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: Albert T Cone on 26 May 2010 10:07 Ret. wrote: > Doug wrote: >> It would be impossible to achieve full compliance but much more could >> be done to reduce the danger from cars by concentrating on them >> instead of relatively harmless cyclists > > And in what way are the authorities 'concentrating on harmless cyclists' > Doug? I spent 30 years in the police. Apart from occasionally > rollicking a cyclist for cycling on the pavement, or riding at night > without lights, I never had any involvement with them. Indeed. In my misspent yoof, I have cycled, when quite staggeringly drunk, with flat tyres, whilst swigging from a can of whatever alcohol was free at that party, along the pavement past a number of police cars. I am not proud of this (or at least only slightly, in an embarrassed sort of way) and indeed would rather hope that someone doing something like that would be stopped and given a sobering ticking off, but it makes me wonder what exactly one has to do as a cyclist to attract the attention of the police..
From: BrianW on 26 May 2010 18:05 On May 26, 11:23�am, "GT" <a...(a)b.c> wrote: > "Brimstone" <brimst...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > > news:tcudnVXS_IAucmHWnZ2dnUVZ8jmdnZ2d(a)bt.com... > > > > > > > > > "GT" <a...(a)b.c> wrote in message > >news:4bfce43d$0$8180$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > >> "Doug" <jag...(a)riseup.net> wrote in message > >>news:96bc7102-785b-4b10-8e7a-42515ed88e9f(a)a16g2000vbr.googlegroups.com.... > >>> On 24 May, 06:20, Doug <jag...(a)riseup.net> burbled: > > >> Doug says, > >>>> "Driver flees when car hits house near Norwich > > >> and Doug says, > >>> A man has been charged with drink driivng. > > >> Doug, the only news you seem to post is anything involving cars - envy is > >> a terrible thing. Why don't you just get yourself acquianted with the > >> road laws in this country, sit a driving test and get yourself a car then > >> you can judge for yourself whether they are comfortable, useful devices, > >> rather than allowing yourself to be brainwashed by the media and small > >> groups of tree huggers and then perhaps you waste so much of your time > >> trying to brainwash others! > > > Doug has already passed the UK driving test and therefore holds a licence. > > Doug has a license to kill? So he is a self-confessed murdered now! > Brilliant.- And furthermore, Mr Bollen not only drove "a lot" (his words), but his choice of car was ... a 14 mpg Land Rover. Some say that that makes him a hypocritical old turd. Obviously, however, I cannot comment one way or the other.
From: GT on 27 May 2010 04:33 "BrianW" <brianwhitehead(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message news:1ca25209-eb4a-42bd-901a-f88801897a22(a)z17g2000vbd.googlegroups.com... On May 26, 11:23?am, "GT" <a...(a)b.c> wrote: > "Brimstone" <brimst...(a)hotmail.com> wrote in message > > news:tcudnVXS_IAucmHWnZ2dnUVZ8jmdnZ2d(a)bt.com... > > "GT" <a...(a)b.c> wrote in message > >news:4bfce43d$0$8180$c3e8da3(a)news.astraweb.com... > >> "Doug" <jag...(a)riseup.net> wrote in message > >>news:96bc7102-785b-4b10-8e7a-42515ed88e9f(a)a16g2000vbr.googlegroups.com... > >>> On 24 May, 06:20, Doug <jag...(a)riseup.net> burbled: > > >> Doug says, > >>>> "Driver flees when car hits house near Norwich > > >> and Doug says, > >>> A man has been charged with drink driivng. > > >> Doug, the only news you seem to post is anything involving cars - envy > >> is > >> a terrible thing. Why don't you just get yourself acquianted with the > >> road laws in this country, sit a driving test and get yourself a car > >> then > >> you can judge for yourself whether they are comfortable, useful > >> devices, > >> rather than allowing yourself to be brainwashed by the media and small > >> groups of tree huggers and then perhaps you waste so much of your time > >> trying to brainwash others! > > > Doug has already passed the UK driving test and therefore holds a > > licence. > > Doug has a license to kill? So he is a self-confessed murdered now! > Brilliant.- And furthermore, Mr Bollen not only drove "a lot" (his words), but his choice of car was ... a 14 mpg Land Rover. Some say that that makes him a hypocritical old turd. Obviously, however, I cannot comment one way or the other. Ahh, well that is fine because under their rules of physics, 14mpg is actually a *very* efficient car becuase the chain of supply for their fuel is controlled. Far more efficient than a normal 40mpg car.
