Nobody likes a grass...

"brianrob1961" wrote in message
...

On 21/09/2013 11:27, Catrap wrote:


"brianrob1961" wrote in message
...

On 18/09/2013 08:24, jnugent wrote:
On 18/09/2013 00:19, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 00:02:27 -0700, jnugent
wrote:

On 17/09/2013 23:49, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Tue, 17 Sep 2013 17:17:04 -0700, jnugent
wrote:

After all, cyclists and London bus drivers have no peers when it
comes
to quantity of traffic offences per 100km travelled.

Can you qualify that statement?

A link to the number of convictions per 100km by mode would suffice.

Why?

Are you unable to trust your own eyes?

I assume from your evasion of my request that you cannot back up your
statement. Is my assumption correct?

Your request is not relevant to my statement and neither would an answer
to it be probative.



Ha ha ha ha ha ha. What a tit and what a cop out. You are almost as much
of a brain dead ****wit as the Mentalguy who sees coaches speeding
around at over 70 mph and then has to backtrack and start using words
like 'anecdotal'.

So let's get this right: despite the fact that their are millions more
cars than there are cyclists, despite the fact that government has to
run a vast machine just to police the behaviour of motorists, and
despite the fact that UK charity Road Peace (http://www.roadpeace.org)
estimates that as of this morning nearly 895 thousand people have been
killed on roads worldwide (a minute fraction of which might have been
caused by cyclists), you think - actually you fantasise - that cyclists
and London (why just London?) bus drivers commit more traffic offences
than car drivers! lol

Yet another off topic, insulting and foul languaged post from the moron
who wants to "take back the group "

Off topic?!?!?!? If road deaths and a post that mentions cyclists
several times is off topic to you then you really are beyond help lol

Dropping the word cyclist in a rant about speeding coaches and motorists
does not make it on topic, no matter how much in your befuddled little world
you might think it does.

On 21/09/2013 11:47, Catrap wrote:


"brianrob1961" wrote in message
...

On 21/09/2013 11:27, Catrap wrote:


"brianrob1961" wrote in message
...

On 18/09/2013 08:24, jnugent wrote:
On 18/09/2013 00:19, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 00:02:27 -0700, jnugent
wrote:

On 17/09/2013 23:49, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Tue, 17 Sep 2013 17:17:04 -0700, jnugent
wrote:

After all, cyclists and London bus drivers have no peers when it
comes
to quantity of traffic offences per 100km travelled.

Can you qualify that statement?

A link to the number of convictions per 100km by mode would suffice.

Why?

Are you unable to trust your own eyes?

I assume from your evasion of my request that you cannot back up your
statement. Is my assumption correct?

Your request is not relevant to my statement and neither would an answer
to it be probative.



Ha ha ha ha ha ha. What a tit and what a cop out. You are almost as much
of a brain dead ****wit as the Mentalguy who sees coaches speeding
around at over 70 mph and then has to backtrack and start using words
like 'anecdotal'.

So let's get this right: despite the fact that their are millions more
cars than there are cyclists, despite the fact that government has to
run a vast machine just to police the behaviour of motorists, and
despite the fact that UK charity Road Peace (http://www.roadpeace.org)
estimates that as of this morning nearly 895 thousand people have been
killed on roads worldwide (a minute fraction of which might have been
caused by cyclists), you think - actually you fantasise - that cyclists
and London (why just London?) bus drivers commit more traffic offences
than car drivers! lol

Yet another off topic, insulting and foul languaged post from the moron
who wants to "take back the group "

Off topic?!?!?!? If road deaths and a post that mentions cyclists
several times is off topic to you then you really are beyond help lol

Dropping the word cyclist in a rant about speeding coaches and motorists
does not make it on topic, no matter how much in your befuddled little
world you might think it does.

Go fiddle with some children and **** off.

On Sat, 21 Sep 2013 11:27:29 +0100, Catrap wrote:

the moron

Why do people insult others?

People who are angry insult people because in their anger they cannot
think of a better way to handle it, except to start a fight and make the
other person feel bad.

On 21/09/2013 12:51, Peter Keller wrote:
On Sat, 21 Sep 2013 11:27:29 +0100, Catrap wrote:

the moron

Why do people insult others?

People who are angry insult people because in their anger they cannot
think of a better way to handle it, except to start a fight and make the
other person feel bad.


No, I for one insult people on here because the insults describe them
perfectly. The trolls on here really are the lowest form of human life.
They are products of the selfish world that Thatcher created.

"brianrob1961" wrote in message
...

On 21/09/2013 11:47, Catrap wrote:


"brianrob1961" wrote in message
...

On 21/09/2013 11:27, Catrap wrote:


"brianrob1961" wrote in message
...

On 18/09/2013 08:24, jnugent wrote:
On 18/09/2013 00:19, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Wed, 18 Sep 2013 00:02:27 -0700, jnugent
wrote:

On 17/09/2013 23:49, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Tue, 17 Sep 2013 17:17:04 -0700, jnugent
wrote:

After all, cyclists and London bus drivers have no peers when it
comes
to quantity of traffic offences per 100km travelled.

Can you qualify that statement?

A link to the number of convictions per 100km by mode would suffice.

Why?

Are you unable to trust your own eyes?

I assume from your evasion of my request that you cannot back up your
statement. Is my assumption correct?

Your request is not relevant to my statement and neither would an answer
to it be probative.



Ha ha ha ha ha ha. What a tit and what a cop out. You are almost as much
of a brain dead ****wit as the Mentalguy who sees coaches speeding
around at over 70 mph and then has to backtrack and start using words
like 'anecdotal'.

