From: Noddy on 9 Jun 2007 06:29
"Andy" <nospam(a)no.no> wrote in message
> And please note before anyone jumps on that remark accusing me of laying
> blame on the train driver I said 'faster than normal', I wasn't suggesting
> 'too fast' or anything like that.
I got your point, but I'd add that I think it would be pretty much
irrelevant how fast the train was going unless it was trying to set some new
land speed record.
From: Noddy on 9 Jun 2007 06:43
"jonz" <series11(a)landy> wrote in message
> Whooooooooosh !
If that noise bothers you too much you can get medication for it, or put
cotton wool in your ears.
From: Diesel Damo on 9 Jun 2007 07:36
On Jun 9, 11:20 am, Stuart Naylor <n...(a)none.invalid> wrote:
> The sort that has the sun in their eyes?
Didn't this happen some time between 1 and 2 pm? Why was he looking up
at the sky and not at the road?
From: John McKenzie on 9 Jun 2007 07:39
> "jonz" <series11(a)landy> wrote in message news:466a6a2e(a)dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> > so are you judge, jury, and executioner ?.........thought the judicial
> > process had not begun yet ?
> So, in your defense of the truck driver, and taking the geographical layout
> of the accident scene into account, what extenuating circumstances would
> exonerate him of any blame in your humble opinion?
The horizontal mirror on the dashboard slipped, making him spill the
line of speed he was about to snort, so he could do another 72 hours
driving, and therefore it's a manufacturing defect*
> We know that a *lot* of people do it, from pushbike riders all the way up to
> B double operators. The problem is that when a B double operator does it the
> potential for disaster is enormous as we've recently seen.
the world is overpopulated.
tosspam(a)aol.com abuse(a)yahoo.com abuse(a)hotmail.com abuse(a)earthlink.com
abuse(a)aol.com vice.president(a)whitehouse.gov president(a)whitehouse.gov
sweep.day(a)accc.gov.au uce(a)ftc.gov admin(a)loopback abuse(a)iprimus.com.au
If you didn't know it was wrong,why did you cover it up? abuse(a)msn.com
$USER@$HOST $LOGNAME(a)localhost -h1024(a)localhost root(a)mailloop.com
abuse(a)federalpolice.gov.au fraudinfo(a)psinet.com abuse(a)cia.gov
$USER(a)localhost abuse(a)sprint.com abuse(a)fbi.gov abuse(a)asio.gov.au
*this probably didn't happen
From: Clockmeister on 9 Jun 2007 07:59
"Daryl Walford" <dwalford(a)internode.on.net> wrote in message
> Arthur Brain wrote:
>> DalienX wrote:
>>> Arthur Brain wrote:
>>>> Don H wrote:
>>>>> And just how is a government supposed to stop cars and trucks
>>>>> from road-rail collision, by boom gates, etc - if the motorists
>>>>> themselves persist in trying to "beat the train"?
>>>> A monster-chicane on either side of each level-crossing would do the
>>>> trick - if you've got to slow down to 30km/h anyway, the dumbfuck
>>>> driving the truck might even stop.
>>>> Bottom line is all these semis on the road
>>>> - break the road, which we car-drivers have to pay to fix through our
>>>> - kill people, because so many of them are dumbfucks
>>>> - waste resources when rail can carry SOOOOOOO MUCH MORE, for a
>>>> fraction of the effort.
>>> A smarter government would prevent the situation in the first place
>>> with overpasses and underpasses.
>>> If the road never meets the rail, there will be no accidents.
>> If morons weren't allowed to drive, there'd be no accidents, and my
>> taxes could be spent on something useful instead.
> Unemployed don't pay much tax and unemployed is what you would most likely
> be without an effective (road) transport system.
Slamming into the side of a train was certainly effective but didn't get the
load to it's intended destination.
Fuckwits shouldn't be on the road, fullstop. Truck driving is supposed to be
a professional occupation after all...