Oh dear

UK.TOSSPOT?

Is this the name for a car newsgroup?

Gary 🙂

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

So much for new years' resolutions

I posted to uk.tosspot. But I didn't cross-post, honest I didn't.

I was so angry about that woman fined £135 and six points for casually wiping out a 17-year-old
that I couldn't restrain myself.

Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. chapmancentral.comchapmancentral.comOpen ↗ (BT ADSL and
dynamic DNS permitting)
NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
work. Apologies.

Hi Just zis Guy, you know?,

On Mon, 13 Jan 2003 22:35:54 +0000, in uk.rec.cycling Just zis Guy, you know? put fingers to
keyboard and tapped away writing...

Message ID:- <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

So much for new years' resolutions

I posted to uk.tosspot. But I didn't cross-post, honest I didn't.

I was so angry about that woman fined £135 and six points for casually wiping out a 17-year-old
that I couldn't restrain myself.

I can understand your fury. However, it is not the woman's fault that she was punished so leniently,
it was the court's fault, or, indeed, the entire British legal system's fault.

The cagers you post to in uk.tosspot don't give a stuff about one 17 year old's life, and they'll
simply rejoice at the news that one of their own got off so lightly.

It's only when cagers get 5 years to life for causing death by careless driving that they'll think
twice before making such dangerous overtaking manoeuvers. £135 plus £60 costs would seem lenient for
the careless cager who ran me down bike while I was riding in a cycle lane.

Quoted message said:

Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. chapmancentral.comchapmancentral.comOpen ↗ (BT ADSL and
dynamic DNS permitting)
NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
work. Apologies.

--

Best wishes, Agincourt

And gentlemen in England now a-bed Shall think themselves accursed they were not here, And hold
their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks That fought with us upon Saint Crispin’s day.

In message <[email hidden]>, Ace Agincourt
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

It's only when cagers get 5 years to life for causing death by careless driving that they'll think
twice before making such dangerous overtaking manoeuvers.

Actually I doubt that it would make any great difference. The driver does not expect to kill
someone, and any such punishment will be far removed in their mind - not that I don't think it
should happen.

However, such a change in the law to give increased sentences to drivers in such instances is only
likely to occur when public attitudes have changed enough, as they have with drink driving, and are
starting to with regard to speeding.

Chris French, Leeds

Gary said:

UK.TOSSPOT?

aka uk.transport.

--
Guy
===
I wonder if you wouldn't mind piecing out our imperfections with your thoughts; and while you're
about it perhaps you could think when we talk of bicycles, that you see them printing their proud
wheels i' the receiving earth; thanks awfully.

Ace Agincourt said:

I can understand your fury. However, it is not the woman's fault that she was punished so
leniently, it was the court's fault, or, indeed, the entire British legal system's fault.

Indeed. I have written to my MP and to the Secretary of State for Transport - and a fat lot of good
it will do.

Quoted message said:

The cagers you post to in uk.tosspot don't give a stuff about one 17 year old's life, and they'll
simply rejoice at the news that one of their own got off so lightly.

Maybe. I see some evidence that one or two of them have thought about
it. Paul "Mr Safety" Smith thinks that overtaking a cyclist so close he crashes and dies is but a
minor thing, of course.

Quoted message said:

It's only when cagers get 5 years to life for causing death by careless driving that they'll think
twice before making such dangerous overtaking manoeuvers. £135 plus £60 costs would seem lenient
for the careless cager who ran me down bike while I was riding in a cycle lane.

My view is that where a driver kills someone through negligent drivintg there should be an automatic
minimum twelve month ban, training course and extended retest (cost to driver) plus a fine of (as a
guide) the Inland Revenue taxable benefit value fo the car they were driving at the time.

The courts would be free to increase this to a maximum of (say) 15 years in prison, unlimited ban,
unlimited fine. And of course CUT THEIR GOOLIES OFF because it's the only language these people
understand.

Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. chapmancentral.comchapmancentral.comOpen ↗ (BT ADSL and
dynamic DNS permitting)
NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
work. Apologies.

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Ace Agincourt said:

I can understand your fury. However, it is not the woman's fault that she was punished so
leniently, it was the court's fault, or, indeed, the entire British legal system's fault.

Indeed. I have written to my MP and to the Secretary of State for Transport - and a fat lot of
good it will do.

Quoted message said:

The cagers you post to in uk.tosspot don't give a stuff about one 17 year old's life, and they'll
simply rejoice at the news that one of their own got off so lightly.

Maybe. I see some evidence that one or two of them have thought about
it. Paul "Mr Safety" Smith thinks that overtaking a cyclist so close he crashes and dies is but a
minor thing, of course.

Quoted message said:

It's only when cagers get 5 years to life for causing death by careless driving that they'll
think twice before making such dangerous overtaking manoeuvers. £135 plus £60 costs would seem
lenient for the careless cager who ran me down bike while I was riding in a cycle lane.

My view is that where a driver kills someone through negligent drivintg there should be an
automatic minimum twelve month ban, training course and extended retest (cost to driver) plus a
fine of (as a guide) the Inland Revenue taxable benefit value fo the car they were driving at
the time.

The courts would be free to increase this to a maximum of (say) 15 years in prison, unlimited ban,
unlimited fine. And of course CUT THEIR GOOLIES OFF because it's the only language these people
understand.

Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. chapmancentral.comchapmancentral.comOpen ↗ (BT ADSL and
dynamic DNS permitting)
NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
work. Apologies.

There appears to be a slight oversight when these cases are considered. The car driver is in control
of a machine that can very effectively kill if used incorrectly. As a result of this, it should be
their total responsibility to ensure they do not use it to kill, and *no excuse* (except severe,
unavoidable mechanical failure)should be sufficient to alleviate that responsibility. If one expects
to be able to get away with taking a life 'by accident' whilst in control of one of these machines,
then they should not be allowed behind the wheel. I hereby propose that as part of the driving test
henceforth, a contract should be signed, in advance, by the candidates, in which they admit
responsibility and liability for any accident involving either cyclists or pedestrians, after all,
they are the ones in control of the *potential* death machine, right ? Then, if they cause a fatal
injury whilst in control of their machine, CUT THEIR GOOLIES OFF!!...over to you Guy ;-)

Dave

Dave said:

if they cause a fatal injury whilst in control of their machine, CUT THEIR GOOLIES OFF!!

It's the only language these people understand. Obviously.

Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. chapmancentral.comchapmancentral.comOpen ↗ (BT ADSL and
dynamic DNS permitting)
NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
work. Apologies.

"Dave" <[email hidden]> wrote in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On Tue, 14 Jan 2003 19:01:53 +0000, Ace Agincourt <[email hidden]> wrote:

I hereby propose that as part of the driving test henceforth, a contract should be signed, in
advance, by the candidates, in which they admit responsibility and liability for any accident
involving either cyclists or pedestrians, after all, they are the ones in control of the
*potential* death machine, right ? Then, if they cause a fatal injury whilst in control of their
machine, CUT THEIR GOOLIES OFF!

Not a bad idea, but then they wouldn't be able to think and would be a burden on society.

Cheers Rich