On 22:49 6 Sep 2020, Mike Collins said:

On Sunday, 6 September 2020 19:49:38 UTC+1, Pamela wrote:
On 03:39 30 Aug 2020, Mike Collins said:

On Sunday, 30 August 2020 01:43:31 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 30/08/2020 01:01, Mike Collins wrote:
On Sunday, 30 August 2020 00:34:12 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 29/08/2020 15:25, Mike Collins wrote:
On Saturday, 29 August 2020 11:02:07 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 29/08/2020 00:44, Mike Collins wrote:
On Saturday, 29 August 2020 00:20:48 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 28/08/2020 22:44, Mike Collins wrote:
On Friday, 28 August 2020 21:29:42 UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
On 28/08/2020 17:41, Simon Mason wrote:
QUOTE:
In yet another depressing incident of extreme violence
that app
ears to be aimed at cyclists, Norfolk Police have issued a warning
afte
r
a cyclist was garroted by a rope strung between trees.

Police say the 25-year-old man was left with "extensive
lacerat
ions" across his neck after falling victim to the trap in woods next
to Edinburgh Way in Thetford. Shockingly, wood containing nails was
also placed at head height down alleyways that are regularly used by
cyclist
s
from Edinburgh Way and Durham Way used by cyclists.

PC Nike Harris commented: “We are concerned as these
th
roughways are sometimes used by cyclists on their way to from work.
We do not know why the rope and wood has been put in place but it may
be i
n
attempt to discourage cyclists and bikers.

“We would ask you report anti-social behaviour in th
e a
reas to police rather than take matters into your own hands if this
is the case. Although we know these routes are not strictly meant for
cyclists or bikers we do not want to find people are being seriously
injured.”

Norfolk Police have asked anyone with information to
contact PC
Harris on 101, quoting crime reference 36/60081/20.

https://road.cc/content/news/cycling...log-28-august-
2020-
2
76847#live-blog-item-18383

Is "...not strictly meant for cyclists or bikers..." modern
poli
ce-speak
for *footpaths*?

Define footpath taking in to account S72 of the 1835
Highways act
.

Why?

Because there is a difference.

Explain it and explain why the alleged "difference" means that
it is lawful or acceptable for cyclists to abuse footpaths or
footways.

Are cyclists supposed to use them (on bikes, that is) or not?

Treat "footpath" as including "footway"if you like.

It's a straightforward enough question.

Can you answer it?

I'd conclude that you can't, but that's a step too far. It's
more a
case
of "you daren't".

If so, the answer's so obvious, isn't it?
Why don't cyclists and bikers frustrate the rope-slingers
by sim
ply not
riding on footways?

So you believe I can cause permanent injury to the next
motorist
who violates the above cited act?
Or S34 of the 1988 Road Traffic Act?

I shan't ever drive along a footpath so will never be a
target for anyone incensed by cyclists abusing footpaths.

Can you equally guarantee that you won't cycle along one?

That's a straightforward enough question, isn't it?

Can you - dare you - answer it?\

Avoiding the question as usual.

You are not prepared to guarantee that you will never abuse a
footpa
th
or footway by riding a bicycle along one, thereby bringing
nuisance
and
danger to adjacent residents and other pedestrians using the
rout
e
f
or
its proper and intended purpose.

And that was the fully-expected reaction from you.

I'll pay you the compliment of adding that it would have been
an eas
y
and cheap gambit for you to say that you were prepared to give
that guarantee, but it would have been a lie you were not
prepare
d
to tel
l.
That's something.

I, of course, will unhesitatingly guarantee that I shall never
knowi
ngly
drive or ride any sort of vehicle along a designated footway or
foot
path.

Apology accepted.

I haven't apologised to you and have done and said nothing to
apologis
e for.

Back to the real world.
Apology accepted once again.

You may try to understand English your way.

I am not from Liverpool.


I shall continue to use and understand it correctly.

Sez the Unwashed Northerner.

How's the trolling going, Mike?

I'm enjoying it so far

Thought so.