Clear threat to kill from a racist cyclist

On 02/10/17 12:10, JNugent wrote:
On 02/10/2017 10:06, TMS320 wrote:
On 01/10/17 00:18, JNugent wrote:
On 30/09/2017 11:28, TMS320 wrote:

On 29/09/17 21:45, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:

Just look on any press reports of pedestrians being hurt by law
breaking
cyclists.

...and compare to the almost completely ignored 5800 foot travellers
per year killed or seriously injured by motor vehicles.

Estimated, guessed or just fabricated (and for what possible purpose,
other than trying to win an argument)?

Actual, actually. On top of the 19000 a year slightly injured.

Is that across the galaxy or just the solar system?

Don't be stupid.

On 03/10/2017 08:43, TMS320 wrote:
On 02/10/17 12:10, JNugent wrote:
On 02/10/2017 10:06, TMS320 wrote:
On 01/10/17 00:18, JNugent wrote:
On 30/09/2017 11:28, TMS320 wrote:

On 29/09/17 21:45, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:

Just look on any press reports of pedestrians being hurt by law
breaking
cyclists.

...and compare to the almost completely ignored 5800 foot
travellers per year killed or seriously injured by motor vehicles.

Estimated, guessed or just fabricated (and for what possible
purpose, other than trying to win an argument)?

Actual, actually. On top of the 19000 a year slightly injured.

Is that across the galaxy or just the solar system?

Don't be stupid.

There were just over 1700 road accident fatalities in the UK in 2013
(latest year currently available):

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...oad-fatalities

That is everyone, including 109 cyclists and 398 pdestrians.

Your 5800 pedestrians are your fantasy.

JNugent wrote in news:f5e3trFmgk1U1
@mid.individual.net:

On 03/10/2017 08:43, TMS320 wrote:


And you reply today.

Been somwhere nice?

On 26/10/2017 19:13, Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
JNugent wrote in news:f5e3trFmgk1U1
@mid.individual.net:

On 03/10/2017 08:43, TMS320 wrote:


And you reply today.

Been somwhere nice?

Yes, thanks.

On 26/10/17 13:48, JNugent wrote:
On 03/10/2017 08:43, TMS320 wrote:
On 02/10/17 12:10, JNugent wrote:
On 02/10/2017 10:06, TMS320 wrote:
On 01/10/17 00:18, JNugent wrote:
On 30/09/2017 11:28, TMS320 wrote:


...and compare to the almost completely ignored 5800 foot
travellers per year killed or seriously injured by motor vehicles.

Estimated, guessed or just fabricated (and for what possible
purpose, other than trying to win an argument)?

Actual, actually. On top of the 19000 a year slightly injured.

Is that across the galaxy or just the solar system?

Don't be stupid.

There were just over 1700 road accident fatalities in the UK in 2013
(latest year currently available):

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...oad-fatalities

That is everyone, including 109 cyclists and 398 pdestrians.

Your 5800 pedestrians are your fantasy.

Oh hello. Been visiting your home planet?

To follow on, I'm a messenger not a fantasist. You continue to have an
inability to read and comprehend.

On 30/10/2017 00:16, TMS320 wrote:
On 26/10/17 13:48, JNugent wrote:
On 03/10/2017 08:43, TMS320 wrote:
On 02/10/17 12:10, JNugent wrote:
On 02/10/2017 10:06, TMS320 wrote:
On 01/10/17 00:18, JNugent wrote:
On 30/09/2017 11:28, TMS320 wrote:


...and compare to the almost completely ignored 5800 foot
travellers per year killed or seriously injured by motor vehicles.

Estimated, guessed or just fabricated (and for what possible
purpose, other than trying to win an argument)?

Actual, actually. On top of the 19000 a year slightly injured.

Is that across the galaxy or just the solar system?

Don't be stupid.

There were just over 1700 road accident fatalities in the UK in 2013
(latest year currently available):

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...oad-fatalities

That is everyone, including 109 cyclists and 398 pdestrians.

Your 5800 pedestrians are your fantasy.

Oh hello. Been visiting your home planet?

To follow on, I'm a messenger not a fantasist. You continue to haveÂ* an
inability to read and comprehend.

Is that your best effort?

And does 398 still equal 5800 down your way?

