|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Police hunt rapist on a bike
On 16/04/2019 21:08, MrCheerful wrote:
The rapist arrived and made off on a bike, and the victim is a cyclist. I realise these things are difficult for any cyclist to understand, but that makes them both cyclists in the minds of any normal human being, oh, wait a minute...I see the problem. Then please explain why the perpetrators of this crime aren't called motorists: https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/re...ading-15980797 I realise it is a struggle for people like you and Nugent but have a stab at it. |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Police hunt rapist on a bike
On 16/04/2019 20:02, TMS320 wrote:
On 16/04/2019 17:50, Simon Jester wrote: If I drive through a red traffic light in my car, which class of road users has broken the law? A: Pedestrian B: Cyclist C: Motorist D: Train Passenger E: Golfer No mention of motorists he- https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/re...ading-15980797 "The 20-year-old man was walking in Blenheim Road when three offenders got out of a car parked at the side of the road and walked towards him." Had they ALL been driving? In fact, had ANY of them been driving? If your attempt at an answer to either question is a tentaive "Yes", please explain how you came to your conclusion. https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/re...t-run-15995656 "The 35-year-old man, from Staines, died at the scene after he was involved in a collision with a vehicle... Officers believe the vehicle failed to stop..." What do you find difficult to comprehend in that? |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Police hunt rapist on a bike
On 16/04/2019 12:06, TMS320 wrote:
On 16/04/2019 11:35, JNugent wrote: On 16/04/2019 08:45, TMS320 wrote: On 16/04/2019 03:14, JNugent wrote: On 15/04/2019 22:03, Simon Jester wrote On Monday, April 15, 2019 at 9:05:11 PM UTC+1, MrCheerful wrote: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...shire-47939192 So, 'Woman cyclist raped by pedestrian' would be more acurate. How? The headline is: "Woman raped in Peterborough by passing cyclist". It does but is plainly wrong unless you can describe a way that makes "rape by passing cyclist" technically possible. In what way is it not possible? I was asking you to suggest how it could be technically possible. It's possible, perhaps, to perform the act while cycling but I have little doubt that it would require the lady concerned to be cooperative. Let's just say that I won't be searching out dodgy sites to find examples. If you disagree with the analysis, perhaps you have? Unless his bike, his cycling and the fact that he is a cyclist is - in your view at least, and that of Jester - irrelevant, whilst the fact that the rapist cyclist's victim is a cyclist is not irrelevant? Got it. You might both want to think about honing your skills in logic. That retort usually follows a lack of ability on your part. In the meantime, let's all hope that this personÂ* is caught and brought to justice. I have corrected your sentence. Well, you certainly amended it. All we really know about him, though, is that he is a cyclist. And male. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Police hunt rapist on a bike
On 17/04/2019 00:27, JNugent wrote:
On 16/04/2019 12:06, TMS320 wrote: On 16/04/2019 11:35, JNugent wrote: On 16/04/2019 08:45, TMS320 wrote: On 16/04/2019 03:14, JNugent wrote: On 15/04/2019 22:03, Simon Jester wrote On Monday, April 15, 2019 at 9:05:11 PM UTC+1, MrCheerful wrote: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-englan...shire-47939192 So, 'Woman cyclist raped by pedestrian' would be more acurate. How? The headline is: "Woman raped in Peterborough by passing cyclist". It does but is plainly wrong unless you can describe a way that makes "rape by passing cyclist" technically possible. In what way is it not possible? I was asking you to suggest how it could be technically possible. It's possible, perhaps, to perform the act while cycling but I have little doubt that it would require the lady concerned to be cooperative. Let's just say that I won't be searching out dodgy sites to find examples. If you disagree with the analysis, perhaps you have? Unless his bike, his cycling and the fact that he is a cyclist is - in your view at least, and that of Jester - irrelevant, whilst the fact that the rapist cyclist's victim is a cyclist is not irrelevant? Got it. You might both want to think about honing your skills in logic. That retort usually follows a lack of ability on your part. In the meantime, let's all hope that this personÂ* is caught and brought to justice. I have corrected your sentence. Well, you certainly amended it. All we really know about him, though, is that he is a cyclist. And male. No, no! He is a pedestrian, so there is no need to look at cyclists in an attempt to identify him. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Police hunt rapist on a bike
