Motor cars are dangerous.

On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 23:25:03 +0000, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 21:52:33 +0000, Judith
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 19:50:47 +0000, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

snip


I would expect a majority of cyclists to have third party insurance as
a minimum, but I am willing to have my expectation shown to be
incorrect.


Half of the poorest households do not have home contents insurance.

The poorest 5%? 10%? 25%? 50%?

More than half of all renters do not have home contents insurance

Presumably renters are included in the household stats above.

Given that most cyclists are poor: this probably means that half the cyclists
on the road have no insurance.

What is the average income of cyclists compared to the average income
of the population?

Going to give us another made-up lie, idiot boy?

On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 18:06:50 -0300, Judith wrote:

On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 20:44:29 +0000, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 20:09:17 +0000, Judith
wrote:

On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 19:52:48 +0000, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 15:26:08 +0000, Judith
wrote:

On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 14:08:03 +0000, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 13:34:40 +0000, Judith
wrote:

Toxocariasis

Oh, does wiping a dog's arse prevent dogs from getting roundworm?

No - but it may prevent them wiping the dog **** off their arse on the carpet
or on to the childrens bedding.

I thought that bi-monthly or tri-monthly worming tablets did that. But
perhaps you know something vets don't know.


I certainly know that dogs and hence dog **** in a house with a child is not in
the best interests of the child.

http://dogsbabies.com/wp-content/upl...restaurant.jpg


Is that your dog and brat? Who is the other one?

No.

I'm sorry, I was sure there was a family resemblance with the dog.


Which end?

On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 08:32:41 +0000, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 08:03:16 -0000, "Tarcap"
wrote:



"Bertie Wooster" wrote in message
. ..

On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 16:25:12 -0000, "Tarcap"
wrote:



"Bertie Wooster" wrote in message
...

On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 10:05:15 +0000 (UTC), Scion
wrote:

Bertie Wooster put finger to keyboard:

Earlier today I left Chinbook Meadows with Meg.

Meg sat nicely on the pavement infront of the zebra crossing.

Cars in both directions stopped for us, and I called Meg to heel and
started to cross the road.

CRASH

A young lad in a car with a loud beatbox, smashed into the car infront
of him. That car then smashed into the shiny new car in front of her.
And that car was shunted onto the crossing narrowly missing Meg.

I continued over the crossing and went on my way, betting that the three
car drivers wished they had gone by bike.

Location:

data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1syZdKdvPZsOzaaiw9b5eppA!2e0 ?hl=en

Why didn't you offer your details as a witness to the two not-at-fault
drivers?

How are they "not-at-fault"? Would the crash have occurred had they
chosen another form of transport?

Probably not if they had chosen aircraft or cruise liners as their form of
transport, but as they chose to use the road which they are completely
entitled to, then of course it would have occurred. In fact, had they
chosen
bicycles, they probably would have been quite badly injured.

Oh - I thought that cyclists invariably sailed through pedestrian
crossings. Perhaps I am mistaken.

You appear to be saying that cyclists sailing through pedestrian crossings
is a good thing, then?

It is if the alternative it to have some dimwitted motor car driver
ram you.

There is more than one alternative.

They could give up their childrens toys when they are out and
traveling among grown-ups.

On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 06:41:43 -0300, Dave- Cyclists VORC
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 23:25:03 +0000, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 21:52:33 +0000, Judith
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 19:50:47 +0000, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

snip


I would expect a majority of cyclists to have third party insurance as
a minimum, but I am willing to have my expectation shown to be
incorrect.


Half of the poorest households do not have home contents insurance.

The poorest 5%? 10%? 25%? 50%?

More than half of all renters do not have home contents insurance

Presumably renters are included in the household stats above.

Given that most cyclists are poor: this probably means that half the cyclists
on the road have no insurance.

What is the average income of cyclists compared to the average income
of the population?

Going to give us another made-up lie, idiot boy?

--
"7 miles at 12mph takes 84 mins on a push bike. 7 miles at 70mph takes
about 8 mins."
David Lang - The Medway Handyman

On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 07:37:01 -0300, Mrcheerful
wrote:

On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 08:32:41 +0000, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 08:03:16 -0000, "Tarcap"
wrote:



"Bertie Wooster" wrote in message
...

On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 16:25:12 -0000, "Tarcap"
wrote:



"Bertie Wooster" wrote in message
m...

On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 10:05:15 +0000 (UTC), Scion
wrote:

Bertie Wooster put finger to keyboard:

Earlier today I left Chinbook Meadows with Meg.

Meg sat nicely on the pavement infront of the zebra crossing.

Cars in both directions stopped for us, and I called Meg to heel and
started to cross the road.

CRASH

A young lad in a car with a loud beatbox, smashed into the car infront
of him. That car then smashed into the shiny new car in front of her.
And that car was shunted onto the crossing narrowly missing Meg.

