cumpolsory hemet use enforcement statistics

where ? for Austrailia ? exist online ?

EG

last year Aussie LE fined

21 upper middle class jocks

23 college students

137 aboriginees

243 negroes

4 Italians

2 Finns

1 NORWEGIAN

1,386 Englishmen

wikiarrest ?

On Nov 13, 4:53*pm, Dan O wrote:
On Nov 12, 9:06 pm, DirtRoadie wrote:









On Nov 12, 3:53 pm, "Graham"
wrote:

"DirtRoadie" wrote in ...

On Nov 12, 12:16pm, "Graham"
wrote:

wrote in ...
On Monday, November 12, 2012 8:04:15 AM UTC-5, Graham wrote:
wrote in ...

On Sunday, November 11, 2012 1:02:23 PM UTC-5, Graham wrote:

wrote in ...

Gentlemen:
With all due respect, this is rec.bicycles.tech. Note:http://sheldonbrown.com/recbikes.html
If you must continue helmet discussion please take that elsewhere
where it is appropriate and do not cross post here.
Feel free to note where you are going, but please leave it at that.
Even private email might be better.
Nobody here is the least bit interested, nor is anyone's opinion going
to be changed.

Point taken. Forgive me this is my first forray. If this topic has been debated here ad nauseum before, which appears could well be the case, then I can appreciate your position and I for one will take it no further here. If anyone feels strong enough to want to carry on then remove the mice from my email address and reply direct.

Graham.

I had missed this response. Thank you.
And welcome to the group.
Now if Krygowski can offer the same sort of courtesy maybe we can
clean up a bit.
As nauseum does not begin to describe the bandwidth wasted here by
Krygowski on his holy crusade.
For perspective:http://groups.google.com/group/rec.b...a8fafee4415b12

I can assure you that if that you are interested in discussing the
topic Frank will *be more than happy to accommodate you.
It's his reason for living.
But again, I speak for many who appreciate that topic being taken
elsewhere.

Sorry. *(Personally, I think helmets *are* bicycling technology - at
least they should be.)

I think that is questionable.
But more importantly, I think Andrew hit the nail on the head. Nobody
is going to change their mind. The group is being dragged down as a
result.

Graham is too smart to get hooked like me, but he sure did spell it
out - very nicely put, too.
+1 - very articulate. A breath of fresh air. Yet I can't help but
wonder how long it would have taken Frank to evoke a well deserved
"**** you" response.

Even that, however, didn't seem to
register for Frank. *Talk about a silly little dog.
Maybe I missed something. You expect ANYTHING to register with Frank?
He has no "input" mode and his output mode plays like a broken record.

I really should call it quits; catharsis keeps pulling me back, I
guess.
That's your call.
And too many of the folks who actually talked "tech" are gone.

DR

On 14/11/2012 2:09 PM, DirtRoadie wrote:
On Nov 13, 4:53 pm, Dan O wrote:

Graham is too smart to get hooked like me, but he sure did spell it
out - very nicely put, too.
+1 - very articulate. A breath of fresh air. Yet I can't help but
wonder how long it would have taken Frank to evoke a well deserved
"**** you" response.

Sadly, we may never know ;-)

--
JS

"James" wrote in message ...
On 14/11/2012 2:09 PM, DirtRoadie wrote:
On Nov 13, 4:53 pm, Dan O wrote:

Graham is too smart to get hooked like me, but he sure did spell it
out - very nicely put, too.
+1 - very articulate. A breath of fresh air. Yet I can't help but
wonder how long it would have taken Frank to evoke a well deserved
"**** you" response.

Sadly, we may never know ;-)

--
JS


Never!

Graham.