Stolen Bike

Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:

I pay road tax

No you don't.

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

On 04/08/2018 10:22, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee wrote:
Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:

I pay road tax

No you don't.

Correct.
Vehicle tax doesn't actually pay for our roads. Not directly, anyway.
Our vehicle tax goes into the same pot as all our other tax, and then
that money is distributed all over the place.

It's actually our council tax that pays for our roads and our local
infrastructure.

--
Bod

Bod wrote:
On 04/08/2018 10:22, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee wrote:
Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:

I pay road tax

No you don't.

Correct.

Vehicle tax doesn't actually pay for our roads. Not directly, anyway.
Our vehicle tax goes into the same pot as all our other tax, and then
that money is distributed all over the place.

It's actually our council tax that pays for our roads and our local
infrastructure.

By all accounts, any interaction between a cyclist and a driver will
almost inevitably have the latter bleating that the cyclist 'doesn't pay
road tax'. That this belief is so widespread, despite 'road tax' having
been abolished over eight decades ago, means that it is not going to go
away any time soon. The sense of entitlement of the driver is
responsible for over 1,700 deaths every year in Britain.

Teach drivers that the roads do not belong to them. Beat it out of
them. Because that is the only way things are going to change. Drivers
have to know that if they threaten the life or physical safety of another
road user, then they are going to get seriously injured.

--
john smith |MA (Hons)|MPhil (Hons)|CAPES (mention très bien)|LLB (Hons)
'It never gets any easier. You just get faster'
(Greg LeMond (1961 - ))

On Sat, 04 Aug 2018 11:24:10 +0100, Bod wrote:

On 04/08/2018 10:22, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee wrote:
Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:

I pay road tax
No you don't.

Correct.
Vehicle tax doesn't actually pay for our roads. Not directly, anyway.
Our vehicle tax goes into the same pot as all our other tax, and then
that money is distributed all over the place.

It's actually our council tax that pays for our roads and our local
infrastructure.

What the government does with it is irrelevant. If I drive a car, I pay a
LOT of tax in fuel duty and road tax/tax disk.whatever OCD people want to
call it. If I were to sell my car and only cycle, I'd pay neither.

On Sat, 04 Aug 2018 12:44:54 +0100, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee
wrote:

Bod wrote:
On 04/08/2018 10:22, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee wrote:
Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:

I pay road tax

No you don't.

Correct.

Vehicle tax doesn't actually pay for our roads. Not directly, anyway.
Our vehicle tax goes into the same pot as all our other tax, and then
that money is distributed all over the place.

It's actually our council tax that pays for our roads and our local
infrastructure.

By all accounts, any interaction between a cyclist and a driver will
almost inevitably have the latter bleating that the cyclist 'doesn't pay
road tax'. That this belief is so widespread, despite 'road tax' having
been abolished over eight decades ago, means that it is not going to go
away any time soon. The sense of entitlement of the driver is
responsible for over 1,700 deaths every year in Britain.

Teach drivers that the roads do not belong to them. Beat it out of
them. Because that is the only way things are going to change. Drivers
have to know that if they threaten the life or physical safety of another
road user, then they are going to get seriously injured.

I can get to my destination 10 times faster than you. I can carry 10
times as much luggage as you. I don't get all sweaty getting there. Just
because a minority **** up and kill people doesn't automatically make all
drivers bad.

On Sat, 04 Aug 2018 10:15:41 +0100, Peter Keller
wrote:

On 03.08.2018 21:02, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Fri, 03 Aug 2018 11:12:58 +0100, Peter Keller
wrote:

On 02.08.2018 15:52, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2018 11:01:04 +0100, Peter Keller
wrote:

On 01.08.2018 14:43, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 10:57:41 +0100, Peter Keller
wrote:

On 31.07.2018 13:02, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Tue, 31 Jul 2018 10:06:34 +0100, Peter Keller
wrote:

On 30.07.2018 12:13, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jul 2018 09:53:56 +0100, Peter Keller
wrote:

On 29.07.2018 12:00, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jul 2018 10:04:18 +0100, Peter Keller
wrote:

On 28.07.2018 13:41, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Sat, 28 Jul 2018 11:40:08 +0100, Peter Keller
wrote:

On 27.07.2018 13:35, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
Treehugging ignorant moron.

