Perils od cycling late on a saturday
View Full Version : Perils od cycling late on a saturday
Pages :
[
1]
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
There I was cycling back from a pleasant 2 hour spin along
the local canal bank when I saw up ahead a group of teenage
neds. Complete in my cycling shorts, top and sunglasses, all
purchased from the recent sale at Lidl, I knew I had left
the start time too late as the canal bank is a drinking
place for the young ones, and this being Saturday and there
is a fair nearby they were out early. As I approached, I
thought, head down and keep going. They split to let me
past, excellent I thought, then OUCH, a large rock hit off
my back and another one flew over my shoulder narrowly
missing my head (no helmet). 7 against 1 with no one else in
sight. I am a 6'1" 16 stone police officer but I bit my lip
and kept on going to the sound of laughter.
Moral of the story: Start cycle early (especially on a
Saturday). Don't live in Glasgow.
p.s. wonder if they would have bothered with me if I was
just an ordinary guy with shorts and a t-shirt on?
Rory (with a bruised back and pride)
>p.s. wonder if they would have bothered with me if I was
> just an ordinary guy with shorts and a t-shirt on?
Probably. A p*x on them. One can but hope something happens
that means they can't breed...
Hope the bruises fade soon.
Cheers, helen s
--This is an invalid email address to avoid spam-- to get
correct one remove fame & fortune
h*$el*$$e*nd**$o$ts**i*$*$m*m$o*n*s@$*a$o*l.c**$om$
--Due to financial crisis the light at the end of the tunnel
is switched off--
On Sat, 15 May 2004 19:06:09 +0100, "Rodders"
<tellmeifyouneedmyemailaddress@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>There I was cycling back from a pleasant 2 hour spin along
>the local canal bank when I saw up ahead a group of teenage
>neds. Complete in my cycling shorts, top and sunglasses,
>all purchased from the recent sale at Lidl, I knew I had
>left the start time too late as the canal bank is a
>drinking place for the young ones, and this being Saturday
>and there is a fair nearby they were out early. As I
>approached, I thought, head down and keep going. They split
>to let me past, excellent I thought, then OUCH, a large
>rock hit off my back and another one flew over my shoulder
>narrowly missing my head (no helmet). 7 against 1 with no
>one else in sight. I am a 6'1" 16 stone police officer but
>I bit my lip and kept on going to the sound of laughter.
A *police officer*?
OK, so you weren't on duty but am I the only one that thinks
it a bit off that a policeman is happy turn the other cheek
to a 7 strong gang chucking rocks at people?
Still, if the police think attempted brainings are
acceptable behaviour these days then it goes someway to
explain why they also didn't give a **** when a car full of
neds stopped to shoot me with air pistols.
>Moral of the story: Start cycle early (especially on a
>Saturday). Don't live in Glasgow.
>
>p.s. wonder if they would have bothered with me if I was
> just an ordinary guy with shorts and a t-shirt on?
>
>Rory (with a bruised back and pride)
>OK, so you weren't on duty but am I the only one that
>thinks it a bit off that a policeman is happy turn the
>other cheek to a 7 strong gang chucking rocks at people?
He may not have been happy to do so. Off-duty, probably
without radio for recourse to back-up, I can understand why
a person alone would be reluctant to take on a 7-strong
gang. Mind you, it would have been useful if he had a mobile
phone with him to call up his work colleagues to come and
assist. Moral - always carry a mobile phone, then if you are
an off-duty plod, you may still be able to get your fellow
officers to come and assist.
Cheers, helen s
--This is an invalid email address to avoid spam-- to get
correct one remove fame & fortune
h*$el*$$e*nd**$o$ts**i*$*$m*m$o*n*s@$*a$o*l.c**$om$
--Due to financial crisis the light at the end of the tunnel
is switched off--
On Sat, 15 May 2004 19:57:44 +0100, "[Not Responding]"
<not_responding@dev.null.invalid> wrote:
>OK, so you weren't on duty but am I the only one that
>thinks it a bit off that a policeman is happy turn the
>other cheek to a 7 strong gang chucking rocks at people?
>
>Still, if the police think attempted brainings are
>acceptable behaviour these days then it goes someway to
>explain why they also didn't give a **** when a car full of
>neds stopped to shoot me with air pistols.
