From: Derek Geldard on 2 Aug 2010 13:29 On Mon, 2 Aug 2010 13:44:50 +0000 (UTC), boltar2003(a)boltar.world wrote: >On Mon, 02 Aug 2010 14:01:49 +0100 >Derek Geldard <dgg(a)miniac.demon.co.uk> wrote: >>>>So that's why you suck my fingernails. >>> >>>Perhaps that some sort of ironic insult where you come from but I'm afraid >>>I have no idea what you're talking about but I'll just nod and smile ok? >>> >> >>Situation as per usual. > >Why, do you normally get people patting you on the head and smiling? Nope, only you > Can't say I'm surprised. Not got your teeth in ? Derek
From: Chris Bartram on 2 Aug 2010 17:04 On 02/08/10 12:14, Chelsea Tractor Man wrote: > On Mon, 2 Aug 2010 12:07:43 +0100, GT wrote: > >> I frequently see 1 car in L1 doing maybe 60 and then a stream of cars in L2 >> doing 65-70. The L2 'convoy' trails back for 10+ car lengths, but they all >> just sit there in L2. There is no reason for them all to be in L2 - they are >> not overtaking anything. > > I used to work with a guy who admitted to just sitting in L2 "because its > easier". i know someone who does the same 'because it's safer'. <boggle>.
From: Ian Dalziel on 3 Aug 2010 03:07 On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 07:06:06 +0100, Chelsea Tractor Man <mr.c.tractor(a)hotmail.co.uk> wrote: >On Mon, 02 Aug 2010 22:46:12 +0100, Ian Dalziel wrote: > >> No, the Highway Code says you shouldn't. It doesn't constitute the >> law. > >so any accident you cause would be dangerous driving? Eh? Causing an accident by any means sounds a bit dangerous to me, no? No, it *can* be used as evidence for a dwdca charge, not dd. Nothing makes it illegal per se. -- Ian D
From: GT on 3 Aug 2010 05:31 "Nick Finnigan" <nix(a)genie.co.uk> wrote in message news:i36t5e$kvo$2(a)news.eternal-september.org... > GT wrote: >> >> Well how would you define it? I'm referring to the normal dictionary >> definition - something that you aren't allowed to do as defined and >> enforced by law - like speeding, driving on the pavement, going through >> red lights, > > There are laws that can be pointed to for those. > >> undertaking etc. > > Which law do you think covers that? You mean there isn't one? So its legal? OK, you ask the policeman who stops you to explain it.
From: GT on 3 Aug 2010 05:32
"Ian Dalziel" <iandalziel(a)lineone.net> wrote in message news:ctff56d0d001g3343186335nnmddf7mjm2(a)4ax.com... > On Tue, 3 Aug 2010 07:06:06 +0100, Chelsea Tractor Man > <mr.c.tractor(a)hotmail.co.uk> wrote: > >>On Mon, 02 Aug 2010 22:46:12 +0100, Ian Dalziel wrote: >> >>> No, the Highway Code says you shouldn't. It doesn't constitute the >>> law. >> >>so any accident you cause would be dangerous driving? > > Eh? Causing an accident by any means sounds a bit dangerous to me, no? > > No, it *can* be used as evidence for a dwdca charge, not dd. Nothing > makes it illegal per se. So undertaking is covered by the dwdca law then? |