From: thirty-six on 28 May 2010 08:49 On 26 May, 10:58, "GT" <a...(a)b.c> wrote: > "thirty-six" <thirty-...(a)live.co.uk> wrote in message > > news:71eaf388-2cc5-40b4-93cb-86893c6761ba(a)a16g2000vbr.googlegroups.com... > On 26 May, 10:00, "GT" <a...(a)b.c> wrote: > > > thirty-six failed to indent: > > "The design of a bicycle is well known and respected, there is no need > > for type approval, it is a relatively simple device of which problems > > with brakes, suspension and steering rarely occur and are immediately > > obvious to the rider. A single track machine does not require > > complexity in steering, suspension and braking." > > > GT: > > Interesting, but lets turn that round talk about cars for a moment: > > > The design of a car is well known and respected, yet cyclist still call > > for type approval! It is a relatively simple device of which problems > > with brakes, suspension and steering rarely occur and are immediately > > obvious to the driver. A car does not require complex in steering, > > suspension or braking. > > thirty-six still didn't indent: > "The brakes are complex" > > No they are not - they work the same way as a bike - pads press onto round > parts and the friction causes the vehicle to stop. Power assistance for > brakes is also not complex. > > thirty-six still didn't indent: > "they require engine assistance on the whole and require balanced > distribution using multiple systems" > > Yes, but this is not complex. > > thirty-six still didn't indent: > "The pads or shoes are hidden from view so cannot be casually inspected." > > They are not hidden from view - they are on the wheels. Just bend down and > have a look. > > thirty-six still didn't indent: > "Suspension is also relatively complex" > > No it isn't - it is a large spring, or in some cases is it leaf-springs - > the same technology used in Silver Cross prams! > > thirty-six still didn't indent: > "Steering is also relatively complex" > > No it isn't - you turn the steering wheel and the big pole it is attached to > turns a steering rack (like a toblerone) which moves left or right and turns > the front wheels. its only a 'set of cogs' more complex than a bike. > > thirty-six still didn't indent: > "There are plenty of design problems with four wheel vehicles, especially > heavy ones." > > All of which have been overcome by design experts. > > I think you have very limited mechanical knowledge and so find these things > complex. To a mechanic or even layman with basic mechanical knowledge, there > is nothing complex about a car. Please inspect my earlier posting for the word RELATIVELY in respect of the difference in complexity between bicycles and motor cars. If English is not your first language I suggest you use a dictionary. Motor cars need annual check because owers are happy to let them trundle along even though they may not be safe in handling when taking emergency action avoidance due to faulty or imbalanced brakes, steering or suspension due to wear, corrosion or collision.
From: GT on 28 May 2010 09:42
"thirty-six" <thirty-six(a)live.co.uk> wrote in message news:92c10c0d-dd33-4a6b-9de6-71f89f351d5b(a)c11g2000vbe.googlegroups.com... > On 26 May, 10:58, "GT" <a...(a)b.c> wrote: >> "thirty-six" <thirty-...(a)live.co.uk> wrote in message >> >> news:71eaf388-2cc5-40b4-93cb-86893c6761ba(a)a16g2000vbr.googlegroups.com... >> On 26 May, 10:00, "GT" <a...(a)b.c> wrote: >> >> > thirty-six failed to indent: >> > "The design of a bicycle is well known and respected, there is no need >> > for type approval, it is a relatively simple device of which problems >> > with brakes, suspension and steering rarely occur and are immediately >> > obvious to the rider. A single track machine does not require >> > complexity in steering, suspension and braking." >> >> > GT: >> > Interesting, but lets turn that round talk about cars for a moment: >> >> > The design of a car is well known and respected, yet cyclist still call >> > for type approval! It is a relatively simple device of which problems >> > with brakes, suspension and steering rarely occur and are immediately >> > obvious to the driver. A car does not require complex in steering, >> > suspension or braking. >> >> thirty-six still didn't indent: >> "The brakes are complex" >> >> No they are not - they work the same way as a bike - pads press onto >> round >> parts and the friction causes the vehicle to stop. Power assistance for >> brakes is also not complex. >> >> thirty-six still didn't indent: >> "they require engine assistance on the whole and require balanced >> distribution using multiple systems" >> >> Yes, but this is not complex. >> >> thirty-six still didn't indent: >> "The pads or shoes are hidden from view so cannot be casually inspected." >> >> They are not hidden from view - they are on the wheels. Just bend down >> and >> have a look. >> >> thirty-six still didn't indent: >> "Suspension is also relatively complex" >> >> No it isn't - it is a large spring, or in some cases is it leaf-springs - >> the same technology used in Silver Cross prams! >> >> thirty-six still didn't indent: >> "Steering is also relatively complex" >> >> No it isn't - you turn the steering wheel and the big pole it is attached >> to >> turns a steering rack (like a toblerone) which moves left or right and >> turns >> the front wheels. its only a 'set of cogs' more complex than a bike. >> >> thirty-six still didn't indent: >> "There are plenty of design problems with four wheel vehicles, especially >> heavy ones." >> >> All of which have been overcome by design experts. >> >> I think you have very limited mechanical knowledge and so find these >> things >> complex. To a mechanic or even layman with basic mechanical knowledge, >> there >> is nothing complex about a car. > > Please inspect my earlier posting for the word RELATIVELY in respect > of the difference in complexity between bicycles and motor cars. Post was 'inspected' before I replied to it! Mechanical ignorance is not a bad thing - we all have different areas of knowledge, but inserting the word 'relatively' doesn't really give you freedom to post biased comments on things you know little about! If you knew the difference between the way bikes and cars work on the above points, you would have used different phrasing, like 'slightly more complex', or 'a couple of cogs more than...' and so forth. |