If your tongue isn't planted firmly in cheek then I guess
you *are* the only one. Copper or not, you do not
remonstrate with 7 other people. Turning the other cheek is
allowed when the alternative is being beaten to a pulp by 7
****-heads.
Your second paragraph, I agree, it is unacceptable for the
police not be interested. But I think it is very different
to the OP's example.
£0.02
--
Young Musician of the Year 2004 was a fiddle
Richard Bates wrote:
>
> Turning the other cheek is allowed when the alternative is
> being beaten to a pulp by 7 ****-heads.
>
Yebbut he didn't turn the other cheek, he turned his back
;-)
Tony
Rodders wrote:
> There I was cycling back from a pleasant 2 hour spin along
> the local canal bank when I saw up ahead a group of
> teenage neds. Complete in my cycling shorts, top and
> sunglasses, all purchased from the recent sale at Lidl, I
> knew I had left the start time too late as the canal bank
> is a drinking place for the young ones, and this being
> Saturday and there is a fair nearby they were out early.
> As I approached, I thought, head down and keep going. They
> split to let me past, excellent I thought, then OUCH, a
> large rock hit off my back and another one flew over my
> shoulder narrowly missing my head (no helmet). 7 against 1
> with no one else in sight. I am a 6'1" 16 stone police
> officer but I bit my lip and kept on going to the sound of
> laughter.
>
> Moral of the story: Start cycle early (especially on a
> Saturday). Don't live in Glasgow.
>
> p.s. wonder if they would have bothered with me if I was
> just an ordinary guy with shorts and a t-shirt on?
I've heard that the neds have a habit of attacking cyclists
in Glasgow, so at least it wasn't personal.
Rodders wrote:
> There I was cycling back from a pleasant 2 hour spin along
> the local canal bank when I saw up ahead a group of
> teenage neds. Complete in my cycling shorts, top and
> sunglasses, all purchased from the recent sale at Lidl, I
> knew I had left the start time too late as the canal bank
> is a drinking place for the young ones, and this being
> Saturday and there is a fair nearby they were out early.
> As I approached, I thought, head down and keep going. They
> split to let me past, excellent I thought, then OUCH, a
> large rock hit off my back and another one flew over my
> shoulder narrowly missing my head (no helmet). 7 against 1
> with no one else in sight. I am a 6'1" 16 stone police
> officer but I bit my lip and kept on going to the sound of
> laughter.
>
> Moral of the story: Start cycle early (especially on a
> Saturday). Don't live in Glasgow.
>
> p.s. wonder if they would have bothered with me if I was
> just an ordinary guy with shorts and a t-shirt on?
I've heard that the neds have a habit of attacking cyclists
in Glasgow, so at least it wasn't personal.
On Sat, 15 May 2004 19:57:44 +0100, "[Not Responding]"
<not_responding@dev.null.invalid> wrote:
>>They split to let me past, excellent I thought, then OUCH,
>>a large rock hit off my back and another one flew over my
>>shoulder narrowly missing my head (no helmet). 7 against 1
>>with no one else in sight. I am a 6'1" 16 stone police
>>officer but I bit my lip and kept on going to the sound of
>>laughter.
>
>A *police officer*?
>
>OK, so you weren't on duty but am I the only one that
>thinks it a bit off that a policeman is happy turn the
>other cheek to a 7 strong gang chucking rocks at people?
>
>Still, if the police think attempted brainings are
>acceptable behaviour these days then it goes someway to
>explain why they also didn't give a **** when a car full of
>neds stopped to shoot me with air pistols.
I almost replied to the original message but then decided
not to, now I've changed my mind again.
I disagree with you entirely, IMVHO he did exactly the right
thing. Reading his message gave me a reminder that I really
shouldn't tar all coppers with my single (admittedly
cynical) brush. It's good to know that there are police
officers around who don't treat every little incident as an
excuse to start wielding their "authority" around in a heavy
handed and egotistical manner. Biting your lip and turning
the other cheek in the way the OP did is a very difficult
thing to do. Particularly if you know you have the resources
available to "deal" with it (in whatever way that applies to
the individual). More power to his elbow I say.
