Mountain biker dies after crash into rollerblader, in LSCR, North Vancouver, BC

"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 00:38:17 GMT, "Jeff Strickland"
wrote:

Who died?

He was on a pathway else the lady going the worng way on roller blades
would
not have been there.

You just blamed a fatal (your words) accident on the victim, whom appears
to
not have been at fault at all.

Thanks for demonstrating once again just what a moron you are. He was
obviously SPEEDING. He was training for a triathlon. DUH!

So now you squirm as you try to justify your insult.

Seriously, seek help. It is available, and I'll make it easy for you by
making it only a click away...
http://www.nmha.org/go/help/

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 02:26:04 GMT, "Jeff Strickland"
wrote:


"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message
.. .

You just blamed a fatal (your words) accident on the victim, whom appears
to
not have been at fault at all.

Thanks for demonstrating once again just what a moron you are. He was
obviously SPEEDING. He was training for a triathlon. DUH!


Maybe he was speeding, but he was on the right side of the trail, and there
was no indication that he caused the accident, and every indication that the
accident was caused by the other party being on the wrong side of the
pathway.

Nevertheless, if he hadn't been speeding, the accident wouldn't have
happened, so speed was a major contributor.
--
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

On 25 Jun 2007 19:53:59 -0700, (Bill Z.)
wrote:

Mike Vandeman writes:

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 00:38:17 GMT, "Jeff Strickland"
wrote:

Who died?

He was on a pathway else the lady going the worng way on roller blades would
not have been there.

You just blamed a fatal (your words) accident on the victim, whom appears to
not have been at fault at all.

Thanks for demonstrating once again just what a moron you are. He was
obviously SPEEDING. He was training for a triathlon. DUH!

Don't you know that in a triathlon, one uses a road bike and rides on
a paved surface (also needed for roller blades, which work poorly if
at all on dirt)?

And that's relevant because?
--
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

Mike Vandeman writes:

On 25 Jun 2007 19:53:59 -0700, (Bill Z.)
wrote:

Mike Vandeman writes:

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 00:38:17 GMT, "Jeff Strickland"
wrote:

Who died?

He was on a pathway else the lady going the worng way on roller blades would
not have been there.

You just blamed a fatal (your words) accident on the victim, whom appears to
not have been at fault at all.

Thanks for demonstrating once again just what a moron you are. He was
obviously SPEEDING. He was training for a triathlon. DUH!

Don't you know that in a triathlon, one uses a road bike and rides on
a paved surface (also needed for roller blades, which work poorly if
at all on dirt)?

And that's relevant because?

Read the title of your silly post to see why. There is simply no
reason to believe he road mountain bikes on road or off road. The
"trail" he was on was almost certainly paved - he possibly just
wanted to avoid riding in traffic.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 02:26:04 GMT, "Jeff Strickland"
wrote:


"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message
. ..

You just blamed a fatal (your words) accident on the victim, whom
appears
to
not have been at fault at all.

Thanks for demonstrating once again just what a moron you are. He was
obviously SPEEDING. He was training for a triathlon. DUH!


Maybe he was speeding, but he was on the right side of the trail, and
there
was no indication that he caused the accident, and every indication that
the
accident was caused by the other party being on the wrong side of the
pathway.

Nevertheless, if he hadn't been speeding, the accident wouldn't have
happened, so speed was a major contributor.



Do you just pull facts out of your ass, or did you get that from the
article?

On 26 Jun 2007 19:06:24 -0700, (Bill Z.)
wrote:

Mike Vandeman writes:

On 25 Jun 2007 19:53:59 -0700, (Bill Z.)
wrote:

Mike Vandeman writes:

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 00:38:17 GMT, "Jeff Strickland"
wrote:

Who died?

He was on a pathway else the lady going the worng way on roller blades would
not have been there.

You just blamed a fatal (your words) accident on the victim, whom appears to
not have been at fault at all.

Thanks for demonstrating once again just what a moron you are. He was
obviously SPEEDING. He was training for a triathlon. DUH!

