Brighton cyclist ordered to pay £1,000 for ignoring one-way sign

On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 21:53:30 -0000, JNugent wrote:

On 11/01/2013 21:25, Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 20:57:58 -0000, JNugent
wrote:

On 11/01/2013 17:46, Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 00:57:05 -0000, Mrcheerful
wrote:


"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqpuin1bytk5n5@i7-940...
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 17:52:45 -0000, Simon Weissel
wrote:







Because they are SMALLER AND LESS DANGEROUS, god you're thick.


So which part of the law becomes irrelevant due to size? and at what
size
exactly? Have you told your MP about these missing bits in the law?

The law is to prevent accidents which hurt people or destroy property.
A person on a bike doesn't do that, because they are SMALLER and
LIGHTER.

Are you *reading* this, PhilO?

Does he normally *listen* to it?

No idea.

But he currently has a virtual wager on with other posters that no-one
in this NG ever claims that cyclists cannot injure pedestrians.

You have claimed it, so he has lost.

He'll say I don't count or something.

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

Police cordoned off Liverpool City Centre this morning when a suspicious object was discovered in a car.
It later turned out to be a tax disc.

"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqrm3kpsytk5n5@i7-940...
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 20:40:03 -0000, Tony Dragon
wrote:

On 11/01/2013 19:31, Mrcheerful wrote:
"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqrcz2tlytk5n5@i7-940...
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 00:57:05 -0000, Mrcheerful

wrote:


"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqpuin1bytk5n5@i7-940...
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 17:52:45 -0000, Simon Weissel
wrote:

On 10/01/2013 17:44, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote:




You don't often see cars going the wrong way up a one-way street.
Cyclists seem to think the law does not apply to them.

Because they are SMALLER AND LESS DANGEROUS, god you're thick.


So which part of the law becomes irrelevant due to size? and at what
size
exactly? Have you told your MP about these missing bits in the law?

The law is to prevent accidents which hurt people or destroy property.
A
person on a bike doesn't do that, because they are SMALLER and LIGHTER.


the laws are to give order to an otherwise unregulated activity,
ignoring
them for any group of road users is unwise.
As you have agreed, cycles can and do injure and kill people and damage
property, which is why there are laws which govern their use.



And of course they can also cause accidents.

Not big ones.


even a 'small' accident can kill. Which is why there are rules to keep the
majority safe, breaking the rules increases the chances of a crash/injury or
death.

"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqrm3buiytk5n5@i7-940...
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 19:31:47 -0000, Mrcheerful
wrote:


"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqrcz2tlytk5n5@i7-940...
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 00:57:05 -0000, Mrcheerful

wrote:


"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqpuin1bytk5n5@i7-940...
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 17:52:45 -0000, Simon Weissel
wrote:

On 10/01/2013 17:44, Dave - Cyclists VOR wrote:
On 09/01/2013 20:25, Lieutenant Scott wrote:



There should be a law against that.....


You don't often see cars going the wrong way up a one-way street.
Cyclists seem to think the law does not apply to them.

Because they are SMALLER AND LESS DANGEROUS, god you're thick.


So which part of the law becomes irrelevant due to size? and at what
size
exactly? Have you told your MP about these missing bits in the law?

The law is to prevent accidents which hurt people or destroy property.
A
person on a bike doesn't do that, because they are SMALLER and LIGHTER.


the laws are to give order to an otherwise unregulated activity, ignoring
them for any group of road users is unwise.
As you have agreed, cycles can and do injure and kill people and damage
property, which is why there are laws which govern their use.

Cyclists rarely cause injuries, and when they do they're usually minor.
So the law should concentrate on the cars which are far more dangerous.


Hello, Doug has returned.

On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 22:14:38 -0000, Mrcheerful wrote:


"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqrm3kpsytk5n5@i7-940...
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 20:40:03 -0000, Tony Dragon
wrote:

On 11/01/2013 19:31, Mrcheerful wrote:
"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqrcz2tlytk5n5@i7-940...
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 00:57:05 -0000, Mrcheerful

wrote:







The law is to prevent accidents which hurt people or destroy property.
A
person on a bike doesn't do that, because they are SMALLER and LIGHTER.


the laws are to give order to an otherwise unregulated activity,
ignoring
them for any group of road users is unwise.
As you have agreed, cycles can and do injure and kill people and damage
property, which is why there are laws which govern their use.



And of course they can also cause accidents.

Not big ones.


even a 'small' accident can kill. Which is why there are rules to keep the
majority safe, breaking the rules increases the chances of a crash/injury or
death.

CAN. Not likely. Cars cause more and bigger accidents, concentrate on them.

We'll be arresting pedestrians next, like they do in America.

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

Before marriage, a man yearns for the woman he loves. After marriage, the 'Y' becomes silent.

On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 22:15:09 -0000, Mrcheerful wrote:


"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqrm3buiytk5n5@i7-940...
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 19:31:47 -0000, Mrcheerful
wrote:


"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqrcz2tlytk5n5@i7-940...
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 00:57:05 -0000, Mrcheerful

wrote:


"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqpuin1bytk5n5@i7-940...
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 17:52:45 -0000, Simon Weissel
wrote:







Because they are SMALLER AND LESS DANGEROUS, god you're thick.


So which part of the law becomes irrelevant due to size? and at what
size
exactly? Have you told your MP about these missing bits in the law?