I understand your point though, letting the little gits get
away with that sort of thing really isn't ideal, but think
about it, what could he have done? Turned around, gone back
and attempted to reason with them? Gone back and knocked the
crap out of 'em? Use his mobile to call in his on duty mates
then descended en masse and thrown them all in a cell for a
few hours?
Nothing the OP could have done would likely have had the
slightest positive effect on how these clowns behaved in the
future. Nothing.
The best hope is that they were simply teenagers being
the little bastards that teenagers often are. That they
have the right family and environment around them so that
with maturity and expanding horizons they realise there
are better things to do with their time than throw rocks
at people.
--
"Bob"
'The people have spoken, the bastards'
Email address is spam trapped. To reply directly remove
the beverage.
On Sat, 15 May 2004 19:57:44 +0100, "[Not Responding]"
<not_responding@dev.null.invalid> wrote:
>>They split to let me past, excellent I thought, then OUCH,
>>a large rock hit off my back and another one flew over my
>>shoulder narrowly missing my head (no helmet). 7 against 1
>>with no one else in sight. I am a 6'1" 16 stone police
>>officer but I bit my lip and kept on going to the sound of
>>laughter.
>
>A *police officer*?
>
>OK, so you weren't on duty but am I the only one that
>thinks it a bit off that a policeman is happy turn the
>other cheek to a 7 strong gang chucking rocks at people?
>
>Still, if the police think attempted brainings are
>acceptable behaviour these days then it goes someway to
>explain why they also didn't give a **** when a car full of
>neds stopped to shoot me with air pistols.
I almost replied to the original message but then decided
not to, now I've changed my mind again.
I disagree with you entirely, IMVHO he did exactly the right
thing. Reading his message gave me a reminder that I really
shouldn't tar all coppers with my single (admittedly
cynical) brush. It's good to know that there are police
officers around who don't treat every little incident as an
excuse to start wielding their "authority" around in a heavy
handed and egotistical manner. Biting your lip and turning
the other cheek in the way the OP did is a very difficult
thing to do. Particularly if you know you have the resources
available to "deal" with it (in whatever way that applies to
the individual). More power to his elbow I say.
I understand your point though, letting the little gits get
away with that sort of thing really isn't ideal, but think
about it, what could he have done? Turned around, gone back
and attempted to reason with them? Gone back and knocked the
crap out of 'em? Use his mobile to call in his on duty mates
then descended en masse and thrown them all in a cell for a
few hours?
Nothing the OP could have done would likely have had the
slightest positive effect on how these clowns behaved in the
future. Nothing.
The best hope is that they were simply teenagers being
the little bastards that teenagers often are. That they
have the right family and environment around them so that
with maturity and expanding horizons they realise there
are better things to do with their time than throw rocks
at people.
--
"Bob"
'The people have spoken, the bastards'
Email address is spam trapped. To reply directly remove
the beverage.
On Sat, 15 May 2004 20:35:25 +0100, Call me Bob
<usenet@COFFEEtoomanypenguins.co.uk> wrote:
snip
>
>I disagree with you entirely, IMVHO he did exactly the
>right thing. Reading his message gave me a reminder that I
>really shouldn't tar all coppers with my single
>(admittedly cynical) brush. It's good to know that there
>are police officers around who don't treat every little
>incident as an excuse to start wielding their "authority"
>around in a heavy handed and egotistical manner. Biting
>your lip and turning the other cheek in the way the OP did
>is a very difficult thing to do. Particularly if you know
>you have the resources available to "deal" with it (in
>whatever way that applies to the individual). More power
>to his elbow I say.
>
>I understand your point though, letting the little gits get
>away with that sort of thing really isn't ideal, but think
>about it, what could he have done? Turned around, gone back
>and attempted to reason with them? Gone back and knocked
>the crap out of 'em? Use his mobile to call in his on duty
>mates then descended en masse and thrown them all in a cell
>for a few hours?
You're right. I wasn't really questioning why the OP didn't
intervene himself; more wondering why people (inc the OP)
seem to accept this sort of thing as annoying but not worth
doing anything about.
I just find it depressing that we've at a state where we
accept that nothing can be done. Getting rocks chucked at
you is just one of those things that we must learn to live
with or avoid.
