Dr. Thompson I presume

On Oct 31, 11:30*am, MagillaGorilla wrote:
DirtRoadie wrote:
On Oct 30, 7:18*pm, RicodJour wrote:
On Oct 30, 8:28*pm, Anton Berlin wrote:

In the better med schools they teach this method of creating patients.

http://velonews.com/article/99513

http://velonews.com/article/99685/la...osing-argument....

I hope the good doctor gets his asshole reamed in prison on a daily
basis.

It's hard to know exactly how accurate, complete and/or biased the
reporting is, but from what I've read, I hope the jury gets the same
impression that I have and the dear doctor hangs.

I've been in a situation where an angry driver pulled in front of a
paceline and hit the brakes. We had no serious consequences but it
quickly became apparent how that act simple act is anything but
innocent and could easily end up being deadly.

DR

The cyclists deserved what they got.

First of all, how come they couldn't stop their bikes in time? *A bike can
stop faster than a car.

Second, when a car is behind you trying to get around you, you don't ride
2-abreast and hold up the car....and then flip the driver off when he passes
you.

If you're driving a car and you hit the rear of someone's car, it's your
fault. *I don't see why riding a bike makes it any different.

Trollboy,

I know you're just looking for love and attention,
but don't be ridiculous. There's a presumption, when
driving or cycling on the road, that other people aren't
going to deliberately try to cause an accident or hurt you.
This presumption is the only thing that makes roads
usable for either cars or bikes. "Defensive driving"
means watching out for other people's screw-ups,
not defending yourself against someone who tries to
cause accidents, because there really is very little
you can do about that.

In particular, because everyone including drivers follows
at closer than the real safe stopping distance, it is
possible to cut someone off. The presumption that
the driver who rear-ends someone is at fault goes
out the window (or through the window, in this case)
when the leading driver deliberately tries to cause
the accident.

In your crusade against idiots, you should be against
Dr. Thompson. Why? He confessed to the crime.
If he had told the traffic investigator he'd done nothing
wrong, rather than bragging about teaching them a
lesson, he might have got away with it.

Ben