A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » Australia
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Talkback one eyed lunatics.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old May 14th 15, 08:39 AM posted to aus.legal,aus.bicycle
Pelican
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 8
Default Talkback one eyed lunatics.



"F Murtz" wrote in message
eb.com...
Pelican wrote:


"F Murtz" wrote in message
...
I do not know If any one has heard 2UE afternoon talkback, think his
name is Justin smith,on the subject of bicycle rider registration, he
seems manic on the subject and howls down anyone who has an opposite
view to his, he seems to have the opinion that it is a foregone
conclusion that we will have rider registration by the end of the year.
He seems to have Duncan Gay (roads minister)on his side.
He also has the opinion that bicycle ordinations should not be allowed
representation at the soon to be,round table group on the subject with
Duncan Gay because "they are going to say no to everything".
His idea is registration of rider not bicycle with mandated fluoro
jackets with number on the back.

We would then be the only place in the world with it.
It would almost mean the death knell for cycle riding.
He has a bee in his bonnet about insurance associated with
license,which would in my opinion eventually make the license fee
expensive which is the case of all mandated insurance since the
beginning of time.
He would be better served to get government paid cover for the minute
cases of third party claims against bicycles.(every so often a bicycle
knocks some one down injuring and even killing where the victim has no
cover and can not identify the culprit)
It is not worth registration just for revenge against the rider,it is
better to cover the third party through special govt.paid insurance
and would be much cheaper than an other licensing monolith.
It would mean that I would never ride again as it is rare that I do
and would not be worth it (I sometimes take train with bicycle to the
city or places like Gosford for use at the other end)


There are quite a few proposals floating around. For example, this one
-
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/new...-1226738618261.
It's a democracy, so feel free to make your views heard. Write to the
Minister, and have your say. For what it's worth, I don't like your
idea of a government scheme. I would much prefer a private scheme by
the insurance industry, if possible, backed by law making it compulsory
for bike riders, or bikes, to be registered in a way that makes it
self-funding. The simpler, the better.


No such animal as the simpler the better once it starts
The small cost of third party claims paid by government would be nothing
against the overall cost of compulsory licensing and insurance for all
bike riders, a complete new industry with the insurers licking their lips
at the new windfall, which would increase as it takes hold, the same as it
did for all mandated insurance cover, compulsory auto third party
compulsory building insurance etc, loads more govt staff to run licensing
etc.


You are over-exaggerating the problem. The law already provides a remedy
for cyclists with personal or property injuries. The law already provides a
remedy for others with personal or property injuries which are the fault of
cyclists, but the consequences might be difficult where a cyclist doesn't
have funds. That problem can arise in many situations, of course. All that
is apparently being considered is a measure to ensure that those injured by
cyclists have an effective remedy eg by there being some sort of fund of
contributions by cyclists. That need not involve licensing, registration of
bikes, annual payments etc etc. It's not an anti-biking measure.

Ads
  #12  
Old May 14th 15, 09:10 AM posted to aus.legal,aus.bicycle
Jeßus[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12
Default Talkback one eyed lunatics.

On Thu, 14 May 2015 17:17:33 +1000, "Pelican"
wrote:



"Jeßus" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 14 May 2015 15:28:49 +1000, F Murtz
wrote:

I do not know If any one has heard 2UE afternoon talkback, think his
name is Justin smith,on the subject of bicycle rider registration, he
seems manic on the subject and howls down anyone who has an opposite
view to his, he seems to have the opinion that it is a foregone
conclusion that we will have rider registration by the end of the year.
He seems to have Duncan Gay (roads minister)on his side.
He also has the opinion that bicycle ordinations should not be allowed
representation at the soon to be,round table group on the subject with
Duncan Gay because "they are going to say no to everything".
His idea is registration of rider not bicycle with mandated fluoro
jackets with number on the back.

We would then be the only place in the world with it.
It would almost mean the death knell for cycle riding.


You might find a lot of people celebrating if that comes to pass.
I know I certainly would be. I recently fitted cameras to all my
vehicles, specifically because of lycra wearig cyclists who think
theyre entitled to do whatever they please on country roads.

The next rider who makes me choose between hitting him/her, or another
innocent vehicle, or the roadside verge, is going to have a very bad
day.