Thanks greatly for that excellent compliment coming from
YOU. Especially as it is from YOU!
Now please ejaculate in my direction the further excellent
accolade of being a weed, a fungus, and the dregs of this
earth.

It really is a very great compliment to be called a
treehugging ignorant moron by YOU.
Especially by YOU.
And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR
eyes.
After all I ride a bicycle.
And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think
they are the ****witted pits of humanity.
And because it is YOU who think that, that is an
extremely great compliment.
We must be doing something right.

Why do people insult others?
An insult can be interpreted as an attempt to reduce the
social status of the recipient and raise the relative
status of the insulter.
No, it's because you're wrong.
Once again, Thanks greatly for that excellent compliment of
Treehugging ignorant moron.
The fact that you call me a Treehugging ignorant moron. has
nothing to do with whether I am right or wrong.
You only honour me with that excellent epithet because you
fear that you may be losing some argument , so you introduce
an irrelevancy in order to make you think that you are
omehow better than me.
So I still take it as a great compliment.
No, I say it because all green people are incorrect.

They might be, but that is independent of them being
Treehugging ignorant morons
So now please throw me the further excellent epithet of being
a stench, a revulsion, and a big suck on a sour lemon.
If they are green they are by definition treehuggers.
Sez you. Blah!
No not me, it's the meaning of the word.

What word?
"Treehugger", do keep up at the back.

Someone who hugs trees? I have never known or seen one.
It's an expression, obviously too complicated for you to understand.

Thanks a lot for that great compliment.
Now please ejaculate to me the further honour of being a canker and an
open wound.
How can you take being called thick as a compliment?

Easy. It is because you said it. Obviously you have nothing constructive
to say.

I'm just fed up of your stupidity. I get more sense discussing the theory
of relativity with my cat.

And thanks greatly for your excellent complement of my not keeping
up. Now please throw out to me the further honour of being a
nincompoop.
No, as that word is meaningless.
Oooh yes please --
And the accolade of being a mistake of nature and a heavy-metal
bagpipe player?
Please!
The only heavy metal a bagpipe should see is a crusher.

If they are wrong they are by definition ignorant morons.
Ignorant moron has nothing to do with being wrong.
If you're ignorant of something, you'll be wrong about it. If
you're ignorant of the earth being round, you'll think it's flat.

On 05.08.2018 17:15, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Sat, 04 Aug 2018 10:15:41 +0100, Peter Keller
wrote:

On 03.08.2018 21:02, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Fri, 03 Aug 2018 11:12:58 +0100, Peter Keller
wrote:

On 02.08.2018 15:52, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2018 11:01:04 +0100, Peter Keller
wrote:

On 01.08.2018 14:43, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 10:57:41 +0100, Peter Keller
wrote:

On 31.07.2018 13:02, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Tue, 31 Jul 2018 10:06:34 +0100, Peter Keller
wrote:

On 30.07.2018 12:13, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jul 2018 09:53:56 +0100, Peter Keller
wrote:

On 29.07.2018 12:00, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jul 2018 10:04:18 +0100, Peter Keller
wrote:

On 28.07.2018 13:41, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Sat, 28 Jul 2018 11:40:08 +0100, Peter Keller
wrote:

On 27.07.2018 13:35, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
Â*Treehugging ignorant moron.

Thanks greatly for that excellent compliment coming from
YOU. Especially as it is from YOU!
Now please ejaculate in my direction the further
excellent accolade of being a weed, a fungus, and the
dregs of this earth.

It really is a very great compliment to be called a
treehugging ignorant moron by YOU.
Especially by YOU.
And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR
eyes.
After all I ride a bicycle.
And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think
they are the ****witted pits of humanity.
And because it is YOU who think that,Â* that is an
extremely great compliment.
We must be doing something right.