>Nothing the OP could have done would likely have had the
>slightest positive effect on how these clowns behaved in
>the future. Nothing.
>
>The best hope is that they were simply teenagers being
>the little bastards that teenagers often are. That they
>have the right family and environment around them so that
>with maturity and expanding horizons they realise there
>are better things to do with their time than throw rocks
>at people.
On Sat, 15 May 2004 20:35:25 +0100, Call me Bob
<usenet@COFFEEtoomanypenguins.co.uk> wrote:
snip
>
>I disagree with you entirely, IMVHO he did exactly the
>right thing. Reading his message gave me a reminder that I
>really shouldn't tar all coppers with my single
>(admittedly cynical) brush. It's good to know that there
>are police officers around who don't treat every little
>incident as an excuse to start wielding their "authority"
>around in a heavy handed and egotistical manner. Biting
>your lip and turning the other cheek in the way the OP did
>is a very difficult thing to do. Particularly if you know
>you have the resources available to "deal" with it (in
>whatever way that applies to the individual). More power
>to his elbow I say.
>
>I understand your point though, letting the little gits get
>away with that sort of thing really isn't ideal, but think
>about it, what could he have done? Turned around, gone back
>and attempted to reason with them? Gone back and knocked
>the crap out of 'em? Use his mobile to call in his on duty
>mates then descended en masse and thrown them all in a cell
>for a few hours?
You're right. I wasn't really questioning why the OP didn't
intervene himself; more wondering why people (inc the OP)
seem to accept this sort of thing as annoying but not worth
doing anything about.
I just find it depressing that we've at a state where we
accept that nothing can be done. Getting rocks chucked at
you is just one of those things that we must learn to live
with or avoid.
>Nothing the OP could have done would likely have had the
>slightest positive effect on how these clowns behaved in
>the future. Nothing.
>
>The best hope is that they were simply teenagers being
>the little bastards that teenagers often are. That they
>have the right family and environment around them so that
>with maturity and expanding horizons they realise there
>are better things to do with their time than throw rocks
>at people.
On Sat, 15 May 2004 20:08:57 +0100, Richard Bates
<usenet01@artybee.net> wrote (more or less):
>On Sat, 15 May 2004 19:57:44 +0100, "[Not Responding]"
><not_responding@dev.null.invalid> wrote:
>
>>OK, so you weren't on duty but am I the only one that
>>thinks it a bit off that a policeman is happy turn the
>>other cheek to a 7 strong gang chucking rocks at people?
>>
>>Still, if the police think attempted brainings are
>>acceptable behaviour these days then it goes someway to
>>explain why they also didn't give a **** when a car full
>>of neds stopped to shoot me with air pistols.
>
>If your tongue isn't planted firmly in cheek then I guess
>you *are* the only one. Copper or not, you do not
>remonstrate with 7 other people. Turning the other cheek is
>allowed when the alternative is being beaten to a pulp by 7
>****-heads.
>
>Your second paragraph, I agree, it is unacceptable for the
>police not be interested. But I think it is very different
>to the OP's example.
To not report it after the the moment of personal danger is
passed seems a bit off. Especially when we're told it's a
place to be regularly avoided, as opposed to this being a
once-off event.
--
Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr (http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr/)
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122 (http://html.dnsalias.net:1122/) Smalltalk
links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk)
http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk
On Sat, 15 May 2004 20:35:25 +0100, Call me Bob
<usenet@COFFEEtoomanypenguins.co.uk> wrote (more or less):
>I disagree with you entirely, IMVHO he did exactly the
>right thing. Reading his message gave me a reminder that I
>really shouldn't tar all coppers with my single
>(admittedly cynical) brush. It's good to know that there
>are police officers around who don't treat every little
>incident as an excuse to start wielding their "authority"
>around in a heavy handed and egotistical manner. Biting
>your lip and turning the other cheek in the way the OP did
>is a very difficult thing to do. Particularly if you know
>you have the resources available to "deal" with it (in
>whatever way that applies to the individual). More power
>to his elbow I say.