Even if every rider was a suicidal ****wit, you should not be in a situation
of making such a choice.


I shouldn't be, as you say. The last incident that compelled me to
install cameras was extremely dangerous and almost caused a head on
collision with an oncoming car. Not only was the rider unapologetic,
he fully denied being dead centre of my lane (even though he was,
hence the cameras now)... this was on a tight bend, on a country road
with barriers/rails on the LHS and a cutting to the right (oncoming
car anyway so that wasn't an option either). That rider is very lucky
to still be here.

After 10 years living in the Sunshine Coast hinterland and now N.E Tas
- both places very popular with riders - I've lost pretty much all
tolerance for them. Too many incidents and far too consistently for my
liking.


  #13  
Old May 14th 15, 09:28 AM posted to aus.legal,aus.bicycle
F Murtz[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 192
Default Talkback one eyed lunatics.

Pelican wrote:


"F Murtz" wrote in message
eb.com...
Pelican wrote:


"F Murtz" wrote in message
...
I do not know If any one has heard 2UE afternoon talkback, think his
name is Justin smith,on the subject of bicycle rider registration, he
seems manic on the subject and howls down anyone who has an opposite
view to his, he seems to have the opinion that it is a foregone
conclusion that we will have rider registration by the end of the year.
He seems to have Duncan Gay (roads minister)on his side.
He also has the opinion that bicycle ordinations should not be allowed
representation at the soon to be,round table group on the subject with
Duncan Gay because "they are going to say no to everything".
His idea is registration of rider not bicycle with mandated fluoro
jackets with number on the back.

We would then be the only place in the world with it.
It would almost mean the death knell for cycle riding.
He has a bee in his bonnet about insurance associated with
license,which would in my opinion eventually make the license fee
expensive which is the case of all mandated insurance since the
beginning of time.
He would be better served to get government paid cover for the minute
cases of third party claims against bicycles.(every so often a bicycle
knocks some one down injuring and even killing where the victim has no
cover and can not identify the culprit)
It is not worth registration just for revenge against the rider,it is
better to cover the third party through special govt.paid insurance
and would be much cheaper than an other licensing monolith.
It would mean that I would never ride again as it is rare that I do
and would not be worth it (I sometimes take train with bicycle to the
city or places like Gosford for use at the other end)

There are quite a few proposals floating around. For example, this one
-
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/new...-1226738618261.

It's a democracy, so feel free to make your views heard. Write to the
Minister, and have your say. For what it's worth, I don't like your
idea of a government scheme. I would much prefer a private scheme by
the insurance industry, if possible, backed by law making it compulsory
for bike riders, or bikes, to be registered in a way that makes it
self-funding. The simpler, the better.


No such animal as the simpler the better once it starts
The small cost of third party claims paid by government would be
nothing against the overall cost of compulsory licensing and insurance
for all bike riders, a complete new industry with the insurers licking
their lips at the new windfall, which would increase as it takes hold,
the same as it did for all mandated insurance cover, compulsory auto
third party compulsory building insurance etc, loads more govt staff
to run licensing etc.


You are over-exaggerating the problem. The law already provides a
remedy for cyclists with personal or property injuries. The law already
provides a remedy for others with personal or property injuries which
are the fault of cyclists, but the consequences might be difficult where
a cyclist doesn't have funds. That problem can arise in many
situations, of course. All that is apparently being considered is a
measure to ensure that those injured by cyclists have an effective
remedy eg by there being some sort of fund of contributions by
cyclists. That need not involve licensing, registration of bikes,
annual payments etc etc. It's not an anti-biking measure.

Except that utopian idea wont take hold
but my over exaggerated idea might as people have a hatred of bicycles
(and motor cycles as well )because people see them doing things they
cant(even legal things), when they are stuck in traffic,
Bicycles drive me nuts too especially having to pass the same rider 10
times on the same bit of road but none of my annoyances would be fixed
one iota by registration.
  #14  
Old May 14th 15, 09:33 AM posted to aus.legal,aus.bicycle
F Murtz[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 192
Default Talkback one eyed lunatics.