On 17/04/2019 00:25, JNugent wrote:
On 16/04/2019 20:02, TMS320 wrote: On 16/04/2019 17:50, Simon Jester wrote: If I drive through a red traffic light in my car, which class of road users has broken the law? A: Pedestrian B: Cyclist C: Motorist D: Train Passenger E: Golfer No mention of motorists he- https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/re...ading-15980797 "The 20-year-old man was walking in Blenheim Road when three offenders got out of a car parked at the side of the road and walked towards him." Had they ALL been driving? In fact, had ANY of them been driving? If your attempt at an answer to either question is a tentaive "Yes", please explain how you came to your conclusion. Unless they had found an abandoned car to camp in, it is an obvious yes. https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/re...t-run-15995656 "The 35-year-old man, from Staines, died at the scene after he was involved in a collision with a vehicle... Officers believe the vehicle failed to stop..." What do you find difficult to comprehend in that? What do you find difficult? |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Police hunt rapist on a bike
On 17/04/2019 09:23, TMS320 wrote:
On 17/04/2019 00:25, JNugent wrote: On 16/04/2019 20:02, TMS320 wrote: On 16/04/2019 17:50, Simon Jester wrote: If I drive through a red traffic light in my car, which class of road users has broken the law? A: Pedestrian B: Cyclist C: Motorist D: Train Passenger E: Golfer No mention of motorists he- https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/re...ading-15980797 "The 20-year-old man was walking in Blenheim Road when three offenders got out of a car parked at the side of the road and walked towards him." Had they ALL been driving? In fact, had ANY of them been driving? If your attempt at an answer to either question is a tentaive "Yes", please explain how you came to your conclusion. Unless they had found an abandoned car to camp in, it is an obvious yes. Is it? You haven't explained your (heh!) "reasoning" for that. So... how do you know (that's "know" rather than "suggest" or "blindly believe") that they weren't all passive passengers who had never either learned or even attempted to drive? Do you even know which doors of the parked car they each emerged from? https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/re...t-run-15995656 "The 35-year-old man, from Staines, died at the scene after he was Â*involved in a collision with a vehicle... Officers believe the vehicle failed to stop..." What do you find difficult to comprehend in that? What do you find difficult? Nothing in this thread so far, except for your "reasoning". Of course, I'm not the one trying to call anyone a "motorist" when there's no evidence they have ever sat behind the wheel of a motor vehicle. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Police hunt rapist on a bike
On 17/04/2019 10:24, JNugent wrote:
On 17/04/2019 09:23, TMS320 wrote: On 17/04/2019 00:25, JNugent wrote: On 16/04/2019 20:02, TMS320 wrote: On 16/04/2019 17:50, Simon Jester wrote: If I drive through a red traffic light in my car, which class of road users has broken the law? A: Pedestrian B: Cyclist C: Motorist D: Train Passenger E: Golfer No mention of motorists he- https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/re...ading-15980797 "The 20-year-old man was walking in Blenheim Road when three offenders got out of a car parked at the side of the road and walked towards him." Had they ALL been driving? In fact, had ANY of them been driving? If your attempt at an answer to either question is a tentaive "Yes", please explain how you came to your conclusion. Unless they had found an abandoned car to camp in, it is an obvious yes. Is it? You haven't explained your (heh!) "reasoning" for that. So... how do you know (that's "know" rather than "suggest" or "blindly believe") that they weren't all passive passengers who had never either learned or even attempted to drive? Do you even know which doors of the parked car they each emerged from? Of course! There must have been five of them. The driver was there under threat and the fifth was there to make that when the three got out the driver didn't do a runner. So