Why do people insult others?
An insult can be interpreted as an attempt to reduce the
social status of the recipient and raise the relative
status of the insulter.
Â*No, it's because you're wrong.
Once again, Thanks greatly for that excellent compliment
of Treehugging ignorant moron.
The fact that you call me a Treehugging ignorant moron.
has nothing to do with whether I am right or wrong.
You only honour me with that excellent epithet because you
fear that you may be losing some argument , so you
introduce an irrelevancy in order to make you think that
you are omehow better than me.
So I still take it as a great compliment.
Â*No, I say it because all green people are incorrect.

They might be, but that is independent of them being
Treehugging ignorant morons
So now please throw me the further excellent epithet of
being a stench, a revulsion, and a big suck on a sour lemon.
Â*If they are green they are by definition treehuggers.
Sez you. Blah!
Â*No not me, it's the meaning of the word.

What word?
Â*"Treehugger", do keep up at the back.

Someone who hugs trees? I have never known or seen one.
Â*It's an expression, obviously too complicated for you to understand.

Thanks a lot for that great compliment.
Now please ejaculate to me the further honour of being a canker and
an open wound.
Â*How can you take being called thick as a compliment?

Easy. It is because you said it. Obviously you have nothing
constructive to say.

I'm just fed up of your stupidity.

Thanks greatly for that excellent compliment coming from YOU.
Now please vomit to me the further esteemed honour from YOU of
green-nostriled, crossed eyed, hairy-livered, goisher kopf,

And thanks greatly for your excellent complement of my not keeping
up. Now please throw out to me the further honour of being a
nincompoop.
Â*No, as that word is meaningless.
Oooh yes please --
And the accolade of being a mistake of nature and a heavy-metal
bagpipe player?
Please!
Â*The only heavy metal a bagpipe should see is a crusher.

If they are wrong they are by definition ignorant morons.
Ignorant moron has nothing to do with being wrong.
Â*If you're ignorant of something, you'll be wrong about it.Â* If
you're ignorant of the earth being round, you'll think it's flat.

Bullenscheiße.
If I am ignorant of something I simply do not know something. By
definition that omething could be anything, right or wrong.
Â*If I ask Mr Smith about Quantum mechanics and he says he has no
idea, I would not call him ignorant.Â* However if I ask Mr Jones
and he gives me the wrong answer, some bull**** propagated by the
media, then I would call him ignorant.
Makes no difference.
Ignorant means does not know.
Â*********, otherwise 100% of the population is ignorant, as nobody
knows everything.

Exactly. Everybody is ignorant of something.
So calling a person ignorant is just stating a fact. And this
applies to anybody.
Â*No, not everyone is ignorant, you misunderstand the word.

Oh yes they are. I do not misunderstand the word.

"lacking knowledge or awareness in general;
uneducated or unsophisticated."Â* So that applies to you then,

Thank you very muchly for those further excellent honours coming from YOU.
Now I would love the further excellent honour from you of being a living
emptiness, and a meaningless void.


Note the "IN GENERAL" - as in an ignorant person knows nothing about
many many things, not just a few.

Another excellent compliment from YOU.
Now please ejaculate to me the further accolade of having a loathsome
disease,

I am really glad I am an ignorant moron according to you.
Now please throw me the further excellent honour of having
crawled out of a mutant maggot egg rejected by an evil
scientist as being below his low standards.
Â*Have you got that strange fetish where you enjoy having abuse
shouted at you?

Why yes!
If all you can do to win your arguments is to shout compliments
at me
Â*I have never complimented you.

Oh yes you have!
By calling me a tree-hugging ignorant moron.
Now please throw out to me the further excellent honour of being a
thick-headed trog.
Â*Just because you misunderstand an insult as a compliment doesn't
make it one.

