Another killer driver smashes a shop and kills a boy.
in [UK Drivers]
|
From: David Hansen on 18 May 2010 08:08 On 18 May 2010 06:35:09 GMT someone who may be Adrian <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote this:- >I notice that the Duhg/Hansen dreamteam Excellent, an insult. Do keep it up. >the "unacceptable face of motoring" (is there >an acceptable face for them?) I can't speak for Doug, but for me the answer to your question is yes. That should have been obvious, so I can only assume that you are trolling. -- David Hansen, Edinburgh I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/ukpga_20000023_en_8#pt3-pb3-l1g54
From: Adrian on 18 May 2010 08:33 David Hansen <SENDdavidNOhSPAM(a)spidacom.co.uk> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: >>I notice that the Duhg/Hansen dreamteam > Excellent, an insult. Do keep it up. That wasn't an insult. Unless, of course, you regard being associated with Duhg as an insult? >>the "unacceptable face of motoring" (is there an acceptable face for >>them?) > I can't speak for Doug, but for me the answer to your question is yes. > That should have been obvious, so I can only assume that you are > trolling. Not at all. It was a straight question. As with Duhg, you've consistently and constantly displayed the rather tired and hackneyed "Two pedals good, four wheels bad" mantra for about as long as I can recall seeing your posts. If your position truly is that it is not in any way, shape or form the particular mode of transport which is inherently good or bad, that all modes have their advantages/disadvantages/appropriateness, and that the problems stem solely from the attitude/competence/responsibility of the individual users, then I apologise for misrepresenting you - but you might wish to consider why so many people seem to share my apparent misconceptions of your views.
From: GT on 18 May 2010 10:03 "Doug" <jagmad(a)riseup.net> wrote in message news:62c873a9-0c94-4095-8d2c-b8bc47bf141f(a)h11g2000vbo.googlegroups.com... > Once again demonstrating the sheer deadly destructiveness of a car > compare to that of a bicycle. Nowhere is safe from these terrorists. You have totally ruined the point of this post by calling all car drivers terrorists!! Oh and your signature is wrong - you state, 'a driving licence is a licence to kill'? This is a clear typo as murdering someone by driving over them is not legal in this country!! No, a driving license is a license to drive - the clue is in its name!! In order to have a license to kill, you need to join the forces where after weapons training + relevant assignment, you will be issued with a 'license to kill'.
From: Adrian on 18 May 2010 10:12 "GT" <a(a)b.c> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > In order to have a license to kill, you need to join the forces where > after weapons training + relevant assignment, you will be issued with a > 'license to kill'. <gently> James Bond isn't real, y'know.
From: GT on 18 May 2010 10:37
"Adrian" <toomany2cvs(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:85flhtFgk9U9(a)mid.individual.net... > "GT" <a(a)b.c> gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying: > >> In order to have a license to kill, you need to join the forces where >> after weapons training + relevant assignment, you will be issued with a >> 'license to kill'. > > <gently> > James Bond isn't real, y'know. :-) 'License to kill' *does* actually exist tho! |