The law is to prevent accidents which hurt people or destroy property.
A
person on a bike doesn't do that, because they are SMALLER and LIGHTER.


the laws are to give order to an otherwise unregulated activity, ignoring
them for any group of road users is unwise.
As you have agreed, cycles can and do injure and kill people and damage
property, which is why there are laws which govern their use.

Cyclists rarely cause injuries, and when they do they're usually minor.
So the law should concentrate on the cars which are far more dangerous.


Hello, Doug has returned.

Doug sounds like a sensible chap.


--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

Do not adjust your mind - the fault is with reality.

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 22:14:38 -0000, Mrcheerful
wrote:

"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqrm3kpsytk5n5@i7-940...
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 20:40:03 -0000, Tony Dragon
wrote:

On 11/01/2013 19:31, Mrcheerful wrote:
"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqrcz2tlytk5n5@i7-940...
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 00:57:05 -0000, Mrcheerful

wrote:




The law is to prevent accidents which hurt people or destroy
property. A
person on a bike doesn't do that, because they are SMALLER and
LIGHTER.

the laws are to give order to an otherwise unregulated activity,
ignoring
them for any group of road users is unwise.
As you have agreed, cycles can and do injure and kill people and
damage property, which is why there are laws which govern their
use.

And of course they can also cause accidents.

Not big ones.


even a 'small' accident can kill. Which is why there are rules to
keep the majority safe, breaking the rules increases the chances of
a crash/injury or death.

CAN. Not likely. Cars cause more and bigger accidents, concentrate
on them.

This is a cycle group

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 22:15:09 -0000, Mrcheerful
wrote:

"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqrm3buiytk5n5@i7-940...
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 19:31:47 -0000, Mrcheerful
wrote:


"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqrcz2tlytk5n5@i7-940...
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 00:57:05 -0000, Mrcheerful

wrote:


"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqpuin1bytk5n5@i7-940...
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 17:52:45 -0000, Simon Weissel
wrote:







Because they are SMALLER AND LESS DANGEROUS, god you're thick.


So which part of the law becomes irrelevant due to size? and at
what size
exactly? Have you told your MP about these missing bits in the
law?

The law is to prevent accidents which hurt people or destroy
property. A
person on a bike doesn't do that, because they are SMALLER and
LIGHTER.

the laws are to give order to an otherwise unregulated activity,
ignoring them for any group of road users is unwise.
As you have agreed, cycles can and do injure and kill people and
damage property, which is why there are laws which govern their
use.

Cyclists rarely cause injuries, and when they do they're usually
minor. So the law should concentrate on the cars which are far more
dangerous.

Hello, Doug has returned.

Doug sounds like a sensible chap.

He was universally despised on every group he posted to.

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 22:15:09 -0000, Mrcheerful
wrote:

"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqrm3buiytk5n5@i7-940...
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 19:31:47 -0000, Mrcheerful
wrote:


"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqrcz2tlytk5n5@i7-940...
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 00:57:05 -0000, Mrcheerful

wrote:


"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqpuin1bytk5n5@i7-940...
On Thu, 10 Jan 2013 17:52:45 -0000, Simon Weissel
wrote:







Because they are SMALLER AND LESS DANGEROUS, god you're thick.


So which part of the law becomes irrelevant due to size? and at
what size
exactly? Have you told your MP about these missing bits in the
law?

The law is to prevent accidents which hurt people or destroy
property. A
person on a bike doesn't do that, because they are SMALLER and
LIGHTER.

the laws are to give order to an otherwise unregulated activity,
ignoring them for any group of road users is unwise.
As you have agreed, cycles can and do injure and kill people and
damage property, which is why there are laws which govern their
use.

Cyclists rarely cause injuries, and when they do they're usually
minor. So the law should concentrate on the cars which are far more
dangerous.

Hello, Doug has returned.

Doug sounds like a sensible chap.

It is not a compliment.
He was universally despised on every group he posted to.

On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 11:03:57 -0000, Mrcheerful wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 22:14:38 -0000, Mrcheerful
wrote:

"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqrm3kpsytk5n5@i7-940...
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 20:40:03 -0000, Tony Dragon
wrote:

On 11/01/2013 19:31, Mrcheerful wrote:





And of course they can also cause accidents.

Not big ones.


even a 'small' accident can kill. Which is why there are rules to
keep the majority safe, breaking the rules increases the chances of
a crash/injury or death.

CAN. Not likely. Cars cause more and bigger accidents, concentrate
on them.

This is a cycle group

I'm saying the law should concentrate on the cars, not the cyclists.

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

A sign at the golf course detailing the dress code:
Guys: No Shirts, No Golf
Girls: No Shirts, No Green Fees

On Sat, 12 Jan 2013 11:04:53 -0000, Mrcheerful wrote:

Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 22:15:09 -0000, Mrcheerful
wrote:

"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqrm3buiytk5n5@i7-940...
On Fri, 11 Jan 2013 19:31:47 -0000, Mrcheerful
wrote:


"Lieutenant Scott" wrote in message
newsp.wqrcz2tlytk5n5@i7-940...








the laws are to give order to an otherwise unregulated activity,
ignoring them for any group of road users is unwise.
As you have agreed, cycles can and do injure and kill people and
damage property, which is why there are laws which govern their
use.

Cyclists rarely cause injuries, and when they do they're usually
minor. So the law should concentrate on the cars which are far more
dangerous.

Hello, Doug has returned.

Doug sounds like a sensible chap.

He was universally despised on every group he posted to.

That could mean the rest of the group were idiots. Most people in newsgroups are idiots.

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

Two fish are in a tank. One says to the other, "I'll man the guns, you drive".