>
>I understand your point though, letting the little gits get
>away with that sort of thing really isn't ideal, but think
>about it, what could he have done? Turned around, gone back
>and attempted to reason with them? Gone back and knocked
>the crap out of 'em? Use his mobile to call in his on duty
>mates then descended en masse and thrown them all in a cell
>for a few hours?
>
>Nothing the OP could have done would likely have had the
>slightest positive effect on how these clowns behaved in
>the future. Nothing.
Are we really at the stage where gangs of youths assaulting
cyclists is something about which nothing can be done?
--
Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr (http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr/)
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122 (http://html.dnsalias.net:1122/) Smalltalk
links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk)
http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk
"dirtylitterboxofferingstospammers" <wafflycathcs@aol.comcomcom> wrote in
message news:20040515150315.13668.00000769@mb-m26.aol.com...
> >
> >OK, so you weren't on duty but am I the only one that
> >thinks it a bit off that a policeman is happy turn the
> >other cheek to a 7 strong gang chucking rocks at people?
>
> He may not have been happy to do so. Off-duty, probably
> without radio for recourse to back-up, I can understand
> why a person alone would be reluctant to take on a 7-
> strong gang.
Magazines for automatic weapons are available in
sufficiently large capacity.
> Mind you, it would have been useful if he had a mobile
> phone with him to call up his work colleagues to come
> and assist.
The technology exists for police to carry positioning
emergency alarms at all times.
The colleagues could have helped to dispose of the bodies.
> Moral - always carry a mobile phone, then if you are an
> off-duty plod, you may still
be
> able to get your fellow officers to come and assist.
The moral I drew was that one should always carry a
powerful automatic weapon in addition to the comms kit.
Especially in glasgow.
--
Mark South Citizen of the World, Denizen of the Net <<Tiens!
Ce poulet a une grenade!
in message <7eqca05f1l349kvbkjshs1bb8kc2h096il@4ax.com>, Richard Bates
('usenet01@artybee.net') wrote:
> On Sat, 15 May 2004 19:57:44 +0100, "[Not Responding]"
> <not_responding@dev.null.invalid> wrote:
>
>>OK, so you weren't on duty but am I the only one that
>>thinks it a bit off that a policeman is happy turn the
>>other cheek to a 7 strong gang chucking rocks at people?
>
> If your tongue isn't planted firmly in cheek then I guess
> you *are* the only one. Copper or not, you do not
> remonstrate with 7 other people. Turning the other cheek
> is allowed when the alternative is being beaten to a pulp
> by 7 ****-heads.
Couldn't agree more. He who fights and runs away...
Simon, who would have done exactly the same.
--
simon@jasmine.org.uk (Simon Brooke)
http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
;; When all else fails, read the
distractions.
On Sat, 15 May 2004 22:01:14 +0100, Gawnsoft
<xlucid@users.sourceforge.remove.this.antispam.net> wrote:
>>I understand your point though, letting the little gits
>>get away with that sort of thing really isn't ideal, but
>>think about it, what could he have done? Turned around,
>>gone back and attempted to reason with them? Gone back and
>>knocked the crap out of 'em? Use his mobile to call in his
>>on duty mates then descended en masse and thrown them all
>>in a cell for a few hours?
>>
>>Nothing the OP could have done would likely have had the
>>slightest positive effect on how these clowns behaved in
>>the future. Nothing.
>
>Are we really at the stage where gangs of youths assaulting
>cyclists is something about which nothing can be done?
The point really is what on earth can be done? Can you
suggest a course of action that would have had even the
slightest hope of getting these kids to see the error of
their ways, and not do similar in future?
--
"Bob"
'The people have spoken, the bastards'
Email address is spam trapped. To reply directly remove
the beverage.
On Sat, 15 May 2004 22:01:14 +0100, Gawnsoft
<xlucid@users.sourceforge.remove.this.antispam.net> wrote:
>>I understand your point though, letting the little gits
>>get away with that sort of thing really isn't ideal, but
>>think about it, what could he have done? Turned around,
>>gone back and attempted to reason with them? Gone back and
>>knocked the crap out of 'em? Use his mobile to call in his
>>on duty mates then descended en masse and thrown them all
>>in a cell for a few hours?
