Re: What did he do that for!?

On Sat, 17 May 2008 09:10:59 +0100, "Toby Sleigh"
<[email hidden]> said in <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

"Boris Johnson has blown it already
The Mayor should never, ever, have agreed to wear a cycling helmet. Doesn't
he get why?"
Complete article here;
http://tinyurl.com/3v5oy8

Cracking read :-) Misses the point a bit (since plastic hats are
not a defence against the feared consequences, and cycling is not
actually dangerous anyway), but spot on in that outright defiance is
the best response to handwringers and nannies.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

On Sat, 17 May 2008 15:11:58 +0100

Just zis Guy said:

On Sat, 17 May 2008 09:10:59 +0100, "Toby Sleigh"
<[email hidden]> said in <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

"Boris Johnson has blown it already
The Mayor should never, ever, have agreed to wear a cycling helmet.
Doesn't he get why?"
Complete article here;
http://tinyurl.com/3v5oy8

Cracking read :-) Misses the point a bit (since plastic hats are
not a defence against the feared consequences, and cycling is not
actually dangerous anyway), but spot on in that outright defiance is
the best response to handwringers and nannies.

Um, doesn't miss the point at all. He's making a point that
is neither pro- nor anti- cyclehelmets as such: they're just
a hook to hang a little rant on. And as a high-flyin' London
journo, he presumably knows Boris. Looks like a bit of a
ribbing, and doubtless has an "in-joke" layer that's
obscure to ordinary folks like us.

--
not me guv

you know? said:

On Sat, 17 May 2008 09:10:59 +0100, "Toby Sleigh"
<[email hidden]> said in <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

"Boris Johnson has blown it already
The Mayor should never, ever, have agreed to wear a cycling helmet. Doesn't
he get why?"
Complete article here;
http://tinyurl.com/3v5oy8

Cracking read :-)  Misses the point a bit (since plastic hats are
not a defence against the feared consequences, and cycling is not
actually dangerous anyway), but spot on in that outright defiance is
the best response to handwringers and nannies.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony.  Contents liable to settle after posting.http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

Quite agree, which is why I ignore the motorway speed limit

On Sun, 18 May 2008 14:56:53 -0700 (PDT), Sir Jeremy
<[email hidden]> said in
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Quite agree, which is why I ignore the motorway speed limit

Your sociopathic response to laws limiting the danger you pose to
others has no obvious relevance to handwringers demanding illusory
protection against a not terribly significant risk.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

Just zis Guy said:

Sir Jeremy <[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quite agree, which is why I ignore the motorway speed limit

Quoted message said:

Your sociopathic response to laws limiting the danger you pose to
others has no obvious relevance to handwringers demanding illusory
protection against a not terribly significant risk.

That reminds me of the judge's remarks (quoted in "What The Papers
Didn't Mean To Say" ed. Fritz Spiegl; Scouser Press 1965):

"I think it inexcusable it was not said this clothing had no trace of
petrol on it. I hope this practice of not mentioning negative findings
is not common and will never be repeated".

you know? said:

On Sun, 18 May 2008 14:56:53 -0700 (PDT), Sir Jeremy
<[email hidden]> said in
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Quite agree, which is why I ignore the motorway speed limit

Your sociopathic response to laws limiting the danger you pose to
others has no obvious relevance to handwringers demanding illusory
protection against a not terribly significant risk.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony.  Contents liable to settle after posting.http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

Ironic really isn't it?

You and Spindrift can probably dig up some bogus statistic to show
that I (and just about everyone else on Britains motorways) are
putting millions of lives at risk by travelling at illegal (>70mph)
speeds. Yet there's no political will to do much about us.

On the other hand there's growing political will to impose helmets on
cyclists and your bleatings will no difference at all.

On Mon, 19 May 2008 14:36:57 -0700 (PDT), Sir Jeremy
<[email hidden]> said in
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Your sociopathic response to laws limiting the danger you pose to
others has no obvious relevance to handwringers demanding illusory
protection against a not terribly significant risk.

Quoted message said:

You and Spindrift can probably dig up some bogus statistic to show
that I (and just about everyone else on Britains motorways) are
putting millions of lives at risk by travelling at illegal (>70mph)
speeds. Yet there's no political will to do much about us.

Not sure what the supposed relevance of that comment is. The link
between speed and both risk and severity of collisions is well
established.

Quoted message said:

On the other hand there's growing political will to impose helmets on
cyclists and your bleatings will no difference at all.

No, not really. The political will is at least as lacking now as it
has ever been. The 1980s and early 1990s was the peak time for
that, the present Government has repeatedly made it clear that it
does not view it as a productive subject for legislation. A few
(mainly non-cycling) zealots does not amount to anything much, other
than a continued nuisance.

Ever seen a picture of Britain's leading helmet promoter?

http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/wiki/Angela_Lee

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

you know? said:

On Mon, 19 May 2008 14:36:57 -0700 (PDT), Sir Jeremy
<[email hidden]> said in
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Your sociopathic response to laws limiting the danger you pose to
others has no obvious relevance to handwringers demanding illusory
protection against a not terribly significant risk.

