Cyclists are a menace!

"johnwright" ""john\"@no spam here.com" wrote

[anip]

This sort of thing has gone on for many years. What was it the
judge in the Lady Chatterley case said (in 1962!) "I would not let
my servant read this book" or something like.

Wasn't it a member of the House of Lords, who said that he wouldn't
mind his daughter reading the book, but he certainly wouldn't want
his gamekeeper to see it

Jeremy Parker

Jeremy Parker wrote:
"johnwright" ""john\"@no spam here.com" wrote

[anip]

This sort of thing has gone on for many years. What was it the
judge in the Lady Chatterley case said (in 1962!) "I would not let
my servant read this book" or something like.

Wasn't it a member of the House of Lords, who said that he wouldn't
mind his daughter reading the book, but he certainly wouldn't want
his gamekeeper to see it

Jeremy Parker


If he had, it would have been his wife, not his daughter. Showing that
you have never read it.

On 20 Dec, 12:09, johnwright ""john\"@no spam here.com" wrote:
BrianW wrote:
Reminds me of a prog I listened to recently on Radio 4 about the
introduction Clause 28 into the Local Government Act, back in the 80s,
which banned the "promotion" of homosexual lifestyles. *Apparently one
of the driving forces behind it was some Tory peer who kept going on
about pro-gay propaganda being distributed in schools. *Whenever asked
for proof, she always said "I'll release it in due course". *She never
did, of course. *When interviewed on the programme, she admitted that
she hadn't actually *seen* any of the propaganda in question, but had
been told about it by "concerned parents". *Hmmm.

This sort of thing has gone on for many years. What was it the judge in
the Lady Chatterley case said (in 1962!) "I would not let my servant
read this book" or something like.

It was more the reliance on hearsay in law-making that worried me,
than anything else.

David Hansen wrote:
On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 12:09:05 +0000 someone who may be johnwright
""john\"@no spam here.com" wrote this:-

This sort of thing has gone on for many years. What was it the judge in
the Lady Chatterley case said (in 1962!) "I would not let my servant
read this book" or something like.

The actor, they prefer the word barrister, for the government side.
His words were something like, "is this the sort of book you would
want your wife or servant to read?" These words seem to have played
a fair part in the government losing the case.

Thanks for that.

--

I'm not apathetic... I just don't give a sh** anymore

?John Wright

Marc wrote:
Jeremy Parker wrote:
"johnwright" ""john\"@no spam here.com" wrote

[anip]

This sort of thing has gone on for many years. What was it the judge
in the Lady Chatterley case said (in 1962!) "I would not let my
servant read this book" or something like.

Wasn't it a member of the House of Lords, who said that he wouldn't
mind his daughter reading the book, but he certainly wouldn't want his
gamekeeper to see it

Jeremy Parker

If he had, it would have been his wife, not his daughter. Showing that
you have never read it.

It's a lovely tale. Someone certainly *ought* to have said exactly that.

Marc wrote:
Jeremy Parker wrote:
"johnwright" ""john\"@no spam here.com" wrote

[anip]

This sort of thing has gone on for many years. What was it the judge
in the Lady Chatterley case said (in 1962!) "I would not let my
servant read this book" or something like.

Wasn't it a member of the House of Lords, who said that he wouldn't
mind his daughter reading the book, but he certainly wouldn't want his
gamekeeper to see it

Jeremy Parker

If he had, it would have been his wife, not his daughter. Showing that
you have never read it.

The book or the judgement?

--

I'm not apathetic... I just don't give a sh** anymore

?John Wright

johnwright wrote:
Marc wrote:
Jeremy Parker wrote:
"johnwright" ""john\"@no spam here.com" wrote

[anip]

This sort of thing has gone on for many years. What was it the judge
in the Lady Chatterley case said (in 1962!) "I would not let my
servant read this book" or something like.

Wasn't it a member of the House of Lords, who said that he wouldn't
mind his daughter reading the book, but he certainly wouldn't want
his gamekeeper to see it

Jeremy Parker

If he had, it would have been his wife, not his daughter. Showing that
you have never read it.

The book or the judgement?

Either by the sound of it.