>>
>>Nothing the OP could have done would likely have had the
>>slightest positive effect on how these clowns behaved in
>>the future. Nothing.
>
>Are we really at the stage where gangs of youths assaulting
>cyclists is something about which nothing can be done?
The point really is what on earth can be done? Can you
suggest a course of action that would have had even the
slightest hope of getting these kids to see the error of
their ways, and not do similar in future?
--
"Bob"
'The people have spoken, the bastards'
Email address is spam trapped. To reply directly remove
the beverage.
"Gawnsoft" <xlucid@users.sourceforge.remove.this.antispam.net> wrote in
message news:o81da0pbkfftc5cmh3rhptgekc53d2csa4@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 15 May 2004 20:35:25 +0100, Call me Bob
> <usenet@COFFEEtoomanypenguins.co.uk> wrote (more or less):
>
> >I disagree with you entirely, IMVHO he did exactly the
> >right thing. Reading his message gave me a reminder that
> >I really shouldn't tar all coppers with my single
> >(admittedly cynical) brush. It's good to know that there
> >are police officers around who don't treat every little
> >incident as an excuse to start wielding their "authority"
> >around in a heavy handed and egotistical manner. Biting
> >your lip and turning the other cheek in the way the OP
> >did is a very difficult thing to do. Particularly if you
> >know you have the resources available to "deal" with it
> >(in whatever way that applies to the individual). More
> >power to his elbow I say.
> >
> >I understand your point though, letting the little gits
> >get away with that sort of thing really isn't ideal, but
> >think about it, what could he have done? Turned around,
> >gone back and attempted to reason with them? Gone back
> >and knocked the crap out of 'em? Use his mobile to call
> >in his on duty mates then descended en masse and thrown
> >them all in a cell for a few hours?
> >
> >Nothing the OP could have done would likely have had the
> >slightest positive effect on how these clowns behaved in
> >the future. Nothing.
>
> Are we really at the stage where gangs of youths
> assaulting cyclists is something about which nothing can
> be done?
>
>
> --
> Cheers, Euan
As the OP , and a serving Glasgow Detective, I can assure
you that my encounter would rate very minor on the current
situation scale of Glasgow's crime. Possibly in "The Bill"
or some such TV programme I could have round up a posse and
dealt with these hooligans,. But in actual fact, it was the
last day of Scottish football and every available officer
was at one football match or another. Even if they hadn't
been, it was my word against
7. I had the sore back but did I have corroboration on how I
received the injury?
Rory
On Sun, 16 May 2004 00:09:55 +0100, "Rodders"
<tellmeifyouneedmyemailaddress@ntlworld.com> wrote (more or less):
>As the OP , and a serving Glasgow Detective, I can assure
>you that my encounter would rate very minor on the current
>situation scale of Glasgow's crime. Possibly in "The Bill"
>or some such TV programme I could have round up a posse and
>dealt with these hooligans,. But in actual fact, it was the
>last day of Scottish football and every available officer
>was at one football match or another. Even if they hadn't
>been, it was my word against
>7. I had the sore back but did I have corroboration on how
> I received the injury?
Back in the late Eighties, a quality of life report was
produced, for UK places with population >100K.
Edinburgh came top. Then Bath, then Bristol.
Glasgow came eighth. Apparently what dropped it down the
rankings was the violent crime rate.
Some things don't change, I guess.
p.s. Later I lived in Staines, when the equivalent report
for places <100K people came out. Staines was second
bottom of this list. Cue local councillors spouting
off what do these academics know?
I've lived in Edinburgh. And Glasgow. And the fifth-rated of
the 'larges'.
I've lived in Staines.
The academics were spot on.
p.p.s. I used to cycle commute in Glasgow, when I both lived
and worked there. My bike was stolen within 6 months.
I'm so happy that they've invented Kryptonite bike locks
since then.
--
Cheers, Euan Gawnsoft: http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr (http://www.gawnsoft.co.sr/)
Symbian/Epoc wiki: http://html.dnsalias.net:1122 (http://html.dnsalias.net:1122/) Smalltalk
links (harvested from comp.lang.smalltalk)
http://html.dnsalias.net/gawnsoft/smalltalk
Automatic Translations (Powered by
):
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by
vBSEO 3.3.0