Jeßus wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2015 17:17:33 +1000, "Pelican"
wrote:



"Jeßus" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 May 2015 15:28:49 +1000, F Murtz
wrote:

I do not know If any one has heard 2UE afternoon talkback, think his
name is Justin smith,on the subject of bicycle rider registration, he
seems manic on the subject and howls down anyone who has an opposite
view to his, he seems to have the opinion that it is a foregone
conclusion that we will have rider registration by the end of the year.
He seems to have Duncan Gay (roads minister)on his side.
He also has the opinion that bicycle ordinations should not be allowed
representation at the soon to be,round table group on the subject with
Duncan Gay because "they are going to say no to everything".
His idea is registration of rider not bicycle with mandated fluoro
jackets with number on the back.

We would then be the only place in the world with it.
It would almost mean the death knell for cycle riding.

You might find a lot of people celebrating if that comes to pass.
I know I certainly would be. I recently fitted cameras to all my
vehicles, specifically because of lycra wearig cyclists who think
theyre entitled to do whatever they please on country roads.

The next rider who makes me choose between hitting him/her, or another
innocent vehicle, or the roadside verge, is going to have a very bad
day.


Even if every rider was a suicidal ****wit, you should not be in a situation
of making such a choice.


I shouldn't be, as you say. The last incident that compelled me to
install cameras was extremely dangerous and almost caused a head on
collision with an oncoming car. Not only was the rider unapologetic,
he fully denied being dead centre of my lane (even though he was,
hence the cameras now)... this was on a tight bend, on a country road
with barriers/rails on the LHS and a cutting to the right (oncoming
car anyway so that wasn't an option either). That rider is very lucky
to still be here.

After 10 years living in the Sunshine Coast hinterland and now N.E Tas
- both places very popular with riders - I've lost pretty much all
tolerance for them. Too many incidents and far too consistently for my
liking.


You have me puzzled, why would a rider being dead centre of a lane cause
a problem? was he coming toward you on the wrong side of the road?
  #15  
Old May 14th 15, 09:31 PM posted to aus.legal,aus.bicycle
Rod Speed
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,091
Default Talkback one eyed lunatics.



"Zebee Johnstone" wrote in message
...
In aus.bicycle on Thu, 14 May 2015 16:09:38 +1000
Pelican wrote:
It's a democracy, so feel free to make your views heard. Write to the
Minister, and have your say. For what it's worth, I don't like your idea
of
a government scheme. I would much prefer a private scheme by the
insurance
industry, if possible, backed by law making it compulsory for bike
riders,
or bikes, to be registered in a way that makes it self-funding. The
simpler, the better.


Is car registration self-funding does anyone know?


Self funding in what sense ? The total fees they charge
do more than pay for the cost of all those shinybums.

What about driver licencing?


It isn't really feasible to separate the cost of rego and
drivers licensing except with the license test stuff.

after all this is closer to that than it is to rego.


What ?

At what age does a rider need to ahve a paid licence?


Should there be high penalties for hitting a licenced cyclist given
they would now have a "right to the road" many think they do not now
have?



  #16  
Old May 14th 15, 09:59 PM posted to aus.legal,aus.bicycle
Rod Speed
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,091
Default Talkback one eyed lunatics.



"F Murtz" wrote in message
eb.com...
Pelican wrote:


"F Murtz" wrote in message
...
I do not know If any one has heard 2UE afternoon talkback, think his
name is Justin smith,on the subject of bicycle rider registration, he
seems manic on the subject and howls down anyone who has an opposite
view to his, he seems to have the opinion that it is a foregone
conclusion that we will have rider registration by the end of the year.
He seems to have Duncan Gay (roads minister)on his side.
He also has the opinion that bicycle ordinations should not be allowed
representation at the soon to be,round table group on the subject with
Duncan Gay because "they are going to say no to everything".
His idea is registration of rider not bicycle with mandated fluoro
jackets with number on the back.

We would then be the only place in the world with it.
It would almost mean the death knell for cycle riding.
He has a bee in his bonnet about insurance associated with
license,which would in my opinion eventually make the license fee
expensive which is the case of all mandated insurance since the
beginning of time.
He would be better served to get government paid cover for the minute
cases of third party claims against bicycles.(every so often a bicycle
knocks some one down injuring and even killing where the victim has no
cover and can not identify the culprit)
It is not worth registration just for revenge against the rider,it is
better to cover the third party through special govt.paid insurance
and would be much cheaper than an other licensing monolith.
It would mean that I would never ride again as it is rare that I do
and would not be worth it (I sometimes take train with bicycle to the
city or places like Gosford for use at the other end)


There are quite a few proposals floating around. For example, this one
-
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/new...-1226738618261.
It's a democracy, so feel free to make your views heard. Write to the
Minister, and have your say. For what it's worth, I don't like your
idea of a government scheme. I would much prefer a private scheme by
the insurance industry, if possible, backed by law making it compulsory
for bike riders, or bikes, to be registered in a way that makes it
self-funding. The simpler, the better.


No such animal as the simpler the better once it starts


Dunno.

The small cost of third party claims paid by government would be nothing


Dunno, given the very high accident rate seen with cyclists, that's
a hard claim to substantiate. Corse it is covered by Medicare already.

against the overall cost of compulsory licensing and insurance for all
bike riders,


Also not clear what it would cost if the RTA did it, just adding
that to the current stuff for cars and trucks and trailers and drivers.

a complete new industry


No need for anything like that and it would be mad to go that route.

with the insurers licking their lips at the new windfall,


Not if it's a single small fee paid once with a
new bike sale as Abbott's sister proposes.

which would increase as it takes hold, the same as it did for all mandated
insurance cover, compulsory auto third party compulsory building insurance
etc,


The cost has in fact dropped at times with law changes.

loads more govt staff to run licensing etc.


Not if its just a license with no testing involved.

Not that I am saying it should happen, it shouldn't IMO.

  #17  
Old May 14th 15, 10:01 PM posted to aus.legal,aus.bicycle
Rod Speed
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,091
Default Talkback one eyed lunatics.



"Jeßus" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 May 2015 17:17:33 +1000, "Pelican"
wrote:



"Jeßus" wrote in message
. ..
On Thu, 14 May 2015 15:28:49 +1000, F Murtz
wrote:

I do not know If any one has heard 2UE afternoon talkback, think his
name is Justin smith,on the subject of bicycle rider registration, he
seems manic on the subject and howls down anyone who has an opposite
view to his, he seems to have the opinion that it is a foregone
conclusion that we will have rider registration by the end of the year.
He seems to have Duncan Gay (roads minister)on his side.
He also has the opinion that bicycle ordinations should not be allowed
representation at the soon to be,round table group on the subject with
Duncan Gay because "they are going to say no to everything".
His idea is registration of rider not bicycle with mandated fluoro
jackets with number on the back.

We would then be the only place in the world with it.
It would almost mean the death knell for cycle riding.

You might find a lot of people celebrating if that comes to pass.
I know I certainly would be. I recently fitted cameras to all my
vehicles, specifically because of lycra wearig cyclists who think
theyre entitled to do whatever they please on country roads.

The next rider who makes me choose between hitting him/her, or another
innocent vehicle, or the roadside verge, is going to have a very bad
day.


Even if every rider was a suicidal ****wit, you should not be in a
situation
of making such a choice.


I shouldn't be, as you say. The last incident that compelled me to
install cameras was extremely dangerous and almost caused a head on
collision with an oncoming car. Not only was the rider unapologetic,
he fully denied being dead centre of my lane (even though he was,
hence the cameras now)... this was on a tight bend, on a country road
with barriers/rails on the LHS and a cutting to the right (oncoming
car anyway so that wasn't an option either). That rider is very lucky
to still be here.


Legally he is entitled to be in the center of the lane if he wants to.

Your camera will be what sees you jailed.

After 10 years living in the Sunshine Coast hinterland and now N.E Tas
- both places very popular with riders - I've lost pretty much all
tolerance for them. Too many incidents and far too consistently for my
liking.



  #18  
Old May 14th 15, 10:06 PM posted to aus.legal,aus.bicycle
Rod Speed
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,091
Default Talkback one eyed lunatics.



"F Murtz" wrote in message
web.com...
Pelican wrote:


"F Murtz" wrote in message
eb.com...
Pelican wrote:


"F Murtz" wrote in message
...
I do not know If any one has heard 2UE afternoon talkback, think his
name is Justin smith,on the subject of bicycle rider registration, he
seems manic on the subject and howls down anyone who has an opposite
view to his, he seems to have the opinion that it is a foregone
conclusion that we will have rider registration by the end of the
year.
He seems to have Duncan Gay (roads minister)on his side.
He also has the opinion that bicycle ordinations should not be allowed
representation at the soon to be,round table group on the subject with
Duncan Gay because "they are going to say no to everything".
His idea is registration of rider not bicycle with mandated fluoro
jackets with number on the back.

We would then be the only place in the world with it.
It would almost mean the death knell for cycle riding.
He has a bee in his bonnet about insurance associated with
license,which would in my opinion eventually make the license fee
expensive which is the case of all mandated insurance since the
beginning of time.
He would be better served to get government paid cover for the minute
cases of third party claims against bicycles.(every so often a bicycle
knocks some one down injuring and even killing where the victim has no
cover and can not identify the culprit)
It is not worth registration just for revenge against the rider,it is
better to cover the third party through special govt.paid insurance
and would be much cheaper than an other licensing monolith.
It would mean that I would never ride again as it is rare that I do
and would not be worth it (I sometimes take train with bicycle to the
city or places like Gosford for use at the other end)

There are quite a few proposals floating around. For example, this one
-
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/new...-1226738618261.

It's a democracy, so feel free to make your views heard. Write to the
Minister, and have your say. For what it's worth, I don't like your
idea of a government scheme. I would much prefer a private scheme by
the insurance industry, if possible, backed by law making it compulsory
for bike riders, or bikes, to be registered in a way that makes it
self-funding. The simpler, the better.


No such animal as the simpler the better once it starts
The small cost of third party claims paid by government would be
nothing against the overall cost of compulsory licensing and insurance
for all bike riders, a complete new industry with the insurers licking
their lips at the new windfall, which would increase as it takes hold,
the same as it did for all mandated insurance cover, compulsory auto
third party compulsory building insurance etc, loads more govt staff
to run licensing etc.


You are over-exaggerating the problem. The law already provides a
remedy for cyclists with personal or property injuries. The law already
provides a remedy for others with personal or property injuries which
are the fault of cyclists, but the consequences might be difficult where
a cyclist doesn't have funds. That problem can arise in many
situations, of course. All that is apparently being considered is a
measure to ensure that those injured by cyclists have an effective
remedy eg by there being some sort of fund of contributions by
cyclists. That need not involve licensing, registration of bikes,
annual payments etc etc. It's not an anti-biking measure.


Except that utopian idea wont take hold


It has in some places.

but my over exaggerated idea might


I doubt it.

as people have a hatred of bicycles (and motor cycles as well )


SOME people do.

because people see them doing things they cant
(even legal things), when they are stuck in traffic,


Bicycles drive me nuts too especially having to pass the same rider 10
times on the same bit of road


I object more to the fools that insist on riding
side by side and the fact that that is legal now.

but none of my annoyances would be fixed one iota by registration.


It might help if your claim that it would see
lots not bother to register because they don't
ride enough to warrant the cost is true.

Can't see it being viable tho, particularly with kids.

  #19  
Old May 14th 15, 11:16 PM posted to aus.legal,aus.bicycle
Peter Howard[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 106
Default Talkback one eyed lunatics.

On 14/05/2015 6:10 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2015 17:17:33 +1000, "Pelican"
wrote:



"Jeßus" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 May 2015 15:28:49 +1000, F Murtz
wrote:

I do not know If any one has heard 2UE afternoon talkback, think his
name is Justin smith,on the subject of bicycle rider registration, he
seems manic on the subject and howls down anyone who has an opposite
view to his, he seems to have the opinion that it is a foregone
conclusion that we will have rider registration by the end of the year.
He seems to have Duncan Gay (roads minister)on his side.
He also has the opinion that bicycle ordinations should not be allowed
representation at the soon to be,round table group on the subject with
Duncan Gay because "they are going to say no to everything".
His idea is registration of rider not bicycle with mandated fluoro
jackets with number on the back.

We would then be the only place in the world with it.
It would almost mean the death knell for cycle riding.

You might find a lot of people celebrating if that comes to pass.
I know I certainly would be. I recently fitted cameras to all my
vehicles, specifically because of lycra wearig cyclists who think
theyre entitled to do whatever they please on country roads.

