Pavement cyclist mows down OAP

Surely this was attempted murder by the old lady?

http://www.haverhillecho.co.uk/news/...hill-1-6100023

"Mrcheerful" wrote in message ...

Surely this was attempted murder by the old lady?

http://www.haverhillecho.co.uk/news/...hill-1-6100023

Pedestrians should attack pavement psycholists with "D" locks (in
self-defence, of course, as per Phil Lee's declaration)

On Sun, 8 Jun 2014 13:07:25 +0100, "Tarcap"
wrote:



"Mrcheerful" wrote in message ...

Surely this was attempted murder by the old lady?

http://www.haverhillecho.co.uk/news/...hill-1-6100023

Pedestrians should attack pavement psycholists with "D" locks (in
self-defence, of course, as per Phil Lee's declaration)

I take this moment to remind all usenet posters in the uk (as opposed to
uk.* usenet posters) that recent changes to legislation, plus the
results from recent example cases, mean that posts such as the above may
be ill-advised.

I further remind that discovery of the real identity of a poster using
an isp in the uk, while complex and likely stressful, is nevertheless
doable by a layperson.

On 09/06/2014 10:23, The Todal wrote:
On Sun, 8 Jun 2014 13:07:25 +0100, "Tarcap"
wrote:



"Mrcheerful" wrote in message ...

Surely this was attempted murder by the old lady?

http://www.haverhillecho.co.uk/news/...hill-1-6100023

Pedestrians should attack pavement psycholists with "D" locks (in
self-defence, of course, as per Phil Lee's declaration)

I take this moment to remind all usenet posters in the uk (as opposed to
uk.* usenet posters) that recent changes to legislation, plus the
results from recent example cases, mean that posts such as the above may
be ill-advised.

I further remind that discovery of the real identity of a poster using
an isp in the uk, while complex and likely stressful, is nevertheless
doable by a layperson.

Ironic posts are ill-advised? Why?

On Mon, 09 Jun 2014 10:31:10 +0100, Nick wrote:

On 09/06/2014 10:23, The Todal wrote:
On Sun, 8 Jun 2014 13:07:25 +0100, "Tarcap"
wrote:



"Mrcheerful" wrote in message ...

Surely this was attempted murder by the old lady?

http://www.haverhillecho.co.uk/news/...hill-1-6100023

Pedestrians should attack pavement psycholists with "D" locks (in
self-defence, of course, as per Phil Lee's declaration)

I take this moment to remind all usenet posters in the uk (as opposed to
uk.* usenet posters) that recent changes to legislation, plus the
results from recent example cases, mean that posts such as the above may
be ill-advised.

I further remind that discovery of the real identity of a poster using
an isp in the uk, while complex and likely stressful, is nevertheless
doable by a layperson.

Ironic posts are ill-advised? Why?

The point is that someone may not see it as ironic, and they may well be
able to persuade others that they suffered as a result.

On 09/06/2014 10:39, The Todal wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jun 2014 10:31:10 +0100, Nick wrote:

Ironic posts are ill-advised? Why?

The point is that someone may not see it as ironic, and they may well be
able to persuade others that they suffered as a result.


No way. Jeremy Clarkson makes comments like that on TV.

It would be a pathetic country if freedom of speech were so curtailed.
Indeed I find the threatening nature of your post deeply offensive,
surely that means I can have you prosecuted under the malicious
communications act or such like.

On Mon, 09 Jun 2014 11:04:02 +0100, Nick wrote:

On 09/06/2014 10:39, The Todal wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jun 2014 10:31:10 +0100, Nick wrote:

Ironic posts are ill-advised? Why?

The point is that someone may not see it as ironic, and they may well be
able to persuade others that they suffered as a result.


No way. Jeremy Clarkson makes comments like that on TV.


"It was reported on 3 May, that the BBC had given Clarkson a final
warning, with the presenter accepting that he will be sacked if he makes
another offensive remark."

Q.E.D.

On 09/06/2014 11:25, The Todal wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jun 2014 11:04:02 +0100, Nick wrote:

On 09/06/2014 10:39, The Todal wrote:
On Mon, 09 Jun 2014 10:31:10 +0100, Nick wrote:

Ironic posts are ill-advised? Why?

The point is that someone may not see it as ironic, and they may well be
able to persuade others that they suffered as a result.


No way. Jeremy Clarkson makes comments like that on TV.


"It was reported on 3 May, that the BBC had given Clarkson a final
warning, with the presenter accepting that he will be sacked if he makes
another offensive remark."

Q.E.D.


That was for unbroadcast footage of him reciting a common nursery rhyme
from our childhood under his breath.

Q.E.D (pathetic country re freedom of speech)

I was actually thinking of when he said striking tube workers should be
shot.

Regardless there is a difference between losing a bbc job for poor taste
and a criminal offence which I suspect was your intended meaning.

On Mon, 09 Jun 2014 06:23:06 -0300, The Todal wrote:

On Sun, 8 Jun 2014 13:07:25 +0100, "Tarcap"
wrote:



"Mrcheerful" wrote in message ...

Surely this was attempted murder by the old lady?

http://www.haverhillecho.co.uk/news/...mounted-after-
cycling-accident-in-haverhill-1-6100023

Pedestrians should attack pavement psycholists with "D" locks (in
self-defence, of course, as per Phil Lee's declaration)

I take this moment to remind all usenet posters in the uk (as opposed to
uk.* usenet posters) that recent changes to legislation, plus the
results from recent example cases, mean that posts such as the above may
be ill-advised.

I further remind that discovery of the real identity of a poster using
an isp in the uk, while complex and likely stressful, is nevertheless
doable by a layperson.

And?

On Mon, 09 Jun 2014 06:39:28 -0300, The Todal wrote:

On Mon, 09 Jun 2014 10:31:10 +0100, Nick wrote:

On 09/06/2014 10:23, The Todal wrote:
On Sun, 8 Jun 2014 13:07:25 +0100, "Tarcap"
wrote:



"Mrcheerful" wrote in message
...

Surely this was attempted murder by the old lady?

http://www.haverhillecho.co.uk/news/...paign-mounted-
after-cycling-accident-in-haverhill-1-6100023

Pedestrians should attack pavement psycholists with "D" locks (in
self-defence, of course, as per Phil Lee's declaration)

I take this moment to remind all usenet posters in the uk (as opposed
to uk.* usenet posters) that recent changes to legislation, plus the
results from recent example cases, mean that posts such as the above
may be ill-advised.

I further remind that discovery of the real identity of a poster using
an isp in the uk, while complex and likely stressful, is nevertheless
doable by a layperson.

Ironic posts are ill-advised? Why?

The point is that someone may not see it as ironic, and they may well be
able to persuade others that they suffered as a result.

Oh diddums.