So let's get this right: despite the fact that their are millions more
cars than there are cyclists, despite the fact that government has to
run a vast machine just to police the behaviour of motorists, and
despite the fact that UK charity Road Peace (http://www.roadpeace.org)
estimates that as of this morning nearly 895 thousand people have been
killed on roads worldwide (a minute fraction of which might have been
caused by cyclists), you think - actually you fantasise - that cyclists
and London (why just London?) bus drivers commit more traffic offences
than car drivers! lol

Yet another off topic, insulting and foul languaged post from the moron
who wants to "take back the group "

Off topic?!?!?!? If road deaths and a post that mentions cyclists
several times is off topic to you then you really are beyond help lol

Dropping the word cyclist in a rant about speeding coaches and motorists
does not make it on topic, no matter how much in your befuddled little
world you might think it does.

Go fiddle with some children and **** off.

Yet another off topic, insulting and foul languaged post from the moron who
wants to "take back the group "

"Brian Robertson" wrote in message
...

On 21/09/2013 12:51, Peter Keller wrote:
On Sat, 21 Sep 2013 11:27:29 +0100, Catrap wrote:

the moron

Why do people insult others?

People who are angry insult people because in their anger they cannot
think of a better way to handle it, except to start a fight and make the
other person feel bad.


No, I for one insult people on here because the insults describe them
perfectly. The trolls on here really are the lowest form of human life.
They are products of the selfish world that Thatcher created.

Yet another off topic, insulting and foul languaged post from the moron who
wants to "take back the group "

On 21/09/2013 05:39, brianrob1961 wrote:

On 18/09/2013 01:17, jnugent wrote:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-24124187

Let's hope that someone manages to catch Dave Sherry doing something
wrong on his bike (or even while driving his London bus).

Everything that I have read seems to suggest that using a mobile phone
while you are driving is at least as dangerous as driving while under
the influence of alcohol. Are you saying that it is wrong to shop a
drunk driver?

Don't believe everything you read.

Did the accident rate fall dramatically when handheld mobile use was banned?

It did when thee breathalyser came in.

After all, cyclists and London bus drivers have no peers when it comes
to quantity of traffic offences per 100km travelled.

Can we have your evidence to back up this absurd statement, please?

Mk I Eyeball. Any time, any place where there are cyclists. Or London
bus drivers, especially at traffic lights.

Cyclists in London stopping at red lights is an exception.

On 21/09/2013 15:22, jnugent wrote:
On 21/09/2013 05:39, brianrob1961 wrote:

On 18/09/2013 01:17, jnugent wrote:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-24124187

Let's hope that someone manages to catch Dave Sherry doing something
wrong on his bike (or even while driving his London bus).

Everything that I have read seems to suggest that using a mobile phone
while you are driving is at least as dangerous as driving while under
the influence of alcohol. Are you saying that it is wrong to shop a
drunk driver?

Don't believe everything you read.

Did the accident rate fall dramatically when handheld mobile use was
banned?

It did when thee breathalyser came in.

After all, cyclists and London bus drivers have no peers when it comes
to quantity of traffic offences per 100km travelled.

Can we have your evidence to back up this absurd statement, please?

Mk I Eyeball. Any time, any place where there are cyclists. Or London
bus drivers, especially at traffic lights.

Cyclists in London stopping at red lights is an exception.

I presume you don't see any bad behaviour by car drivers then.

"Brian Roberts0n" wrote in message
...

On 21/09/2013 15:22, jnugent wrote:
On 21/09/2013 05:39, brianrob1961 wrote:

On 18/09/2013 01:17, jnugent wrote:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-24124187

Let's hope that someone manages to catch Dave Sherry doing something
wrong on his bike (or even while driving his London bus).

Everything that I have read seems to suggest that using a mobile phone
while you are driving is at least as dangerous as driving while under
the influence of alcohol. Are you saying that it is wrong to shop a
drunk driver?

Don't believe everything you read.

Did the accident rate fall dramatically when handheld mobile use was
banned?

It did when thee breathalyser came in.

After all, cyclists and London bus drivers have no peers when it comes
to quantity of traffic offences per 100km travelled.

Can we have your evidence to back up this absurd statement, please?

Mk I Eyeball. Any time, any place where there are cyclists. Or London
bus drivers, especially at traffic lights.

Cyclists in London stopping at red lights is an exception.

I presume you don't see any bad behaviour by car drivers then.

But he wouldn't be discussing them on a cycling, NG, would he?
The place for that would be on a motoring NG.

On 21/09/2013 10:39, Brian Roberts0n wrote:
On 21/09/2013 15:22, jnugent wrote:
On 21/09/2013 05:39, brianrob1961 wrote:

On 18/09/2013 01:17, jnugent wrote:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-24124187

Let's hope that someone manages to catch Dave Sherry doing something
wrong on his bike (or even while driving his London bus).

Everything that I have read seems to suggest that using a mobile phone
while you are driving is at least as dangerous as driving while under
the influence of alcohol. Are you saying that it is wrong to shop a
drunk driver?

Don't believe everything you read.

Did the accident rate fall dramatically when handheld mobile use was
banned?

It did when thee breathalyser came in.

After all, cyclists and London bus drivers have no peers when it comes
to quantity of traffic offences per 100km travelled.

Can we have your evidence to back up this absurd statement, please?

Mk I Eyeball. Any time, any place where there are cyclists. Or London
bus drivers, especially at traffic lights.

Cyclists in London stopping at red lights is an exception.

I presume you don't see any bad behaviour by car drivers then.

Why does it matter?

Ploughing through a red light is a rarity for drivers, as you know.