Utter ********.
Just because you intend it as an insult does not make it an insult
if the intended recipient does not receive it as an insult.
I reserve the right to receive your outvomitings the way I see fit,
not the way you do. I am my own sovereign person.
Â*Head in the clouds....

Eh??
Evidence of defeat noted ....

No, you have been defeated because you're ignoring all insults.

What insults?
I have replied to all your compliments in the appropriate way!

Therefore I take such blatherings as compliments and an
admission of failure by you, and an attempt (failed) to bully me
into your line of thought.
Hence my "Hitler" comment very early in this thread.
If you think I am wrong, just say it with evidence of why I am
wrong.
Adding irrelevancies such as "treehugging ignorant moron" adds
nothing to the conversation. All it does its show your utter
intolerance of anyone who may be different from you.
Â*It's clear to everyone with a brain that the green movement is a
complete and utter waste of time.

Thanks greatly for the further excellent compliment and honour
from YOU that I have no brain.
Now please ejaculate to me the further excellent compliment of
being evil beyond comprehension, and half-living in the slough of
despair.
Â*Please firstly explain your attraction to my ejaculations.

It is your way of interacting with people.
Â*I don't even know if you're sexy or not.Â* I will not ejaculate over
an ugly cyclist.

Well that is a relief.

So you admit you're an ugly cyclist?

You said it.
And I take that as a great compliment coming from you.
And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes.
After all I ride a bicycle.
And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the
****witted pits of humanity.
And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great
compliment.
We must be doing something right.


NOw I will get on my bike.
Oh the clear air!
And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they
are the ****witted pits of humanity.
And because it is YOU who think that,Â* that is an extremely
great compliment.
We must be doing something right.
Â*No, I'm fine with normal cyclists.Â* What I don't like are the
ones that dress up like they're in the Tour de France, using
flashing headlamps in broad daylight, cycle on a busy road when
there's a clear pavement right next to them, and wear pansy
helmets because they haven't learned not to fall off yet.

That is their right.
Â*And it's my right to intimidate them with my larger vehicle.
You know those roads where the council are cheapskates and don't
steamroll the road afterwards, so you can throw stones in
cyclist's faces?Â* :-)

It is not your right to threaten anyone with physical harm or to
interfere with their right to do whatever they like.
Yu do not have a right to order somone to change because his
habits or mode of tranport offend you.
Â*I don't mind him cycling if he cycles in the correct place (the
pavement) and wears normal clothing.

If pavement equals footpath then biking on the pvement is against
the law.
Â*Wrong.Â* In fact in a lot of places it's signposted to be encouraged.
Where signposted it is OK. When not signposted, it is technically
against the law, though in practice usually not enforced (pragmatism ...)

It's not enforced because it's a ****ing stupid law.
I don't agree.
It's always best
for the cyclist to go wherever it's quietest.
I don't agree.
If the pavement is full
of pedestrians and there are **** all cars on the road, he should cycle
on the road.Â* If the road is busy and there are **** all pedestrians, he
should cycle on the pavement.
I don't agree.
Â* The least number of things to avoid or
get in the way of is clearly the most sensible course of action.
I don't agree.
Â* It
annoys the cyclist less, it annoys everyone else less, and everyone
makes better progress.
I don't agree.

Â*Think about it.Â* Busy road, quiet footpath, which do you cycle on?
I have a bike and use whichever is the quietest.
I usually find the road safer than the footpath. At least on the road
you don't usually meet cars backing out appearing from nowhere,
pedestrians wandering around like Brown's cows, ....

As I said, you use the quietest one.Â* Round here a car will pass my bike
about every 10 seconds.Â* On the pavement, I'll meet a pedestrian every 5
minutes.
That is your problem.

You have the right to be offended by his clothing. The biker is not
obligated to change his/her clothing because of your disgust.
Â*It does not offend me, it just looks stupid.Â* So I pretend they
aren't there.

That is fine. You have the right to ignore things which you think are
stupid.

I also have the right to take action against them. to make my world more
the way I want it.
No you don't.
You do not have the right to initiate physical force against anyone.
That is assault.

