Prev: Roadside Tributes
Next: Fellow cyclists, are you suffering from air pollution caused by cars?
From: Doug on 9 Jun 2010 01:03
But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
who then is to blame? The cyclist for getting in the way? Or OTOH it
doesn't matter because not enough people have been killed by it yet?
Such are the arguments used by motorists here to justify the
continuing use of cars which are known to have dangerous faults.

"GM recalls 1.5m vehicles because of fire risk

General Motors is recalling 1.5m vehicles because of a risk of fire in
the heated washer system.

The recall affects a large range of its cars including Buicks,
Cadillacs and Chevrolets, mostly in the US.

GM said it had recalled the vehicles in 2008 in an effort to fix the
problem, but there had been new reports of "thermal incidents".

These range from minor faults to considerable melting of plastic, the
US carmaker said.

As a consequence of the problem, it was possible for the heated washer
module to ignite and for a fire to occur, the US National Highway
Safety Administration (NHSA) said..."

More:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10268555.stm

--
UK Radical Campaigns.
http://www.zing.icom43.net
A driving licence is a licence to kill.
From: Dr Zoidberg on 9 Jun 2010 02:49

"Doug" <jagmad(a)riseup.net> wrote in message
news:9b8f8619-e343-4e5e-aaef-7d7082bd506a(a)z10g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
> fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
> who then is to blame?

Why do you think that cyclists and walls are more valuable than
non-cyclists?
What happens if a cyclist is driving or walking at the time?

--
Alex

From: Mrcheerful on 9 Jun 2010 04:19
Doug wrote:
> But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
> fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
> who then is to blame? The cyclist for getting in the way? Or OTOH it
> doesn't matter because not enough people have been killed by it yet?
> Such are the arguments used by motorists here to justify the
> continuing use of cars which are known to have dangerous faults.
>
> "GM recalls 1.5m vehicles because of fire risk
>
> General Motors is recalling 1.5m vehicles because of a risk of fire in
> the heated washer system.
>
> The recall affects a large range of its cars including Buicks,
> Cadillacs and Chevrolets, mostly in the US.
>
> GM said it had recalled the vehicles in 2008 in an effort to fix the
> problem, but there had been new reports of "thermal incidents".
>
> These range from minor faults to considerable melting of plastic, the
> US carmaker said.
>
> As a consequence of the problem, it was possible for the heated washer
> module to ignite and for a fire to occur, the US National Highway
> Safety Administration (NHSA) said..."
>
> More:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10268555.stm

so the reality is some melted plastic on a few cars that are not in this
country. hardly massively dangerous to anyone.


From: GT on 9 Jun 2010 08:03
"Doug" <jagmad(a)riseup.net> wrote in message
news:9b8f8619-e343-4e5e-aaef-7d7082bd506a(a)z10g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> But they are still allowed on the roads though. So if a car catches
> fire and thus causes the driver to loose control and kill a cyclist,
> who then is to blame?

That is a fair point - we should introduce annual tests on vehicle to ensure
they comply with some sort of roadworthy standard. That should iron out most
of these unfortunate accidents. Oh sorry, I forgot - we can't call them
accidents because Doug thinks that car drivers deliberately kill other
people!

Incidentally Doug - you still haven't replied to the other valid points that
everyone has made about the use of the word weapon.


From: Adrian on 9 Jun 2010 08:15
"GT" <ContactGT_rem_ove_(a)hotmail.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like
they were saying:

> Incidentally Doug - you still haven't replied to the other valid points
> that everyone has made about the use of the word weapon.

Duhg never replies to any post that risks becoming inconvenient to his
line of logic. This, apparently, is because he "doesn't have the time".
You'll note that my reply to his decrying of motorists "polluting" his
beloved cycling newsgroup - the in which I pointed out that he started
the vast majority of cross-posted threads, and had never once posted in
the "motorist-free" urcm group...

Strange, then, how he simultaneously finds the time to trawl all sorts of
corners of the web for other - totally unrelated - new threads to post.
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6
Prev: Roadside Tributes
Next: Fellow cyclists, are you suffering from air pollution caused by cars?