robertson wrote:
Another scummy motorist bites the dust:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/suffolk/8035511.stm

Bear in mind that this was on a duel carriageway where, presumably, cyclist
could have been travelling. What chance do any of us stand against such
lunatics?


I quite agree we should be saved from lunatics, like people who admit to
driving trains & bikes while ****ed.

--
Tony the Dragon

Quoting Light of Aria :
"Brian Robertson" wrote in message
Another scummy motorist bites the dust:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/suffolk/8035511.stm
In fairness, the stretch of road they are referring to is a straight dual
carriageway, surrounded by miles of fields, that has literally miles of
clear visibility and little traffic at that time of night.

Since when is 1300 BST at night?

Let's not confuse this with a "safety" issue which it is not.

It bloody well is. Clear visibility or not, I don't want clowns charging
up behind me at 100mph.
--
David Damerell Kill the tomato!
Today is First Friday, May.

Light of Aria wrote:

Let's not confuse this with a "safety" issue which it is not. He had the
audacity to drive at a common and sensible speed but outside of the
parameters the state technocracy could accommodate.

I used to "do the ton" on that road but now I have bikes on my roof so
stick to 70 for stability and fuel conservation reasons.

His crime was in challenging State paternalistic dogma, not of
recklessness.

Up to a point, Lord Copper... It's generally not a problem doing 100 on
such a road as long as nothing unexpected happens. But if something
unexpected does then your reaction times are effectively cut by your
speed and the consequences in the event of it going The Way Of The Pear
are that much worse because of your having more than double the energy
compared to doing 70.

Plenty of people drive at what is certainly "common" and what many would
term "sensible" speeds past various wilting bunches of roadside memorial
flowers on dead straight roads with clear sight lines round here. So
how come the flowers got there?

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/

On May 6, 2:08*pm, "Light of Aria"
wrote:
"Brian Robertson" wrote in message

...

Another scummy motorist bites the dust:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/suffolk/8035511.stm

Bear in mind that this was on a duel carriageway where, presumably,
cyclist could have been travelling. What chance do any of us stand against
such lunatics?

In fairness, the stretch of road they are referring to is a straight dual
carriageway, surrounded by miles of fields, that has literally miles of
clear visibility and little traffic at that time of night.

Let's not confuse this with a "safety" issue which it is not. He had the
audacity to drive at a common and sensible speed but outside of the
parameters the state technocracy could accommodate.

I used to "do the ton" on that road but now I have bikes on my roof so stick
to 70 for stability and fuel conservation reasons.

His crime was in challenging State paternalistic dogma, not of recklessness.

Hardly any speeding is a victimless crime. It's breaking the law
because it is anti-social, threatening to other road users, and makes
accidents more likely.

It's good a SERCO boss has been nabbed, shows nobody's exempt.

In message
"Light of Aria" wrote:


"Brian Robertson" wrote in message
...
Another scummy motorist bites the dust:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/suffolk/8035511.stm

Bear in mind that this was on a duel carriageway where, presumably,
cyclist could have been travelling. What chance do any of us stand
against such lunatics?





In fairness, the stretch of road they are referring to is a straight
dual carriageway, surrounded by miles of fields, that has literally
miles of clear visibility and little traffic at that time of night.

Since when has 1300 BST been a time of night on the A14? It's also a
road with a very high accident rate.

Mike
--
o/ \\ // |\ ,_ o Mike Clark
\__,\\ // __o | \ / /\, "A mountain climbing, cycling, skiing,
" || _`\,_ |__\ \ | immunology lecturer, antibody engineer and
` || (_)/ (_) | \corn computer user"

In article , Mike Clark wrote:
"Light of Aria" wrote:
"Brian Robertson" wrote in message

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/suffolk/8035511.stm

In fairness, the stretch of road they are referring to is a straight
dual carriageway, surrounded by miles of fields, that has literally
miles of clear visibility and little traffic at that time of night.

Since when has 1300 BST been a time of night on the A14? It's also a
road with a very high accident rate.

And not all dead straight with miles of clear visibility.

"David Damerell" wrote in message
...
Quoting Light of Aria :
"Brian Robertson" wrote in message
Another scummy motorist bites the dust:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/suffolk/8035511.stm
In fairness, the stretch of road they are referring to is a straight dual
carriageway, surrounded by miles of fields, that has literally miles of
clear visibility and little traffic at that time of night.

Since when is 1300 BST at night?

Let's not confuse this with a "safety" issue which it is not.

It bloody well is. Clear visibility or not, I don't want clowns charging
up behind me at 100mph.
--
David Damerell Kill the tomato!
Today is First Friday, May.



You may not want "clowns" charging up behind you, but actually few
motorists, not even chav racers, have any intention of having any
involvement with people like you. They just want to get on with their
business as quickly as possible and without cost nor incident.

Don't hog the outside lane, and the "clowns" won't bother you.

"Peter Clinch" wrote in message
...
Light of Aria wrote:

Let's not confuse this with a "safety" issue which it is not. He had the
audacity to drive at a common and sensible speed but outside of the
parameters the state technocracy could accommodate.

I used to "do the ton" on that road but now I have bikes on my roof so
stick to 70 for stability and fuel conservation reasons.

His crime was in challenging State paternalistic dogma, not of
recklessness.

Up to a point, Lord Copper... It's generally not a problem doing 100 on
such a road as long as nothing unexpected happens. But if something
unexpected does then your reaction times are effectively cut by your
speed and the consequences in the event of it going The Way Of The Pear
are that much worse because of your having more than double the energy
compared to doing 70.

Plenty of people drive at what is certainly "common" and what many would
term "sensible" speeds past various wilting bunches of roadside memorial
flowers on dead straight roads with clear sight lines round here. So
how come the flowers got there?

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/



A large surface area. A large user base. Flowers that can remain in place
for years. A rural population with some in-breeding and poor education. Too
much alcohol and not enough wholesome activities to do. etc.

Obviously on the 50 miles of A-what-ever you are going to see more
"flowers", what ever that means, than on a short low speed limit urban road.



I have no problem with high risk consequences at high speeds than lower
speeds. That's just the laws of physics and the risk:reward factors at work.