I continued over the crossing and went on my way, betting that the three
car drivers wished they had gone by bike.

Location:

data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1syZdKdvPZsOzaaiw9b5eppA!2e 0?hl=en

Why didn't you offer your details as a witness to the two not-at-fault
drivers?

How are they "not-at-fault"? Would the crash have occurred had they
chosen another form of transport?

Probably not if they had chosen aircraft or cruise liners as their form of
transport, but as they chose to use the road which they are completely
entitled to, then of course it would have occurred. In fact, had they
chosen
bicycles, they probably would have been quite badly injured.

Oh - I thought that cyclists invariably sailed through pedestrian
crossings. Perhaps I am mistaken.

You appear to be saying that cyclists sailing through pedestrian crossings
is a good thing, then?

It is if the alternative it to have some dimwitted motor car driver
ram you.

There is more than one alternative.

They could give up their childrens toys when they are out and
traveling among grown-ups.

That is no help at all.

You may recall that Meg and I were on foot when the motorists rammed
one another - no bicycles involved.

"Bertie Wooster" wrote in message
...

On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 07:37:01 -0300, Mrcheerful
wrote:

On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 08:32:41 +0000, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 08:03:16 -0000, "Tarcap"
wrote:



"Bertie Wooster" wrote in message
...

On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 16:25:12 -0000, "Tarcap"
wrote:



"Bertie Wooster" wrote in message
m...

On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 10:05:15 +0000 (UTC), Scion
wrote:

Bertie Wooster put finger to keyboard:

Earlier today I left Chinbook Meadows with Meg.

Meg sat nicely on the pavement infront of the zebra crossing.

Cars in both directions stopped for us, and I called Meg to heel and
started to cross the road.

CRASH

A young lad in a car with a loud beatbox, smashed into the car
infront
of him. That car then smashed into the shiny new car in front of her.
And that car was shunted onto the crossing narrowly missing Meg.

I continued over the crossing and went on my way, betting that the
three
car drivers wished they had gone by bike.

Location:

data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1syZdKdvPZsOzaaiw9b5eppA!2e 0?hl=en

Why didn't you offer your details as a witness to the two not-at-fault
drivers?

How are they "not-at-fault"? Would the crash have occurred had they
chosen another form of transport?

Probably not if they had chosen aircraft or cruise liners as their form
of
transport, but as they chose to use the road which they are completely
entitled to, then of course it would have occurred. In fact, had they
chosen
bicycles, they probably would have been quite badly injured.

Oh - I thought that cyclists invariably sailed through pedestrian
crossings. Perhaps I am mistaken.

You appear to be saying that cyclists sailing through pedestrian
crossings
is a good thing, then?

It is if the alternative it to have some dimwitted motor car driver
ram you.

There is more than one alternative.

They could give up their childrens toys when they are out and
traveling among grown-ups.

That is no help at all.

You may recall that Meg and I were on foot when the motorists rammed
one another - no bicycles involved.

For what reason did you post it in a cycling NG, then?

On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 17:08:55 -0000, "Tarcap"
wrote:



"Bertie Wooster" wrote in message
.. .

On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 07:37:01 -0300, Mrcheerful
wrote:

On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 08:32:41 +0000, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 08:03:16 -0000, "Tarcap"
wrote:



"Bertie Wooster" wrote in message
m...

On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 16:25:12 -0000, "Tarcap"
wrote:



"Bertie Wooster" wrote in message
om...

On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 10:05:15 +0000 (UTC), Scion
wrote:

Bertie Wooster put finger to keyboard:

Earlier today I left Chinbook Meadows with Meg.

Meg sat nicely on the pavement infront of the zebra crossing.

Cars in both directions stopped for us, and I called Meg to heel and
started to cross the road.

CRASH

A young lad in a car with a loud beatbox, smashed into the car
infront
of him. That car then smashed into the shiny new car in front of her.
And that car was shunted onto the crossing narrowly missing Meg.

I continued over the crossing and went on my way, betting that the
three
car drivers wished they had gone by bike.

Location:

data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1syZdKdvPZsOzaaiw9b5eppA!2 e0?hl=en

Why didn't you offer your details as a witness to the two not-at-fault
drivers?

How are they "not-at-fault"? Would the crash have occurred had they
chosen another form of transport?

Probably not if they had chosen aircraft or cruise liners as their form
of
transport, but as they chose to use the road which they are completely
entitled to, then of course it would have occurred. In fact, had they
chosen
bicycles, they probably would have been quite badly injured.

Oh - I thought that cyclists invariably sailed through pedestrian
crossings. Perhaps I am mistaken.

You appear to be saying that cyclists sailing through pedestrian
crossings
is a good thing, then?

It is if the alternative it to have some dimwitted motor car driver
ram you.

There is more than one alternative.

They could give up their childrens toys when they are out and
traveling among grown-ups.

That is no help at all.

You may recall that Meg and I were on foot when the motorists rammed
one another - no bicycles involved.