Don't you know that in a triathlon, one uses a road bike and rides on
a paved surface (also needed for roller blades, which work poorly if
at all on dirt)?

And that's relevant because?

Read the title of your silly post to see why. There is simply no
reason to believe he road mountain bikes on road or off road.

And you are omnicient? I already know he's a mountain biker, from
someone who lives there. DUH! Stick to something you know something
about, if any.

The
"trail" he was on was almost certainly paved - he possibly just
wanted to avoid riding in traffic.
--
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

On Jun 26, 6:35 pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 02:26:04 GMT, "Jeff Strickland"



wrote:

"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message
.. .

You just blamed a fatal (your words) accident on the victim, whom appears
to
not have been at fault at all.

Thanks for demonstrating once again just what a moron you are. He was
obviously SPEEDING. He was training for a triathlon. DUH!

Maybe he was speeding, but he was on the right side of the trail, and there
was no indication that he caused the accident, and every indication that the
accident was caused by the other party being on the wrong side of the
pathway.

Nevertheless, if he hadn't been speeding, the accident wouldn't have
happened, so speed was a major contributor.
--
I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to
humans ("pure habitat"). Want to help? (I spent the previous 8
years fighting auto dependence and road construction.)

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of!

http://home.pacbell.net/mjvande

What was the speed limit? What was his speed? Prove that speed had
was the cause

Mike Vandeman writes:

On 26 Jun 2007 19:06:24 -0700, (Bill Z.)
wrote:

Mike Vandeman writes:

On 25 Jun 2007 19:53:59 -0700, (Bill Z.)
Read the title of your silly post to see why. There is simply no
reason to believe he road mountain bikes on road or off road.

And you are omnicient? I already know he's a mountain biker, from
someone who lives there. DUH! Stick to something you know something
about, if any.

Vandeman, you are an idiot. You said he was training for a triathlon,
and the bikes used in triathlons are road bikes with special
handlebars. Regardless of whether he also owns or rides a mountain
bike, you said he was training for a triathlon, not mountain biking
at the time of the accident.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

"Jeff Strickland" wrote in message
news:PGDgi.5654$yN.1770@trnddc07...

"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 02:26:04 GMT, "Jeff Strickland"
wrote:


"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message
...

You just blamed a fatal (your words) accident on the victim, whom
appears
to
not have been at fault at all.

Thanks for demonstrating once again just what a moron you are. He was
obviously SPEEDING. He was training for a triathlon. DUH!


Maybe he was speeding, but he was on the right side of the trail, and
there
was no indication that he caused the accident, and every indication that
the
accident was caused by the other party being on the wrong side of the
pathway.

Nevertheless, if he hadn't been speeding, the accident wouldn't have
happened, so speed was a major contributor.



Do you just pull facts out of your ass, or did you get that from the
article?

Yes, he does pull this **** out of his ass.

Prolly, doesn't even know the difference between a mountain bike, a road
bike or a triathlon bike.

Oz

"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message
...
On 26 Jun 2007 19:06:24 -0700, (Bill Z.)
wrote:

Mike Vandeman writes:

On 25 Jun 2007 19:53:59 -0700, (Bill Z.)
wrote:

Mike Vandeman writes:

On Tue, 26 Jun 2007 00:38:17 GMT, "Jeff Strickland"
wrote:

Who died?

He was on a pathway else the lady going the worng way on roller
blades would
not have been there.

You just blamed a fatal (your words) accident on the victim, whom
appears to
not have been at fault at all.

Thanks for demonstrating once again just what a moron you are. He was
obviously SPEEDING. He was training for a triathlon. DUH!

Don't you know that in a triathlon, one uses a road bike and rides on
a paved surface (also needed for roller blades, which work poorly if
at all on dirt)?

And that's relevant because?

Read the title of your silly post to see why. There is simply no
reason to believe he road mountain bikes on road or off road.

And you are omnicient? I already know he's a mountain biker, from
someone who lives there. DUH! Stick to something you know something
about, if any.


You, Michael J. Vandeman are challenged to also stick to stuff you know
about.

That should reduce the volume of your posts because it is clear that you
know very little about alot of stuff.