You and Spindrift can probably dig up some bogus statistic to show
that I (and just about everyone else on Britains motorways) are
putting millions of lives at risk by travelling at illegal (>70mph)
speeds. Yet there's no political will to do much about us.

Not sure what the supposed relevance of that comment is.  The link
between speed and both risk and severity of collisions is well
established.

Quoted message said:

On the other hand there's growing political will to impose helmets on
cyclists and your bleatings will no difference at all.

No, not really.  The political will is at least as lacking now as it
has ever been.  The 1980s and early 1990s was the peak time for
that, the present Government has repeatedly made it clear that it
does not view it as a productive subject for legislation.  A few
(mainly non-cycling) zealots does not amount to anything much, other
than a continued nuisance.

Ever seen a picture of Britain's leading helmet promoter?

http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/wiki/Angela_Lee

One shouldn't laugh, she is doubtless a nice lady and very sincere

On Wed, 21 May 2008 05:43:45 -0700 (PDT), Sir Jeremy
<[email hidden]> said in
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/wiki/Angela_Lee

One shouldn't laugh, she is doubtless a nice lady and very sincere

Sincere, for sure, but a lot of people have called her vicious and
ruthless - and not the cycling crowd, either, families she's tried
to coerce into acting as poster children.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

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

you know? said:

On Mon, 19 May 2008 14:36:57 -0700 (PDT), Sir Jeremy
<[email hidden]> said in
<[email hidden]>:

Ever seen a picture of Britain's leading helmet promoter?

http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/wiki/Angela_Lee

One shouldn't laugh, she is doubtless a nice lady and very sincere

Roads to hell are paved with do-gooder intentions.

In news:[email hidden],
burtthebike <[email hidden]> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to
tell us:

Quoted message said:

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

you know? said:

On Mon, 19 May 2008 14:36:57 -0700 (PDT), Sir Jeremy
<[email hidden]> said in
<[email hidden]>:

Ever seen a picture of Britain's leading helmet promoter?

http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/wiki/Angela_Lee

One shouldn't laugh, she is doubtless a nice lady and very sincere

I'm sure $DICTATOR was very nice and sincere too, as long as one happened to
agree with him.

Do you see what I did there? Eh? EH??

--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
Drugs are good, except when they kill you.

Dave Larrington said:

In news:[email hidden],
burtthebike <[email hidden]> tweaked the Babbage-Engine to
tell us:

Quoted message said:

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

you know? said:

On Mon, 19 May 2008 14:36:57 -0700 (PDT), Sir Jeremy
<[email hidden]> said in
<[email hidden]>:

Ever seen a picture of Britain's leading helmet promoter?

http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/wiki/Angela_Lee

One shouldn't laugh, she is doubtless a nice lady and very sincere

I'm sure $DICTATOR was very nice and sincere too, as long as one happened to
agree with him.

Do you see what I did there? Eh? EH??

One for the *nix shell script programmers??

--
(\__/) M.
(='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
("😉_("😉 their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there. If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
See http://improve-usenet.org

On Thu, 22 May 2008 08:47:25 +0100, "Dave Larrington"
<[email hidden]> said in
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

I'm sure $DICTATOR was very nice and sincere too, as long as one happened to
agree with him.

Do you see what I did there? Eh? EH??

/me has an email from Mike Godwin stashed away somewhere...

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

you know? said:

On Wed, 21 May 2008 05:43:45 -0700 (PDT), Sir Jeremy
<[email hidden]> said in
<[email hidden]>:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk/wiki/Angela_Lee

One shouldn't laugh, she is doubtless a nice lady and very sincere

Sincere, for sure, but a lot of people have called her vicious and
ruthless - and not the cycling crowd, either, families she's tried
to coerce into acting as poster children.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony.  Contents liable to settle after posting.http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound

Never heard of her before now, and can't say whether she's justified
in her stance. This NG is quick to villify anyone they don't agree
with though

On Fri, 23 May 2008 05:02:57 -0700 (PDT), Sir Jeremy
<[email hidden]> said in
<[email hidden]>:

[ob. Angie Lee]

Quoted message said:

Never heard of her before now, and can't say whether she's justified
in her stance. This NG is quick to villify anyone they don't agree
with though

No, she is not justified in her stance, as most of us are fully
aware (see http://www.cyclehelmets.org for some examples of why
she's wrong, the fact that she continues to state falsehoods after
their falsity has been pointed out is a large part of her problem).

I don't think this group is given to vilifying those who disagree,
only those who continue to assert extreme positions after
significant problems with them have been pointed out. Paul Smith is
a case in point here: lengthy attempts were made to engage in
reasoned debate before it became apparent that he lacked any ability
to challenge his own preconceptions.

I have seen several people come here as helmet advocates and change
their minds, which does not indicate to me a dismissive attitude to
those who disagree, but rather one of engaging and informing.

Since most of the uk.tosspot trolls who come here, do so in order to
"inform" us that we are wrong about many of the choices we make on a
daily basis, and show absolutely no willingness to accept that the
choices we make are valid for us, it is unsurprising that their
input is often met with a swift rebuff.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound