Cycling code of conduct

"Peter Keller" wrote in message ...

On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 12:05:51 +0100, Tarcap wrote:

Fairly normal behaviour for cyclist, perhaps?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...s-Cambridge-s-
uncle-Gary-bust-headphone-wearing-cyclist-ran-pet-chihuahua.html

Thank God I am not normal.

Nobody on here has ever accused you of that.

On 26/04/2015 12:58, Tarcap wrote:


"The Medway Handyman" wrote in message
...

On 26/04/2015 09:22, Tarcap wrote:


"Simon Jester" wrote in message
...

On Saturday, April 25, 2015 at 8:18:12 PM UTC+1, Tarcap wrote:
"Simon Jester" wrote in message
...

No I don't.
I have never used Khat so I have no idea what you are seeing at the
moment.
You really should see a mental health professional or at least contact a
support group.


Here, hang on - aren't you a little premature? You've already started
the
insults *before* you've lost any argument with me.

No insult intended.
We know you have substance abuse, self esteem and sexual identity issues.
No one is judging you for that.
Go snuggle with your cria and make sure you give her extra food in the
morning.

Remember the psycholist's

You still need to cite an official definition for this 'word'.

This seems to sum you up fairly nicely\;

http://definithing.com/psycholist/


Anyway, go easy with yourself, as I explained, you haven't got a complex
at all.
It's something you will have to come to terms with.
Some are born to greatness. Others, like yourself, are born to be just
cyclists.
I know it's sad, but it is also true.

Perhaps we ought to start a charity for these unfortunates? I'm sure a
cure for cycling could be found?


But don't the sponging freeloaders already have too much money wasted on
them?

Good point.

--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 12:24:49 +0100, The Medway Handyman wrote:

On 26/04/2015 12:01, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 11:11:58 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 25/04/2015 18:44, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 12:05:51 +0100, Tarcap wrote:

Fairly normal behaviour for cyclist, perhaps?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...chihuahua.html



The first comment on the page says it all: "Did the bike run over the
'dog' or the 'dog' run under the bike? Was the animal on a lead or just
dashing around like a headless chicken? Too many unknowns."

I severely doubt a cyclist crashed into a dog without seeing it. I
would suggest the dog ran under the bike. A lot of dogs do that when
I'm cycling, but the owners usually say sorry and try to control the dog
before it gets too close. The above dog owner clearly did not.


Typical cyclist response.

Which one was the vehicle?

I'll give you a clue.

a) the one with the wheels.
b) the one with the paws.

Irrelevant. If a dog or person runs in front of your car and dies, it's
not automatically your fault. Someone could very easily wait until a
car was 2 feet from them and leap in front of it and there's no way it
could stop.

Except that the idiot cyclist had 395 acres of open space and still
managed to run over a small dog.

He could have simply been cycling along the path, and the dog walker on the other side of it, then the dog stupidly ran in front of the bike.

--
Smith & Wesson -- the original point and click interface.

On 26/04/2015 14:01, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 12:24:49 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 26/04/2015 12:01, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 11:11:58 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 25/04/2015 18:44, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 12:05:51 +0100, Tarcap
wrote:

Fairly normal behaviour for cyclist, perhaps?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...chihuahua.html




The first comment on the page says it all: "Did the bike run over the
'dog' or the 'dog' run under the bike? Was the animal on a lead or
just
dashing around like a headless chicken? Too many unknowns."

I severely doubt a cyclist crashed into a dog without seeing it. I
would suggest the dog ran under the bike. A lot of dogs do that when
I'm cycling, but the owners usually say sorry and try to control
the dog
before it gets too close. The above dog owner clearly did not.


Typical cyclist response.

Which one was the vehicle?

I'll give you a clue.

a) the one with the wheels.
b) the one with the paws.

Irrelevant. If a dog or person runs in front of your car and dies, it's
not automatically your fault. Someone could very easily wait until a
car was 2 feet from them and leap in front of it and there's no way it
could stop.

Except that the idiot cyclist had 395 acres of open space and still
managed to run over a small dog.

He could have simply been cycling along the path, and the dog walker on
the other side of it, then the dog stupidly ran in front of the bike.

Then someone in control of a vehicle should have used observation and
anticipation skills.

It's called hazard awareness and is part of the driving test. Shame
cyclists don't have to pass a test.



--
Dave - The Medway Handyman www.medwayhandyman.co.uk

On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 15:13:56 +0100, The Medway Handyman wrote:

On 26/04/2015 14:01, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 12:24:49 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 26/04/2015 12:01, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 11:11:58 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 25/04/2015 18:44, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 12:05:51 +0100, Tarcap
wrote:

Fairly normal behaviour for cyclist, perhaps?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...chihuahua.html




The first comment on the page says it all: "Did the bike run over the
'dog' or the 'dog' run under the bike? Was the animal on a lead or
just
dashing around like a headless chicken? Too many unknowns."

I severely doubt a cyclist crashed into a dog without seeing it. I
would suggest the dog ran under the bike. A lot of dogs do that when
I'm cycling, but the owners usually say sorry and try to control
the dog
before it gets too close. The above dog owner clearly did not.


Typical cyclist response.

Which one was the vehicle?

I'll give you a clue.

a) the one with the wheels.
b) the one with the paws.

Irrelevant. If a dog or person runs in front of your car and dies, it's
not automatically your fault. Someone could very easily wait until a
car was 2 feet from them and leap in front of it and there's no way it
could stop.

Except that the idiot cyclist had 395 acres of open space and still
managed to run over a small dog.

He could have simply been cycling along the path, and the dog walker on
the other side of it, then the dog stupidly ran in front of the bike.

Then someone in control of a vehicle should have used observation and
anticipation skills.

It's called hazard awareness and is part of the driving test. Shame
cyclists don't have to pass a test.

Tell you what. Drive along in a built up area at the correct law abiding speed, and I'll stand on the pavement minding my own business, looking at some flowers in a garden, then run in front of you with no warning, about 2 feet in front of you. Can I get you done for dangerous driving?

--
Why did the Blonde put ice in her boyfriend's condom?
To keep the swelling down.

On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 15:13:56 +0100, The Medway Handyman wrote:

On 26/04/2015 14:01, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 12:24:49 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 26/04/2015 12:01, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 11:11:58 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 25/04/2015 18:44, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 12:05:51 +0100, Tarcap
wrote:

Fairly normal behaviour for cyclist, perhaps?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...chihuahua.html




The first comment on the page says it all: "Did the bike run over the
'dog' or the 'dog' run under the bike? Was the animal on a lead or
just
dashing around like a headless chicken? Too many unknowns."

I severely doubt a cyclist crashed into a dog without seeing it. I
would suggest the dog ran under the bike. A lot of dogs do that when
I'm cycling, but the owners usually say sorry and try to control
the dog
before it gets too close. The above dog owner clearly did not.


Typical cyclist response.

Which one was the vehicle?

I'll give you a clue.

a) the one with the wheels.
b) the one with the paws.

Irrelevant. If a dog or person runs in front of your car and dies, it's
not automatically your fault. Someone could very easily wait until a
car was 2 feet from them and leap in front of it and there's no way it
could stop.

Except that the idiot cyclist had 395 acres of open space and still
managed to run over a small dog.

He could have simply been cycling along the path, and the dog walker on
the other side of it, then the dog stupidly ran in front of the bike.

Then someone in control of a vehicle should have used observation and
anticipation skills.

It's called hazard awareness and is part of the driving test. Shame
cyclists don't have to pass a test.

When I took my test in 1997 there was no hazard awareness. You had to be able to stop if a clipboard collided with your dashboard, but that was it.

--
Why did the Blonde put ice in her boyfriend's condom?
To keep the swelling down.

On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 15:13:56 +0100, The Medway Handyman wrote:

On 26/04/2015 14:01, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 12:24:49 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 26/04/2015 12:01, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 11:11:58 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:

On 25/04/2015 18:44, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 12:05:51 +0100, Tarcap
wrote:

Fairly normal behaviour for cyclist, perhaps?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...chihuahua.html




The first comment on the page says it all: "Did the bike run over the
'dog' or the 'dog' run under the bike? Was the animal on a lead or
just
dashing around like a headless chicken? Too many unknowns."

I severely doubt a cyclist crashed into a dog without seeing it. I
would suggest the dog ran under the bike. A lot of dogs do that when
I'm cycling, but the owners usually say sorry and try to control
the dog
before it gets too close. The above dog owner clearly did not.


Typical cyclist response.

Which one was the vehicle?

I'll give you a clue.

a) the one with the wheels.
b) the one with the paws.

Irrelevant. If a dog or person runs in front of your car and dies, it's
not automatically your fault. Someone could very easily wait until a
car was 2 feet from them and leap in front of it and there's no way it
could stop.

Except that the idiot cyclist had 395 acres of open space and still
managed to run over a small dog.

He could have simply been cycling along the path, and the dog walker on
the other side of it, then the dog stupidly ran in front of the bike.

Then someone in control of a vehicle should have used observation and
anticipation skills.

It's called hazard awareness and is part of the driving test. Shame
cyclists don't have to pass a test.

Doesn't matter, the dog was the stupid one and the dog was at fault. People should not have to correct others' ****ups.

--
Why did the Blonde put ice in her boyfriend's condom?
To keep the swelling down.

On 26/04/2015 15:35, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:

The Medway Handyman wrote:
On 26/04/2015 14:01, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 12:24:49 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:
On 26/04/2015 12:01, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 11:11:58 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:
On 25/04/2015 18:44, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
Tarcap wrote:

Fairly normal behaviour for cyclist, perhaps?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...chihuahua.html

The first comment on the page says it all: "Did the bike run over
the 'dog' or the 'dog' run under the bike? Was the animal on a lead
or just dashing around like a headless chicken? Too many unknowns."

I severely doubt a cyclist crashed into a dog without seeing it. I
would suggest the dog ran under the bike. A lot of dogs do that
when I'm cycling, but the owners usually say sorry and try to control
the dog before it gets too close. The above dog owner clearly did not.

Typical cyclist response.

Which one was the vehicle?
I'll give you a clue.
a) the one with the wheels.
b) the one with the paws.

Irrelevant. If a dog or person runs in front of your car and dies,
it's not automatically your fault. Someone could very easily wait
until a car was 2 feet from them and leap in front of it and there's
no way it could stop.

Except that the idiot cyclist had 395 acres of open space and still
managed to run over a small dog.

He could have simply been cycling along the path, and the dog walker on
the other side of it, then the dog stupidly ran in front of the bike.

Then someone in control of a vehicle should have used observation and
anticipation skills.

It's called hazard awareness and is part of the driving test. Shame
cyclists don't have to pass a test.

Tell you what. Drive along in a built up area at the correct law
abiding speed, and I'll stand on the pavement minding my own business,
looking at some flowers in a garden, then run in front of you with no
warning, about 2 feet in front of you. Can I get you done for dangerous
driving?

No.

You won't be able to do anything at all.

On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 15:39:12 +0100, JNugent wrote:

On 26/04/2015 15:35, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:

The Medway Handyman wrote:
On 26/04/2015 14:01, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 12:24:49 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:
On 26/04/2015 12:01, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 11:11:58 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:
On 25/04/2015 18:44, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
Tarcap wrote:

Fairly normal behaviour for cyclist, perhaps?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...chihuahua.html

The first comment on the page says it all: "Did the bike run over
the 'dog' or the 'dog' run under the bike? Was the animal on a lead
or just dashing around like a headless chicken? Too many unknowns."

I severely doubt a cyclist crashed into a dog without seeing it. I
would suggest the dog ran under the bike. A lot of dogs do that
when I'm cycling, but the owners usually say sorry and try to control
the dog before it gets too close. The above dog owner clearly did not.

Typical cyclist response.

Which one was the vehicle?
I'll give you a clue.
a) the one with the wheels.
b) the one with the paws.

Irrelevant. If a dog or person runs in front of your car and dies,
it's not automatically your fault. Someone could very easily wait
until a car was 2 feet from them and leap in front of it and there's
no way it could stop.

Except that the idiot cyclist had 395 acres of open space and still
managed to run over a small dog.

He could have simply been cycling along the path, and the dog walker on
the other side of it, then the dog stupidly ran in front of the bike.

Then someone in control of a vehicle should have used observation and
anticipation skills.

It's called hazard awareness and is part of the driving test. Shame
cyclists don't have to pass a test.

Tell you what. Drive along in a built up area at the correct law
abiding speed, and I'll stand on the pavement minding my own business,
looking at some flowers in a garden, then run in front of you with no
warning, about 2 feet in front of you. Can I get you done for dangerous
driving?

No.

You won't be able to do anything at all.

Very funny. Now could a nearby cop do you for dangerous driving?

--
Confucius say: "Foolish man give wife grand piano. Wise man give wife upright organ."

On 26/04/2015 15:46, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 15:39:12 +0100, JNugent
wrote:

On 26/04/2015 15:35, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:

The Medway Handyman wrote:
On 26/04/2015 14:01, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 12:24:49 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:
On 26/04/2015 12:01, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
On Sun, 26 Apr 2015 11:11:58 +0100, The Medway Handyman
wrote:
On 25/04/2015 18:44, Tough Guy no. 1265 wrote:
Tarcap wrote:

Fairly normal behaviour for cyclist, perhaps?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...chihuahua.html


The first comment on the page says it all: "Did the bike run over
the 'dog' or the 'dog' run under the bike? Was the animal on a
lead
or just dashing around like a headless chicken? Too many
unknowns."

I severely doubt a cyclist crashed into a dog without seeing
it. I
would suggest the dog ran under the bike. A lot of dogs do that
when I'm cycling, but the owners usually say sorry and try to
control
the dog before it gets too close. The above dog owner clearly
did not.

Typical cyclist response.

Which one was the vehicle?
I'll give you a clue.
a) the one with the wheels.
b) the one with the paws.

Irrelevant. If a dog or person runs in front of your car and dies,
it's not automatically your fault. Someone could very easily wait
until a car was 2 feet from them and leap in front of it and there's
no way it could stop.

Except that the idiot cyclist had 395 acres of open space and still
managed to run over a small dog.

He could have simply been cycling along the path, and the dog
walker on
the other side of it, then the dog stupidly ran in front of the bike.

Then someone in control of a vehicle should have used observation and
anticipation skills.

It's called hazard awareness and is part of the driving test. Shame
cyclists don't have to pass a test.

Tell you what. Drive along in a built up area at the correct law
abiding speed, and I'll stand on the pavement minding my own business,
looking at some flowers in a garden, then run in front of you with no
warning, about 2 feet in front of you. Can I get you done for dangerous
driving?

No.

You won't be able to do anything at all.

Very funny. Now could a nearby cop do you for dangerous driving?

What? Sitting at this computer in the spare bedroom?

What are you on?