Clear threat to kill from a racist cyclist

JNugent wrote:
On 27/09/2017 17:18, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
JNugent wrote:
On 27/09/2017 16:24, Simon Jester wrote:

On Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 8:32:48 AM UTC+1, MrCheerful
wrote:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...xi-driver.html

The taxi driver obstructed the cyclist and therefore the cyclist
was entitled to shove the taxi driver in to a bus shelter.

Well done. That will easily be the Most Idiotic Response Of The
Week, by a considerable margin.

Noooooooooooooooooooo, I'm not having that!
Have you not read the idiotic posts from Phucker?

Yes, but he isn't even trying to be taken seriously.

Phucker believes in every word that he types. If he had the guts he would be
dangerous.
Trust me on that.

On 27/09/17 15:10, JNugent wrote:

6. The cyclist broke the law (what a shock!) by failing to comply
with a give-way sign and carriageway marking.

What law? The taxi driver was first up with the abuse by sounding the
horn incorrectly and unnecessarily. Then the silly driver decided to
stop for a chat.

It was a perfectly routine and straightfoward situation. Most people
just carry on and don't worry about it.

On 28.09.2017 03:13, James Wilkinson Sword wrote:

The law should be changed to encourage them to use the pavement so they
don't hold up traffic.*

Bull****. How can a law "encourage" someone to do anything?
Besides, riding on the footpath is dangerous, also for bicyclists. The
road is usually safer.

On 28.09.2017 07:26, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
JNugent wrote:
On 27/09/2017 17:18, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
JNugent wrote:
On 27/09/2017 16:24, Simon Jester wrote:

On Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 8:32:48 AM UTC+1, MrCheerful
wrote:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...xi-driver.html

The taxi driver obstructed the cyclist and therefore the cyclist
was entitled to shove the taxi driver in to a bus shelter.

Well done. That will easily be the Most Idiotic Response Of The
Week, by a considerable margin.

Noooooooooooooooooooo, I'm not having that!
Have you not read the idiotic posts from Phucker?

Yes, but he isn't even trying to be taken seriously.

Phucker believes in every word that he types. If he had the guts he would be
dangerous.
Trust me on that.




Don't show me his guts. They are disgusting.

On 28/09/2017 08:42, TMS320 wrote:
On 27/09/17 15:10, JNugent wrote:

6. The cyclist broke the law (what a shock!) by failing to comply
with a give-way sign and carriageway marking.

What law?

Te Road Traffic ACts.

It doesn't surprise anyone to hear that cyclists don't know that it is
compulsory to cede priority at such points.

* The taxi driver was first up with the abuse by sounding the
horn incorrectly and unnecessarily. Then the silly driver decided to
stop for a chat.

Not the issue at all. The cyclist's typically arrogant faiulure/refusal
to obey the law is the issue.

It was a perfectly routine and straightfoward situation.

Unfortunately, that is more true than false. It is very common for
cyclists to break the law.


Most people
just carry on and don't worry about it.

"Mr Pounder Esquire" wrote in
news
JNugent wrote:
On 27/09/2017 17:18, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
JNugent wrote:
On 27/09/2017 16:24, Simon Jester wrote:

On Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 8:32:48 AM UTC+1, MrCheerful
wrote:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...Eats-courier-u
nleashes-racist-rant-taxi-driver.html

The taxi driver obstructed the cyclist and therefore the cyclist
was entitled to shove the taxi driver in to a bus shelter.

Well done. That will easily be the Most Idiotic Response Of The
Week, by a considerable margin.

Noooooooooooooooooooo, I'm not having that!
Have you not read the idiotic posts from Phucker?

Yes, but he isn't even trying to be taken seriously.

Phucker believes in every word that he types. If he had the guts he
would be dangerous.
Trust me on that.

I trust that you derive satisfaction from abusing cyclists in this NG.
You claim that he ruined the motoring group. Yet you are no better.

(I'm fully prepared for an abusive response; go for it! Then take your
blood pressure).

Kerr-Mudd,John wrote:
"Mr Pounder Esquire" wrote in
news
JNugent wrote:
On 27/09/2017 17:18, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
JNugent wrote:
On 27/09/2017 16:24, Simon Jester wrote:

On Wednesday, September 27, 2017 at 8:32:48 AM UTC+1, MrCheerful
wrote:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...Eats-courier-u
nleashes-racist-rant-taxi-driver.html

The taxi driver obstructed the cyclist and therefore the cyclist
was entitled to shove the taxi driver in to a bus shelter.

Well done. That will easily be the Most Idiotic Response Of The
Week, by a considerable margin.

Noooooooooooooooooooo, I'm not having that!
Have you not read the idiotic posts from Phucker?

Yes, but he isn't even trying to be taken seriously.

Phucker believes in every word that he types. If he had the guts he
would be dangerous.
Trust me on that.

I trust that you derive satisfaction from abusing cyclists in this NG.
You claim that he ruined the motoring group. Yet you are no better.

(I'm fully prepared for an abusive response; go for it! Then take your
blood pressure).

Yip, I detest cyclists and make my views known. Did you know that there is a
moderated cycling group for snowflakes?
Hucker destroyed the driving group by inviting trolls in and replying to
them. The Colonel is one example, Hucker still replies to him!
Sorry to disappoint you on the lack of abuse. My blood pressure is 120/80.

On Thursday, September 28, 2017 at 5:42:49 PM UTC+1, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:

Yip, I detest cyclists

Why?

Simon Jester wrote:
On Thursday, September 28, 2017 at 5:42:49 PM UTC+1, Mr Pounder
Esquire wrote:

Yip, I detest cyclists

Why?

I'm sure that over the years you will have read my reasons.
Bait not taken.

On Thursday, September 28, 2017 at 6:20:38 PM UTC+1, Mr Pounder Esquire wrote:
Simon Jester wrote:
On Thursday, September 28, 2017 at 5:42:49 PM UTC+1, Mr Pounder
Esquire wrote:

Yip, I detest cyclists

Why?

I'm sure that over the years you will have read my reasons.

I haven't.

Bait not taken.

No bait, just a genuine question.