The next rider who makes me choose between hitting him/her, or another
innocent vehicle, or the roadside verge, is going to have a very bad
day.


Even if every rider was a suicidal ****wit, you should not be in a situation
of making such a choice.


I shouldn't be, as you say. The last incident that compelled me to
install cameras was extremely dangerous and almost caused a head on
collision with an oncoming car. Not only was the rider unapologetic,
he fully denied being dead centre of my lane (even though he was,
hence the cameras now)... this was on a tight bend, on a country road
with barriers/rails on the LHS and a cutting to the right (oncoming
car anyway so that wasn't an option either). That rider is very lucky
to still be here.

After 10 years living in the Sunshine Coast hinterland and now N.E Tas
- both places very popular with riders - I've lost pretty much all
tolerance for them. Too many incidents and far too consistently for my
liking.


You are quite right. You can't be expected to anticipate the possibility
of a slow moving vehicle like a tractor hauling hay, or a logging truck,
or a cyclist on a blind bend. Our brave Anzacs died for the motorists
right to drive with their heads stuck up their arse.
  #20  
Old May 15th 15, 12:49 AM posted to aus.legal,aus.bicycle
Jeßus[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 12
Default Talkback one eyed lunatics.

On Thu, 14 May 2015 18:33:45 +1000, F Murtz
wrote:

Jeßus wrote:
On Thu, 14 May 2015 17:17:33 +1000, "Pelican"
wrote:



"Jeßus" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 14 May 2015 15:28:49 +1000, F Murtz
wrote:

I do not know If any one has heard 2UE afternoon talkback, think his
name is Justin smith,on the subject of bicycle rider registration, he
seems manic on the subject and howls down anyone who has an opposite
view to his, he seems to have the opinion that it is a foregone
conclusion that we will have rider registration by the end of the year.
He seems to have Duncan Gay (roads minister)on his side.
He also has the opinion that bicycle ordinations should not be allowed
representation at the soon to be,round table group on the subject with
Duncan Gay because "they are going to say no to everything".
His idea is registration of rider not bicycle with mandated fluoro
jackets with number on the back.

We would then be the only place in the world with it.
It would almost mean the death knell for cycle riding.

You might find a lot of people celebrating if that comes to pass.
I know I certainly would be. I recently fitted cameras to all my
vehicles, specifically because of lycra wearig cyclists who think
theyre entitled to do whatever they please on country roads.

The next rider who makes me choose between hitting him/her, or another
innocent vehicle, or the roadside verge, is going to have a very bad
day.

Even if every rider was a suicidal ****wit, you should not be in a situation
of making such a choice.


I shouldn't be, as you say. The last incident that compelled me to
install cameras was extremely dangerous and almost caused a head on
collision with an oncoming car. Not only was the rider unapologetic,
he fully denied being dead centre of my lane (even though he was,
hence the cameras now)... this was on a tight bend, on a country road
with barriers/rails on the LHS and a cutting to the right (oncoming
car anyway so that wasn't an option either). That rider is very lucky
to still be here.

After 10 years living in the Sunshine Coast hinterland and now N.E Tas
- both places very popular with riders - I've lost pretty much all
tolerance for them. Too many incidents and far too consistently for my
liking.


You have me puzzled, why would a rider being dead centre of a lane cause
a problem? was he coming toward you on the wrong side of the road?


He was in my lane, going in my direction. The problem was he was in
the middle of my lane and I couldn't veer into the oncoming lane
because of an oncoming vehicle. I was *going* to veer into the other
lane but thankfully I didn't (blind corner).
I dunno, you've lost me a bit here if you can't see the problem?
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Talkback one eyed lunatics F Murtz[_2_] Australia 2 May 15th 15 07:57 AM
lunatics or heroes? Zebee Johnstone Australia 3 June 18th 08 03:38 AM
ABC 774 talkback etc cfsmtb Australia 3 May 16th 06 04:36 AM
Clarkson pie-eyed Just zis Guy, you know? UK 219 September 28th 05 07:08 AM
RR: Get away from me you lazy eyed freak Jimbo(san) Mountain Biking 1 December 2nd 03 01:47 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:50 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2017 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.