On 30/10/17 01:51, JNugent wrote:
On 30/10/2017 00:16, TMS320 wrote:
On 26/10/17 13:48, JNugent wrote:
On 03/10/2017 08:43, TMS320 wrote:
On 02/10/17 12:10, JNugent wrote:
On 02/10/2017 10:06, TMS320 wrote:
On 01/10/17 00:18, JNugent wrote:
On 30/09/2017 11:28, TMS320 wrote:


...and compare to the almost completely ignored 5800 foot
travellers per year killed or seriously injured by motor vehicles.

Estimated, guessed or just fabricated (and for what possible
purpose, other than trying to win an argument)?

Actual, actually. On top of the 19000 a year slightly injured.

Is that across the galaxy or just the solar system?

Don't be stupid.

There were just over 1700 road accident fatalities in the UK in 2013
(latest year currently available):

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...oad-fatalities

That is everyone, including 109 cyclists and 398 pdestrians.

Your 5800 pedestrians are your fantasy.

Oh hello. Been visiting your home planet?

To follow on, I'm a messenger not a fantasist. You continue to have
an inability to read and comprehend.

Is that your best effort?

And does 398 still equal 5800 down your way?

No. But there is no flaw when they are figures for different things.
There is nothing missing from this post to tell you what they apply to.

On 30/10/2017 08:29, TMS320 wrote:
On 30/10/17 01:51, JNugent wrote:
On 30/10/2017 00:16, TMS320 wrote:
On 26/10/17 13:48, JNugent wrote:
On 03/10/2017 08:43, TMS320 wrote:
On 02/10/17 12:10, JNugent wrote:
On 02/10/2017 10:06, TMS320 wrote:
On 01/10/17 00:18, JNugent wrote:
On 30/09/2017 11:28, TMS320 wrote:


...and compare to the almost completely ignored 5800 foot
travellers per year killed or seriously injured by motor vehicles.

Estimated, guessed or just fabricated (and for what possible
purpose, other than trying to win an argument)?

Actual, actually. On top of the 19000 a year slightly injured.

Is that across the galaxy or just the solar system?

Don't be stupid.

There were just over 1700 road accident fatalities in the UK in 2013
(latest year currently available):

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...oad-fatalities

That is everyone, including 109 cyclists and 398 pdestrians.

Your 5800 pedestrians are your fantasy.

Oh hello. Been visiting your home planet?

To follow on, I'm a messenger not a fantasist. You continue to have
an inability to read and comprehend.

Is that your best effort?

And does 398 still equal 5800 down your way?

No. But there is no flaw when they are figures for different things.
There is nothing missing from this post to tell you what they apply to.

OK... the solar system or the whole galaxy?

On 30/10/17 20:47, JNugent wrote:
On 30/10/2017 08:29, TMS320 wrote:
On 30/10/17 01:51, JNugent wrote:
On 30/10/2017 00:16, TMS320 wrote:
On 26/10/17 13:48, JNugent wrote:
On 03/10/2017 08:43, TMS320 wrote:
On 02/10/17 12:10, JNugent wrote:
On 02/10/2017 10:06, TMS320 wrote:
On 01/10/17 00:18, JNugent wrote:
On 30/09/2017 11:28, TMS320 wrote:


...and compare to the almost completely ignored 5800 foot
travellers per year killed or seriously injured by motor
vehicles.

Estimated, guessed or just fabricated (and for what possible
purpose, other than trying to win an argument)?

Actual, actually. On top of the 19000 a year slightly injured.

Is that across the galaxy or just the solar system?

Don't be stupid.

There were just over 1700 road accident fatalities in the UK in
2013 (latest year currently available):

https://www.gov.uk/government/public...oad-fatalities

That is everyone, including 109 cyclists and 398 pdestrians.

Your 5800 pedestrians are your fantasy.

Oh hello. Been visiting your home planet?

To follow on, I'm a messenger not a fantasist. You continue to have
an inability to read and comprehend.

Is that your best effort?
Â*
And does 398 still equal 5800 down your way?

No. But there is no flaw when they are figures for different things.
There is nothing missing from this post to tell you what they apply to.

OK... the solar system or the whole galaxy?

Just in Britain.

Tell you what. Move your eyes to the top of this post and try reading
the words going from left to right. When you reach the end of a line go
back to the left on the line below. Repeat to the end of the third line.