Cyclists ignoring signs get a ticket

On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 15:47:59 -0000, JNugent wrote:

On 13/11/2011 09:54, Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 16:34:46 -0000, Mr. Benn wrote:

"Simon Weaseltemper" wrote in message
...

On 12/11/2011 15:13, Mrcheerful wrote:
http://road.cc/content/news/25728-ca...eration-passer




This is actually quite comical.

“Police in Cambridge issued ten fixed penalty notices last week in a
crackdown against cyclists riding the wrong way up a one-way street last
Thursday, but were unaware that further up the street, a woman was
warning other bike riders of the operation.�

“police say that they would have arrested the woman for obstruction had
they known what she was doing.�(!)

So, someone is telling cyclists that if they ride up a one-way street
they are liable to get a ticket, and the police want to arrest her. This
sounds totally bizarre. It means stopping someone from committing an
offence, is an offence, because the police cannot issue a ticket.

Talk about the police having their bubble burst.

Drivers do this all the time when there is a speed trap, drivers coming
the other way flash their lights ferociously as a warning to others.
What a bunch of ******s the police have become.
=====================================

Why, because they are enforcing the law?

One of the nonsensical laws.

Say I see someone about to commit a murder, and stop them from doing so,
would the police arrest me?

If it's wrong to stop someone from speeding (and being caught for it), then
the answer is clearly "Yes".

You will have obstructed the police.

Let me get this straight, you think I would be arrested for preventing a murder? Even pigs aren't that stupid.

--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

Basic Flying Rules: "Try to stay in the middle of the air. Do not go near the edges of it. The edges of the air can be recognized by the appearance of ground, buildings, sea, trees and interstellar space. It is much more difficult to fly there."

On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 16:11:20 -0000, Simon Mason wrote:

On Nov 13, 1:08 pm, "Lieutenant Scott" wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 12:43:02 -0000, Simon Mason wrote:
On Nov 13, 12:31 pm, "Lieutenant Scott" wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 12:13:54 -0000, Simon Mason wrote:
On Nov 13, 11:41 am, "Lieutenant Scott" wrote:

- Show quoted text -

No you are helping a criminal escape punishment.

By preventing the crime, not moving it. Twit. READ what I write.

The police will prevent the crime of speeding for good by nabbing them
enough times to get them off the road where they can do the public no
harm. Warning them is obstruction, pure and simple.

No, they will nab them enough times to make them buy a satnav with a speed camera database - or at least that's what happened to me.

If you drive in France with it turned on, you will get fined for that.

I have done, and they stole it. But that was a radar detector only. A satnav is for navigation you see....


I have the speed camera option turned on when I am abroad, but I tend
to avoid France anyway - too predictable and boring.

The traffic? The scenery? The people?


--
http://petersparrots.com
http://petersphotos.com

In Today's Market Activity, Helium was up. Feathers were down. Paper was stationary. Fluorescent tubing was dimmed in light trading. Knives were up sharply. Cows steered into a bull market. Pencils lost a few points. Hiking equipment was trailing. Elevators rose, while escalators continued their slow decline. Weights were up in heavy trading. Light switches were off. Mining equipment hit rock bottom. Diapers remain unchanged. Shipping lines stayed at an even keel. The market for raisins dried up. Coca Cola fizzled. Caterpillar stock inched up a bit. Sun peaked at midday. Balloon prices were inflated. And, Scott Tissue touched a new bottom. Invest wisely!

On Nov 16, 1:07*am, "Lieutenant Scott" wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 16:11:20 -0000, Simon Mason wrote:
On Nov 13, 1:08 pm, "Lieutenant Scott" wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 12:43:02 -0000, Simon Mason wrote:
On Nov 13, 12:31 pm, "Lieutenant Scott" wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 12:13:54 -0000, Simon Mason wrote:
On Nov 13, 11:41 am, "Lieutenant Scott" wrote:

- Show quoted text -

No you are helping a criminal escape punishment.

By preventing the crime, not moving it. *Twit. *READ what I write.

The police will prevent the crime of speeding for good by nabbing them
enough times to get them off the road where they can do the public no
harm. Warning them is obstruction, pure and simple.

No, they will nab them enough times to make them buy a satnav with a speed camera database - or at least that's what happened to me.

If you drive in France with it turned on, you will get fined for that.

On 16/11/2011 01:06, Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 15:47:59 -0000, JNugent wrote:

On 13/11/2011 09:54, Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Sat, 12 Nov 2011 16:34:46 -0000, Mr. Benn
wrote:

"Simon Weaseltemper" wrote in message
...

On 12/11/2011 15:13, Mrcheerful wrote:
http://road.cc/content/news/25728-ca...eration-passer





This is actually quite comical.

“Police in Cambridge issued ten fixed penalty notices last week in a
crackdown against cyclists riding the wrong way up a one-way street last
Thursday, but were unaware that further up the street, a woman was
warning other bike riders of the operation.�

“police say that they would have arrested the woman for obstruction had
they known what she was doing.�(!)