obvious that it reinforces how daft you are. https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/re...t-run-15995656 "The 35-year-old man, from Staines, died at the scene after he was Â*involved in a collision with a vehicle... Officers believe the vehicle failed to stop..." What do you find difficult to comprehend in that? What do you find difficult? Nothing in this thread so far, except for your "reasoning". Of course, I'm not the one trying to call anyone a "motorist" when there's no evidence they have ever sat behind the wheel of a motor vehicle. Obviously, the pedestrian was run over by a self driving car. |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Police hunt rapist on a bike
On 17/04/2019 19:03, TMS320 wrote:
On 17/04/2019 10:24, JNugent wrote: On 17/04/2019 09:23, TMS320 wrote: On 17/04/2019 00:25, JNugent wrote: On 16/04/2019 20:02, TMS320 wrote: On 16/04/2019 17:50, Simon Jester wrote: If I drive through a red traffic light in my car, which class of road users has broken the law? A: Pedestrian B: Cyclist C: Motorist D: Train Passenger E: Golfer No mention of motorists he- https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/re...ading-15980797 "The 20-year-old man was walking in Blenheim Road when three offenders got out of a car parked at the side of the road and walked towards him." Had they ALL been driving? In fact, had ANY of them been driving? If your attempt at an answer to either question is a tentaive "Yes", please explain how you came to your conclusion. Unless they had found an abandoned car to camp in, it is an obvious yes. Is it? You haven't explained your (heh!) "reasoning" for that. So... how do you know (that's "know" rather than "suggest" or "blindly believe") that they weren't all passive passengers who had never either learned or even attempted to drive? Do you even know which doors of the parked car they each emerged from? Of course! There must have been five of them. Why? The driver was there under threat and the fifth was there to make that when the three got out the driver didn't do a runner. What evidence do you have (or imagine you have) that any of the THREE was the driver of the car? Go on... So obvious that it reinforces how daft you are. Oh dear... can't think of a sensible answer, can you? https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/re...t-run-15995656 "The 35-year-old man, from Staines, died at the scene after he was Â*involved in a collision with a vehicle... Officers believe the vehicle failed to stop..." What do you find difficult to comprehend in that? What do you find difficult? Nothing in this thread so far, except for your "reasoning". Of course, I'm not the one trying to call anyone a "motorist" when there's no evidence they have ever sat behind the wheel of a motor vehicle. Obviously, the pedestrian was run over by a self driving car. What do you find difficult in the report as it is written? Why was it worthy of comment? |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Police hunt rapist on a bike
On 18/04/2019 02:59, JNugent wrote:
On 17/04/2019 19:03, TMS320 wrote: On 17/04/2019 10:24, JNugent wrote: On 17/04/2019 09:23, TMS320 wrote: On 17/04/2019 00:25, JNugent wrote: On 16/04/2019 20:02, TMS320 wrote: On 16/04/2019 17:50, Simon Jester wrote: If I drive through a red traffic light in my car, which class of road users has broken the law? A: Pedestrian B: Cyclist C: Motorist D: Train Passenger E: Golfer No mention of motorists he- https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/re...ading-15980797 "The 20-year-old man was walking in Blenheim Road when three offenders got out of a car parked at the side of the road and walked towards him." Had they ALL been driving? In fact, had ANY of them been driving? If your attempt at an answer to either question is a tentaive "Yes", please explain how you came to your conclusion. Unless they had found an abandoned car to camp in, it is an obvious yes. Is it? You haven't explained your (heh!) "reasoning" for that. So... how do you know (that's "know" rather than "suggest" or "blindly believe") that they weren't all passive passengers who had never either learned or even attempted to drive? Do you even know which doors of the parked car they each emerged from? Of course! There must have been five of them. Why? The driver was there under threat and the fifth was there to make that when the three got out the driver didn't do a runner. What evidence do you have (or imagine you have) that any of the THREE was the driver of the car? Go on... Well, you have made it very obvious you can't read. So obvious that it reinforces