On Tue, 08 Dec 2009 22:58:50 +0000, Tom Crispin
wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/ygke5dt

==========Quote==========
Angela Harvey, chairman of Westminster's scrutiny committee, which put
together the proposal, said: “We're always getting little old ladies
who are knocked down and abused by a cyclist, who leave them on the
ground as they ride away."
==========/Quote==========

http://tinyurl.com/ygd27z9

==========Quote==========
“So many people are frustrated with it,” said Angela Harvey, chairman
of Westminster’s scrutiny committee, which is behind the proposal.
“We’re always getting little old ladies who are knocked down and
abused by a cyclist, who leaves them on the ground as they ride away.”
==========/Quote==========

I wonder what the daily toll of little old ladies knocked down and
abused by cyclists is. I have sent Cllr Harvey the following email:

==========Quote==========
Dear Cllr Harvey,

I am very concerned about the plight of little old ladies in
Westminster.

Could you please let me know the daily toll of little old ladies being
knocked over, abused and left by cyclists?

Kind regards,
Tom Crispin
==========/Quote==========

I had no reply from Angela Harvey myself, but a friend with more
tenacity than I had this reply. Cllr Harvey appears to have been
mis-conflated, or has she mis-conflated?

==========Quote==========
Thank you for contacting me regarding comments attributed to me in the
press. The quote you've mentioned "We're always getting little old
ladies who are knocked down and abused by a cyclist, who leaves them
on the ground as they ride away" is a mis-conflation of a number of
comments made when relating incidents described by Westminster
residents.

The Built Environment Policy and Scrutiny Committee fully support
increasing the number of cyclists in Westminster; I'm a cyclist
myself. However the Committee's major objective is that the roads
should be safe for all road users, cyclists, pedestrians and motorists
alike, and that is through the persistent application of the Highway
Code. A more accurate picture of the conclusions of the Committee was
included in the Council's own press release (attached).

Our comments reflect the concerns of Westminster residents. The
regularity with which this problem has been brought to the attention
of Councillors led the Committee to consider it necessary to
scrutinise the problem of poor cyclist behaviour. Councillors and
Amenity Societies have heard from a number of residents who have been
injured by inconsiderate cyclists, as well as many more near misses,
abusive language and other unhelpful practices. This is corroborated
by written and oral evidence received by the Committee, available on
the Westminster City Council website (Agenda Item 4, esp. Appendix 1).
You will see the London Cycling Campaign gave evidence at the meeting
and fully support and promote cyclists adherence to the Highway Code.
The minutes of that meeting will be posted on the website in due
course.

It is fully accepted that there is widespread underreporting. This may
be due, at least in part, to the procedural difficulties associated
with formally reporting incidents and low confidence that informing
the relevant authorities will lead to a useful result. It can be very
frustrating to wait a long time in a police station to report an
incident which is unlikely to be resolved. That is why police
enforcement of the Highway Code, and TfL's public awareness campaign
are so key. The high level of media and public interest in the whole
subject underpins our belief that action must be taken now.

Yours sincerely,


Cllr Angela Harvey
==========/Quote==========

On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 17:04:38 +0000, Marc
wrote:

Jeremy Parker wrote:
"johnwright" ""john\"@no spam here.com" wrote

[anip]

This sort of thing has gone on for many years. What was it the
judge in the Lady Chatterley case said (in 1962!) "I would not let
my servant read this book" or something like.

Wasn't it a member of the House of Lords, who said that he wouldn't
mind his daughter reading the book, but he certainly wouldn't want
his gamekeeper to see it

Jeremy Parker


If he had, it would have been his wife, not his daughter. Showing that
you have never read it.


Relevance? : nil.

Believed opportunity to demonstrate being full of own importance? :
taken.

Confirmation of ****wittedness?: 100%

--
Many cyclists are proving the need for registration by their contempt for the Highway Code and laws.

The answer:
All cyclists over 16 to take compulsory test, have compulsory insurance, and be registered.
Registration number to be clearly visible on the back of mandatory hi-viz vest.
Habitual law breakers' cycles confiscated and crushed.
(With thanks to KeithT for the idea)