So, someone is telling cyclists that if they ride up a one-way street
they are liable to get a ticket, and the police want to arrest her. This
sounds totally bizarre. It means stopping someone from committing an
offence, is an offence, because the police cannot issue a ticket.

Talk about the police having their bubble burst.

Drivers do this all the time when there is a speed trap, drivers coming
the other way flash their lights ferociously as a warning to others.
What a bunch of ******s the police have become.
=====================================

Why, because they are enforcing the law?

One of the nonsensical laws.

Say I see someone about to commit a murder, and stop them from doing so,
would the police arrest me?

If it's wrong to stop someone from speeding (and being caught for it), then
the answer is clearly "Yes".

You will have obstructed the police.

Let me get this straight, you think I would be arrested for preventing a
murder? Even pigs aren't that stupid.

You *did* see the word "if", didn't you?

On 16/11/2011 02:44, Simon Mason wrote:
On Nov 16, 1:07 am, "Lieutenant wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 16:11:20 -0000, Simon wrote:
On Nov 13, 1:08 pm, "Lieutenant wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 12:43:02 -0000, Simon wrote:
On Nov 13, 12:31 pm, "Lieutenant wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 12:13:54 -0000, Simon wrote:
On Nov 13, 11:41 am, "Lieutenant wrote:

- Show quoted text -

No you are helping a criminal escape punishment.

By preventing the crime, not moving it. Twit. READ what I write.

The police will prevent the crime of speeding for good by nabbing them
enough times to get them off the road where they can do the public no
harm. Warning them is obstruction, pure and simple.

No, they will nab them enough times to make them buy a satnav with a speed camera database - or at least that's what happened to me.

If you drive in France with it turned on, you will get fined for that.

I have done, and they stole it. But that was a radar detector only. A satnav is for navigation you see....

I have the speed camera option turned on when I am abroad, but I tend
to avoid France anyway - too predictable and boring.

The traffic? The scenery? The people?



Going to France is too common,

And there is no ferry to it from Hull.

my favourite country is Romania.
It has all the beauty of France but has not been spoiled by excessive
tourism.

Despite that, you might still be able to get Hofmeister and a vindaloo there.

On 16/11/2011 01:07, Lieutenant Scott wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 16:11:20 -0000, Simon Mason wrote:
.....


I have the speed camera option turned on when I am abroad, but I tend
to avoid France anyway - too predictable and boring.

The traffic? The scenery? The people?


No curry or cheap lager.

--
Dave - Cyclists VOR. "Many people barely recognise the bicycle as a
legitimate mode of transport; it is either a toy for children or a
vehicle fit only for the poor and/or strange," Dave Horton - Lancaster
University

On Nov 16, 1:07*am, "Lieutenant Scott" wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 16:11:20 -0000, Simon Mason wrote:
On Nov 13, 1:08 pm, "Lieutenant Scott" wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 12:43:02 -0000, Simon Mason wrote:
On Nov 13, 12:31 pm, "Lieutenant Scott" wrote:
On Sun, 13 Nov 2011 12:13:54 -0000, Simon Mason wrote:
On Nov 13, 11:41 am, "Lieutenant Scott" wrote:

- Show quoted text -

No you are helping a criminal escape punishment.

By preventing the crime, not moving it. *Twit. *READ what I write.

The police will prevent the crime of speeding for good by nabbing them
enough times to get them off the road where they can do the public no
harm. Warning them is obstruction, pure and simple.

No, they will nab them enough times to make them buy a satnav with a speed camera database - or at least that's what happened to me.

If you drive in France with it turned on, you will get fined for that.

On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 01:08:09 +0000 (UTC), Peter Keller
wrote:

On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 13:22:41 +0000, Judith wrote:



Please do not believe the ****e which Mason posts.

I am not taking any ****ing orders from ****ing you about whatever
****ing thing I will ****ing believe in from whatever ****ing source.


I forget that English is not your first language:


OED

Please, adv :
Used in polite request

So "please do not" is not actually a "****ing order"

On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 01:07:45 -0000, "Lieutenant Scott" wrote:

snip


I have the speed camera option turned on when I am abroad, but I tend
to avoid France anyway - too predictable and boring.

The traffic? The scenery? The people?


It will be the restaurants and dining out.

Mason likes a nice Vindaloo and a large larger when he is on holiday - makes
him think of home. Can't stand foreign muck.

On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 18:25:45 +0000, Judith wrote:

On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 01:08:09 +0000 (UTC), Peter Keller
wrote:

On Mon, 14 Nov 2011 13:22:41 +0000, Judith wrote:



Please do not believe the ****e which Mason posts.

I am not taking any ****ing orders from ****ing you about whatever
****ing thing I will ****ing believe in from whatever ****ing source.


I forget that English is not your first language:


OED

Please, adv :
Used in polite request

So "please do not" is not actually a "****ing order"

It bloody well is, especially coming from ****ing you!
I assess posts, sayings, opinions etc independently of pressure from
spoilsport powerhungry feminazis.



--
An oft-repeated lie is still a lie.