how daft you are. Oh dear... can't think of a sensible answer, can you? I will leave you to describe a possible scenario that leaves an innocent driver. https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/re...t-run-15995656 "The 35-year-old man, from Staines, died at the scene after he was involved in a collision with a vehicle... Officers believe the vehicle failed to stop..." What do you find difficult to comprehend in that? What do you find difficult? Nothing in this thread so far, except for your "reasoning". Of course, I'm not the one trying to call anyone a "motorist" when there's no evidence they have ever sat behind the wheel of a motor vehicle. Obviously, the pedestrian was run over by a self driving car. What do you find difficult in the report as it is written? Why do you struggle to understand that cars don't do any of the things described (yet)? Why was it worthy of comment? I was replying to Simon. |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Police hunt rapist on a bike
On 18/04/2019 09:29, TMS320 wrote:
On 18/04/2019 02:59, JNugent wrote: On 17/04/2019 19:03, TMS320 wrote: On 17/04/2019 10:24, JNugent wrote: On 17/04/2019 09:23, TMS320 wrote: On 17/04/2019 00:25, JNugent wrote: On 16/04/2019 20:02, TMS320 wrote: On 16/04/2019 17:50, Simon Jester wrote: If I drive through a red traffic light in my car, which class of road users has broken the law? A: Pedestrian B: Cyclist C: Motorist D: Train Passenger E: Golfer No mention of motorists he- https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/re...ading-15980797 "The 20-year-old man was walking in Blenheim Road when three offenders got out of a car parked at the side of the road and walked towards him." Had they ALL been driving? In fact, had ANY of them been driving? If your attempt at an answer to either question is a tentaive "Yes", please explain how you came to your conclusion. Unless they had found an abandoned car to camp in, it is an obvious yes. Is it? You haven't explained your (heh!) "reasoning" for that. So... how do you know (that's "know" rather than "suggest" or "blindly believe") that they weren't all passive passengers who had never either learned or even attempted to drive? Do you even know which doors of the parked car they each emerged from? Of course! There must have been five of them. Why? The driver was there under threat and the fifth was there to make that when the three got out the driver didn't do a runner. What evidence do you have (or imagine you have) that any of the THREE Â*was the driver of the car? Go on... Well, you have made it very obvious you can't read. Hardly.What I am doing is piointing out your lack of logic and your jumping to conclusions. There is nothing in the sentence fragment "...three offenders got out of a car parked at the side of the road.." which either says or means that one of them had been driving. So obvious that it reinforces how daft you are. Oh dear... can't think of a sensible answer, can you? I will leave you to describe a possible scenario that leaves an innocent driver. The driver - whether innocent or not (that doesn't matter) was not one of the three who got out of the car? If the string had read "...three offenders got off a bus stopped at the side of the road...", would you still insist that one of them was the driver? https://www.getreading.co.uk/news/re...t-run-15995656 "The 35-year-old man, from Staines, died at the scene after he was involved in a collision with a vehicle... Officers believe the vehicle failed to stop..." What do you find difficult to comprehend in that? What do you find difficult? Nothing in this thread so far, except for your "reasoning". Of course, I'm not the one trying to call anyone a "motorist" when there's no evidence they have ever sat behind the wheel of a motor vehicle. Obviously, the pedestrian was run over by a self driving car. What do you find difficult in the report as it is written? Why do you struggle to understand that cars don't do any of the things described (yet)? Why was it worthy of comment? I was replying to Simon. Fair enough. In that case you didn't have to make sense. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Police hunt gun toting cyclist | MrCheerful | UK | 0 | February 17th 17 02:45 PM |
Police hunt another thieving cyclist | MrCheerful | UK | 29 | September 10th 16 04:27 PM |
Police on the hunt for yet another hit and run scum | Alycidon | UK | 9 | July 22nd 16 10:33 AM |
Police hunt hit and run cyclist. | Mrcheerful | UK | 2 | February 18th 14 08:48 PM |
"Police hunt bike riding flasher" | [email protected] | UK | 3 | May 9th 08 05:13 PM |