Give him a medal
in [UK Drivers]
|
Prev: Speeding - a few questions
Next: Smartcom 12s relay?
From: Alex Heney on 14 Aug 2006 18:55 On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 23:06:38 +0100, Dave M <me2(a)privacy.net> wrote: >More than 20 motorists in Hampshire have fallen victim to a mystery >vigilante who appears to target drivers spotted using mobile phones. > >All the car owners have found their tyres have been slashed and, in many >cases, a note on their windscreens. > >The sinister message, made from newspaper cuttings, says the driver was >seen using a phone. > >Hampshire Police are investigating the incidents in Gosport, >Lee-on-the-Solent and Stubbington. Give him a medal? He should be in prison. It is criminal damage, even if he did have the "excuse" of having seen the people using a mobile, which he knew the police would do nothing about. But he doesn't. He is clearly targeting people at random, and leaving the notes on the assumption that most people will have used a mobile in their car at some time. One of the people targeted doesn't even *own* a mobile phone. -- Alex Heney, Global Villager Palindrome isn't one. To reply by email, my address is alexATheneyDOTplusDOTcom
From: cramerj on 15 Aug 2006 01:18 Alex Heney wrote: > On Mon, 14 Aug 2006 23:06:38 +0100, Dave M <me2(a)privacy.net> wrote: > > >More than 20 motorists in Hampshire have fallen victim to a mystery > >vigilante who appears to target drivers spotted using mobile phones. > > > >All the car owners have found their tyres have been slashed and, in many > >cases, a note on their windscreens. > > > >The sinister message, made from newspaper cuttings, says the driver was > >seen using a phone. > > > >Hampshire Police are investigating the incidents in Gosport, > >Lee-on-the-Solent and Stubbington. > > Give him a medal? > > He should be in prison. > > It is criminal damage, even if he did have the "excuse" of having seen > the people using a mobile, which he knew the police would do nothing > about. > > But he doesn't. He is clearly targeting people at random, and leaving > the notes on the assumption that most people will have used a mobile > in their car at some time. > > One of the people targeted doesn't even *own* a mobile phone. > -- No mobile !! Well that sounds pretty antisocial. Better do the tires anyway.
From: Jim GM4DHJ on 15 Aug 2006 02:13 > http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hampshire/4791439.stm Funny... The Police around here don't give a toss about vandalism or property damage......
From: Jon on 15 Aug 2006 02:24 me2(a)privacy.net declared for all the world to hear... > More than 20 motorists in Hampshire have fallen victim to a mystery > vigilante who appears to target drivers spotted using mobile phones. > > All the car owners have found their tyres have been slashed and, in many > cases, a note on their windscreens. > > The sinister message, made from newspaper cuttings, says the driver was > seen using a phone. > > Hampshire Police are investigating the incidents in Gosport, > Lee-on-the-Solent and Stubbington. Investigating slowly I hope. -- Regards Jon
From: Lumpy on 15 Aug 2006 02:34
Alex Heney wrote: > > He should be in prison. As should all those pratts driving around using their mobile phones. Let's stnd them all on the fast lane of the motor way, drive at them at speed, and see how good they are at dogding cars whilst talking on their mobiles. Lapse of concentration = severe injury/death (THEIRS, not an innocent road user's) > It is criminal damage, even if he did have the "excuse" of having seen > the people using a mobile, which he knew the police would do nothing > about. If the man ia accusing those people of using phones whilst driving, I would say the police have a duty to investigate, and to serve those idiots with the apporpriate punishment. > But he doesn't. He is clearly targeting people at random, and leaving > the notes on the assumption that most people will have used a mobile > in their car at some time. > > One of the people targeted doesn't even *own* a mobile phone. Just because someone says they don't OWN a phone doesn't mean they didn't USE one. I don't own a car, but I drive one. It is for the police to ascertain whether the targetting is random or not. We can't judge just because someone says they don't own a phone. > Palindrome isn't one. Onomatopoeia isn't one. Lumpy |