Unlit cyclist attacks motorist with bicycle

On 27/03/2015 20:03, Simon Jester wrote:
On Friday, March 27, 2015 at 11:00:24 AM UTC, Tarcap wrote:
"Simon Jester" wrote in message
...


What a waste of taxpayers money.
Cannabis has been legalised in some left pond states and crime has plummeted
as a result.

Well it would do, wouldn't it?
Nobody getting nicked for possession or dealing.

I never mentioned drug possession.

You didn't need to. If cannabis has been legalised, criminal offences
linked to its being illegal will have declined from whatever level they
were at previously to zero.

Theft, robbery and violent crime have dropped.

Criminals drug-users no longer have to pay black market prices and can
now get a predictable supply of their filthy intoxicant at prices which
don't require them to commit as much crime as they [previously did?

Just a guess.

On 27/03/2015 20:09, Tarcap wrote:


"Simon Jester" wrote in message
...

On Friday, March 27, 2015 at 11:00:24 AM UTC, Tarcap wrote:
"Simon Jester" wrote in message
...


What a waste of taxpayers money.
Cannabis has been legalised in some left pond states and crime has
plummeted
as a result.

Well it would do, wouldn't it?
Nobody getting nicked for possession or dealing.

I never mentioned drug possession.
Theft, robbery and violent crime have dropped.


Do you have a cite for that, or did you just make it up?

I was wondering that too.

On Friday, March 27, 2015 at 8:45:40 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:

You mean you weren't already aware of the research results which showed
the connection between the illegal and criminal drug cannabis (also
known by several other terms) and the medical effects mentioned by the
previous poster?

Please cite the relevant research.


OK, fair enough. I assume that the Royal College of Psychiatry will be
authoritative enough for you.

http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/mentalhealthinformation/mentalhealthproblems/alcoholanddrugs/cannabisandmentalhealth.aspx

I have read that and it mainly talks about children and therefore has no relevance.

There are plenty more of you Google on the terms "cannabis" and
""psychosis".

I prefer to use Web of Knowledge as it only lists peer reviewed publications.

On Friday, March 27, 2015 at 8:51:07 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:

Criminals drug-users no longer have to pay black market prices and can
now get a predictable supply of their filthy intoxicant at prices which
don't require them to commit as much crime as they [previously did?

Just a guess.

Absolutely spot on.
Apart from the 'filthy intoxicant' part.
Most Colorado cannabis users use 'edibles'.

On Fri, 27 Mar 2015 13:15:49 -0700 (PDT), Simon Jester
wrote:

On Friday, March 27, 2015 at 8:09:09 PM UTC, Tarcap wrote:


Do you have a cite for that, or did you just make it up?

http://www.drugpolicy.org/resource/m...-status-report

Hardly a credible or unbiased source.

On Friday, March 27, 2015 at 10:12:24 PM UTC, Peter Parry wrote:

Hardly a credible or unbiased source.

Ad Sourcinem?

On 27/03/2015 22:12, Simon Jester wrote:
On Friday, March 27, 2015 at 8:51:07 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:

Criminals drug-users no longer have to pay black market prices and can
now get a predictable supply of their filthy intoxicant at prices which
don't require them to commit as much crime as they [previously did?

Just a guess.

Absolutely spot on.
Apart from the 'filthy intoxicant' part.
Most Colorado cannabis users use 'edibles'.

"Filthy intoxicant" is still right.

And I'm glad you agree on the characterisation of users as criminals,
'cos that's what they are.

On 27/03/2015 22:04, Simon Jester wrote:
On Friday, March 27, 2015 at 8:45:40 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:

You mean you weren't already aware of the research results which showed
the connection between the illegal and criminal drug cannabis (also
known by several other terms) and the medical effects mentioned by the
previous poster?

Please cite the relevant research.


OK, fair enough. I assume that the Royal College of Psychiatry will be
authoritative enough for you.

http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/mentalhealthinformation/mentalhealthproblems/alcoholanddrugs/cannabisandmentalhealth.aspx

I have read that and it mainly talks about children and therefore has no relevance.

What does "mainly" mean?

Does it have the same meaning as "exclusively"?

There are plenty more of you Google on the terms "cannabis" and
""psychosis".

I prefer to use Web of Knowledge as it only lists peer reviewed publications.

I dare say you do.

"JNugent" wrote in message
On 27/03/2015 10:40, TMS320 wrote:
"JNugent" wrote
On 26/03/2015 21:28, TMS320 wrote:
"Mrcheerful" wrote

The motorist had no right to point out the obvious difficulty of
spotting
the cyclist in the dark.

Since we don't allow vigilantism in this country it depends on how the
driver caused the cyclist to stop. By obstructing the cyclist's
passage,
perhaps?

It's interesting to look at Streetview of the village and notice the
cars
left on the pavement. And it's curious how other drivers manage to get
round them in the dark.

It's in the UK, yes?

In a built up area with a speed limit of 30 mph or less, where most
motor
vehicles may be parked without having any lights illuminated, provided
they're on the correct side of the road, not too near a junction and are
fitted with the required reflectors?

Well, apart from being left on the pavement, some are on the wrong side
of
the road.

That's an offence everywhere except (IIRC) London.

It was a comment about the different attitudes to routine rule breaking.

Report them.

Then vigilantism is out of the question.

My second key phrase was "it's curious how other drivers manage to
get round them in the dark". Stating the legal view has nothing to do
with my observation of driver behaviour.

Did you not spot the bit about reflectors?

I did; nothing changes.

There is also the issue of motor vehicles usually having a large (compared
to a bicycle) shiny bodywork surface.

If bikes had all these characteristics,

Contrast & movement against background also matter. Except on unlit roads, a
dark background is rare. On lit roads, black often shows up well.

the problem of unlit bikes would be less of a problem.

Why - are lots of motorists scratching their paintwork on them? If not, what
problem? The attitude that usually comes across most strongly is "oh look
over there, there's cyclist breaking the rules".

Simon Jester wrote:
On Friday, March 27, 2015 at 8:45:40 PM UTC, JNugent wrote:

You mean you weren't already aware of the research results which
showed the connection between the illegal and criminal drug cannabis
(also known by several other terms) and the medical effects
mentioned by the previous poster?

Please cite the relevant research.


OK, fair enough. I assume that the Royal College of Psychiatry will
be authoritative enough for you.

http://www.rcpsych.ac.uk/mentalhealthinformation/mentalhealthproblems/alcoholanddrugs/cannabisandmentalhealth.aspx

I have read that and it mainly talks about children and therefore has
no relevance.

There are plenty more of you Google on the terms "cannabis" and
""psychosis".

I prefer to use Web of Knowledge as it only lists peer reviewed
publications.

This is a cycling group, but I shall nonetheless post an authoritative link
(from Google Scholar) - you can take your choice:
http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar?...ed=0CB8QgQMwAA

You mention the earlier link talks about children. The unfortunate thing is
that it is frequently the use of marijuana (or similar) in mid- to
late-teens that tends to bring on psychotic episodes (/schizophrenia) in the
early- to mid-20s. It is only a small minority that this happens to. This
is where there may have already been some earlier indication towards a
psychosis. Or possibly the individual may not have shown any signs or
symptoms, but where a propensity for psychosis may already exist, but not
known.

The unfortunate thing is that until the psychosis shows itself, the
propensity will not be known. By this time, it is frequently too late. The
person then starts their journey through their relevant mental health
authority on frequently a cocktail of medications.

--
Iain