Another house smashed by a car.
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Which side is the fuel tank filler on?
Next: You tube (shunt) lorry driver keeps his HGV licence
From: Bob on 24 May 2010 06:40 "Doug" <jagmad(a)riseup.net> wrote in message news:9aafe177-6758-4755-97b5-d6a235a083fb(a)k31g2000vbu.googlegroups.com... > No cyclist could do this much damage which clearly proves how much > more dangerous cars are. <snip> No spoon could have done this which clearly proves how much more dangerous knives (when misused) are. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Three people have been stabbed at a house party in a Cumbrian town. Officers were called to an address on Tree Road, Brampton at 0420 BST, Cumbrian Police said. One man and one woman have been taken to hospital, their condition has been described as "serious". Another injured man has been discharged. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/cumbria/8699429.stm ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Bob
From: Doug on 24 May 2010 06:40 On 24 May, 10:01, Derek Geldard <im...(a)miniac.demon.co.uk> wrote: > On Sun, 23 May 2010 22:20:43 -0700 (PDT), Doug <jag...(a)riseup.net> > wrote: > > >No cyclist could do this much damage which clearly proves how much > >more dangerous cars are. > > Yebbut, being a heavy powerful machine it achieves more, carries more > people, goes further, and gets there quicker. > > I 'd have thought you'd have been bound to notice. > That may be so but a car is still much more dangerous than a bicycle. The question is, should utility be placed before road safety and why aren't cars better regulated in the interests of safety? -- UK Radical Campaigns. http://www.zing.icom43.net A driving licence is a licence to kill.
From: Brimstone on 24 May 2010 06:43 "Doug" <jagmad(a)riseup.net> wrote in message news:da0d487f-7733-4ab3-9477-3cd404fdf73d(a)a20g2000vbc.googlegroups.com... > On 24 May, 10:01, Derek Geldard <im...(a)miniac.demon.co.uk> wrote: >> On Sun, 23 May 2010 22:20:43 -0700 (PDT), Doug <jag...(a)riseup.net> >> wrote: >> >> >No cyclist could do this much damage which clearly proves how much >> >more dangerous cars are. >> >> Yebbut, being a heavy powerful machine it achieves more, carries more >> people, goes further, and gets there quicker. >> >> I 'd have thought you'd have been bound to notice. >> > That may be so but a car is still much more dangerous than a bicycle. It also does a great deal more productive work. > The question is, should utility be placed before road safety and why > aren't cars better regulated in the interests of safety? > What additional regulations would you like Doug? Please be specific.
From: Adrian on 24 May 2010 06:45 "Brimstone" <brimstone(a)hotmail.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>> >No cyclist could do this much damage which clearly proves how much >>> >more dangerous cars are. >>> Yebbut, being a heavy powerful machine it achieves more, carries more >>> people, goes further, and gets there quicker. >>> >>> I 'd have thought you'd have been bound to notice. >> That may be so but a car is still much more dangerous than a bicycle. > It also does a great deal more productive work. *ding* A chainsaw is more dangerous than a butter knife, too. But try cutting a tree down with a butter knife...
From: Dr Zoidberg on 24 May 2010 10:04
"Doug" <jagmad(a)riseup.net> wrote in message news:da0d487f-7733-4ab3-9477-3cd404fdf73d(a)a20g2000vbc.googlegroups.com... > On 24 May, 10:01, Derek Geldard <im...(a)miniac.demon.co.uk> wrote: >> On Sun, 23 May 2010 22:20:43 -0700 (PDT), Doug <jag...(a)riseup.net> >> wrote: >> >> >No cyclist could do this much damage which clearly proves how much >> >more dangerous cars are. >> >> Yebbut, being a heavy powerful machine it achieves more, carries more >> people, goes further, and gets there quicker. >> >> I 'd have thought you'd have been bound to notice. >> > That may be so but a car is still much more dangerous than a bicycle. > The question is, should utility be placed before road safety and why > aren't cars better regulated in the interests of safety? > He was driving illegally. If he hadn't been ignoring the law this wouldn't have happened. How do you propose to enforce speeding laws (or indeed any law at all) with full compliance? -- Alex |