For what reason did you post it in a cycling NG, then?

Because I betted myself at the time that the drivers wished they had
been on bicycles.

Do please keep up.

"Bertie Wooster" wrote in message
...

On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 17:08:55 -0000, "Tarcap"
wrote:



"Bertie Wooster" wrote in message
.. .

On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 07:37:01 -0300, Mrcheerful
wrote:

On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 08:32:41 +0000, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

On Tue, 25 Mar 2014 08:03:16 -0000, "Tarcap"
wrote:



"Bertie Wooster" wrote in message
m...

On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 16:25:12 -0000, "Tarcap"
wrote:



"Bertie Wooster" wrote in message
om...

On Mon, 24 Mar 2014 10:05:15 +0000 (UTC), Scion
wrote:

Bertie Wooster put finger to keyboard:

Earlier today I left Chinbook Meadows with Meg.

Meg sat nicely on the pavement infront of the zebra crossing.

Cars in both directions stopped for us, and I called Meg to heel and
started to cross the road.

CRASH

A young lad in a car with a loud beatbox, smashed into the car
infront
of him. That car then smashed into the shiny new car in front of
her.
And that car was shunted onto the crossing narrowly missing Meg.

I continued over the crossing and went on my way, betting that the
three
car drivers wished they had gone by bike.

Location:

data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1syZdKdvPZsOzaaiw9b5eppA!2 e0?hl=en

Why didn't you offer your details as a witness to the two not-at-fault
drivers?

How are they "not-at-fault"? Would the crash have occurred had they
chosen another form of transport?

Probably not if they had chosen aircraft or cruise liners as their form
of
transport, but as they chose to use the road which they are completely
entitled to, then of course it would have occurred. In fact, had they
chosen
bicycles, they probably would have been quite badly injured.

Oh - I thought that cyclists invariably sailed through pedestrian
crossings. Perhaps I am mistaken.

You appear to be saying that cyclists sailing through pedestrian
crossings
is a good thing, then?

It is if the alternative it to have some dimwitted motor car driver
ram you.

There is more than one alternative.

They could give up their childrens toys when they are out and
traveling among grown-ups.

That is no help at all.

You may recall that Meg and I were on foot when the motorists rammed
one another - no bicycles involved.

For what reason did you post it in a cycling NG, then?

Because I betted myself at the time that the drivers wished they had
been on bicycles.

Do please keep up.

Oh, I see. So tacking the word bicycle onto the end of an otherwise
irrelevant post make it on topic, does it?
I bet Adolf Hitler wished he rode a bicycle, too.

On 27/03/2014 15:33, Bertie Wooster wrote:
On Thu, 27 Mar 2014 06:41:43 -0300, Dave- Cyclists VORC
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 23:25:03 +0000, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 21:52:33 +0000, Judith
wrote:

On Sat, 22 Mar 2014 19:50:47 +0000, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

snip


I would expect a majority of cyclists to have third party insurance as
a minimum, but I am willing to have my expectation shown to be
incorrect.


Half of the poorest households do not have home contents insurance.

The poorest 5%? 10%? 25%? 50%?

More than half of all renters do not have home contents insurance

Presumably renters are included in the household stats above.

Given that most cyclists are poor: this probably means that half the cyclists
on the road have no insurance.

What is the average income of cyclists compared to the average income
of the population?

Going to give us another made-up lie, idiot boy?

That wasn't me :-)


--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton, of Lancaster
University, wrote in an interim assessment of the Understanding Walking
and Cycling study. "For them, cycling is a bit embarrassing, they fail
to see its purpose, and have no interest in integrating it into their
lives, certainly on a regular basis."

On 27/03/2014 10:28, Dave- Cyclists VORC wrote:
On Wed, 26 Mar 2014 18:06:50 -0300, Judith wrote:

On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 20:44:29 +0000, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 20:09:17 +0000, Judith
wrote:

On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 19:52:48 +0000, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 15:26:08 +0000, Judith
wrote:

On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 14:08:03 +0000, Bertie Wooster
wrote:

On Sun, 23 Mar 2014 13:34:40 +0000, Judith
wrote:

Toxocariasis

Oh, does wiping a dog's arse prevent dogs from getting roundworm?

No - but it may prevent them wiping the dog **** off their arse on the carpet
or on to the childrens bedding.

I thought that bi-monthly or tri-monthly worming tablets did that. But
perhaps you know something vets don't know.


I certainly know that dogs and hence dog **** in a house with a child is not in
the best interests of the child.

http://dogsbabies.com/wp-content/upl...restaurant.jpg


Is that your dog and brat? Who is the other one?

No.

I'm sorry, I was sure there was a family resemblance with the dog.


Which end?

That wasn't me either :-)

--
Dave - Cyclists VORC
Bicycles are for Children. Like masturbation, something you should grow
out of.
There is something seriously sick and stunted about grown men who want
to ride a bike."