At least they are on a bike.
Â*And take 5 times longer to get to their destination, and can't
carry so much stuff.

That is your take on it.
What if they are enjoying themselves? You have no right to
interfere with that by physical threats such as throwing up stones
from large vehicles at them. Yes, you do have a right to be
offended, as long as you do not act on that with physical threats.
Â*I didn't put the stones there, the council did, they should have
been steamrolled.Â* They also damage car windscreens and chip
paintwork allowing for rust.Â* It's a criminal activity to make
roads be covered in loose chips, but the council operates above the
law.

Perhaps, but you still do not have the right to endanger them
physically by deliberately driving fast close to them when there are
loose stones about.
Â*They have the freedom to get off the road and use the pavement.Â* I
pay road tax and fuel duty for that road, he doesn't.

He probably does.

He can afford a car yet uses a bicycle, that's gross stupidity.

Thanks greatly for the excellent compliment coming from YOU.
My bike is an excellent convenient healthy exhilarating convenient
economical viable means of transport.
It really is a very great compliment to be called grossly stupid by YOU.
Especially by YOU.
And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes.
After all I ride a bicycle.
And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the
****witted pits of humanity.
And because it is YOU who think that, that is an extremely great
compliment.
We must be doing something right.

He can afford a car yet uses a bicycle, that's gross stupidity.

Thanks greatly for the excellent compliment coming from YOU.
My bike is an excellent convenient healthy exhilarating convenient
economical viable means of transport.
It really is a very great compliment to be called grossly stupid by YOU.
Especially by YOU.
And I have no ****ing interest in looking good in YOUR eyes.
After all I ride a bicycle.
And we all know what YOU think of bicyclists. You think they are the
****witted pits of humanity.
And because it is YOU who think that,Â* that is an extremely great
compliment.
We must be doing something right.

Cyclists v drivers? They're often the same people.

Much has been written about a war between cyclists and drivers, as if
the two groups were such polar opposites that they could never cross in
a Venn diagram. But according to new research, people who cycle the most
are likely to own at least two cars.

Regular cyclists – those who cycle at least once a week – are also
disproportionately likely to read broadsheet newspapers, be well
educated, have a household income of at least £50,000 per year and shop
at Waitrose, claims the latest Mintel report, Bicycles in the UK 2010.
In addition, they are twice as likely to be men as women.

https://www.theguardian.com/environm...ng-boom-survey

--
Bod

"%" wrote in message ...

On 2018-08-01 9:00 AM, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 16:25:42 +0100, David wrote:



"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 13:13:03 +0100, David wrote:



"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 05:58:59 +0100, David wrote:

its debbie's foot

Who is Debbie and how many feet is her foot?

9

Doesn't that make her tread on her own toes?

I wear a 10 1/2.

Size is not equal to length of foot in feet.

yes it is

Do you have $34?

"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 02 Aug 2018 15:22:34 +0100, David wrote:



"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
news
On Thu, 02 Aug 2018 00:23:56 +0100, % wrote:

On 2018-08-01 3:52 PM, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 19:22:26 +0100, David wrote:



"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 17:03:08 +0100, % wrote:

On 2018-08-01 9:00 AM, Jimmy Wilkinson Knife wrote:
On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 16:25:42 +0100, David wrote:



"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 13:13:03 +0100, David
wrote:



"Jimmy Wilkinson Knife" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 01 Aug 2018 05:58:59 +0100, David
wrote:

its debbie's foot

Who is Debbie and how many feet is her foot?

9

Doesn't that make her tread on her own toes?

I wear a 10 1/2.
Size is not equal to length of foot in feet.

yes it is

Anyone with a 10.5 foot foot would only be able to get work as a
clown.

my foot size is 10 1/2" in size
" isn't feet.
' is feet.


i foot is one foot ,
two feet is two feet ,
when you catch a fish ,
one foot is three feet

There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore looking
like
an idiot.

I have excitement.

Is your rod erect?

what kind of rod?