View Full Version : Another cager myth exploded
Another cager myth exploded
According to the usual suspects on UK.Tosspot police numbers are being pared to the bone with
everything left to the cameras.
Er, not quite. Apparently police numbers dropped throughout the 90s (under the
motorist-friendly, fuel-duty-escalating Tories), and since 2000 have increased by over 10,000 to
the highest level ever.
Ah, well.
I still vote Lib-Dem, though.
--
Guy
===
WARNING: may contain traces of irony. Contents may settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.com (http://www.chapmancentral.com/)
I know Blind Lemon Blunkett has been banging on about there being more Plods around than ever
before, *but* AFAIK most forces have been obliged to reduce the size of their traffic departments in
order to save money. My suspicions is that most of the new ones are still in the station, filling in
forms and/or wrestling with the bottle of Teachers which all rufty-tufty coppers keep in their desk
drawer (if, that is, The Sweeney is a reliable guide to rozzer etiquette ;-)
Dave Larrington - http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/
===========================================================
Editor - British Human Power Club Newsletter
http://www.bhpc.org.uk/
===========================================================
On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 16:03:10 +0100 someone who may be "Just zis Guy, you know?"
<outlook.bugs@microsoft.com> wrote this:-
>I still vote Lib-Dem, though.
Er, the people all in favour of the Second Newbury Bypass and not objecting to spending £500 million
on a few km of road in Glasgow.
--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E I will always explain revoked
keys, unless the UK government prevents me using the RIP Act 2000.
"David Hansen" <SENDdavidNOhSPAM@spidacom.co.uk> wrote in message
news:t8honv0a24mbo5nv0tv0c7m6fec6ovb232@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 16:03:10 +0100 someone who may be "Just zis Guy, you know?"
> <outlook.bugs@microsoft.com> wrote this:-
>
> >I still vote Lib-Dem, though.
>
> Er, the people all in favour of the Second Newbury Bypass and not objecting to spending £500
> million on a few km of road in Glasgow.
That's right, and the "motorists friend" in Sheffield, who put a stop to all road closures during
their brief period in power
Simon G.
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
> I still vote Lib-Dem, though.
As do I, though I suspect I'd vote a different way if they ever did get
in... But the Lib Dems are worryingly pro-cycle path in a vague "oh yes, they must be a good thing,
so we're for them because it sounds good" kind of way which is the sort of attitude that gets us
so many Truly Crap ones instead of good ones where they help and none where they don't :-(
OTOH, at least it shows they have *heard* of cycles...
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch University of Dundee Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Medical Physics, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK net p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 16:03:10 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <outlook.bugs@microsoft.com> wrote:
>According to the usual suspects on UK.Tosspot police numbers are being pared to the bone with
>everything left to the cameras.
>
>Er, not quite. Apparently police numbers dropped throughout the 90s (under the
>motorist-friendly, fuel-duty-escalating Tories), and since 2000 have increased by over 10,000 to
>the highest level ever.
>
>Ah, well.
>
>I still vote Lib-Dem, though.
Personally speaking. much more depressing in the news today was the statistic that drink-driving
deaths are at a new 10 year high, particularly in relation to young drivers.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3158184.stm
And no, I certainly don't sit comfortably with hypocrisy....
Garryb
On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 16:03:10 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <outlook.bugs@microsoft.com> wrote:
>Ah, well.
>
>I still vote Lib-Dem, though.
Thought so :-)
Tory Boy - a member of an endangered species
--
"Sorry mate, I didn't see you" is not a satisfactory excuse.
And don't forget that 10,000 (or whatever) won't include all the ones that have retired over the
last X years... Still, when we're not allowed to defend our own property, every little helps.
________
Prison works - no-one ever reoffended from a prison cell (it's letting 'em out that doesn't work).
"Peter Clinch" <p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk> wrote in message news:3F7C400F.9010103@dundee.ac.uk...
> Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:
>
> > I still vote Lib-Dem, though.
>
> As do I, though I suspect I'd vote a different way if they ever did get
> in... But the Lib Dems are worryingly pro-cycle path in a vague "oh yes, they must be a good
> thing, so we're for them because it sounds good" kind of way which is the sort of attitude ....
....that they take to so many things.
pk
"David Hansen" <SENDdavidNOhSPAM@spidacom.co.uk> wrote in message
news:t8honv0a24mbo5nv0tv0c7m6fec6ovb232@4ax.com...
> >I still vote Lib-Dem, though.
> Er, the people all in favour of the Second Newbury Bypass and not objecting to spending £500
> million on a few km of road in Glasgow.
More the people who are in favour of a less unfair system of representation. The present voting
system delivers massive majorities based on minority support, in some cases not even putting the
party with most votes in power. That's my first priority at every election. Once that's done I'll
probably vote for the Official Monster Raving Loony Party ;-)
--
Guy
===
WARNING: may contain traces of irony. Contents may settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.com (http://www.chapmancentral.com/)
"Peter Clinch" <p.j.clinch@dundee.ac.uk> wrote in message news:3F7C400F.9010103@dundee.ac.uk...
>
> OTOH, at least it shows they have *heard* of cycles...
So, given recent photo ops, has Tony Blair. Its just that his wasn't going anywhere. A metaphor for
his government perhaps.
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <outlook.bugs@microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:blhjve$iu3$1$8300dec7@news.demon.co.uk...
>
> More the people who are in favour of a less unfair system of
representation.
If you think h*lm*t threads are bad try stating one on the relative merrits of different STV schemes
on an NG for PR anoracks :~(
I'll get my anorak.
> The present voting system delivers massive majorities based on minority support, in some cases not
> even putting the party with most votes in
power.
> That's my first priority at every election. Once that's done I'll
probably
> vote for the Official Monster Raving Loony Party ;-)
Come on -- surely not while IDS is their leader.
On Thu, 02 Oct 2003 18:41:44 +0100, James Hodson <jUNDERSCOREhodson@ntlworld.com.invalid> wrote:
>On Thu, 2 Oct 2003 16:03:10 +0100, "Just zis Guy, you know?" <outlook.bugs@microsoft.com> wrote:
>
>>Ah, well.
>>
>>I still vote Lib-Dem, though.
>
>Thought so :-)
>
Guy
Having been scared faecesless on my way from Bristol to Glos in Friday and also having heard about
the Tories plan to (perhaps) increase the max speed to 80mph on motorways I just might think
differently.
I was scared even though everyone was going at the same speed. James
--
"Sorry mate, I didn't see you" is not a satisfactory excuse.
> Having been scared faecesless on my way from Bristol to Glos in Friday and also having heard about
> the Tories plan to (perhaps) increase the max speed to 80mph on motorways I just might think
> differently.
>
And also decrease inner city speeds to 20mph.
That should even the cyclists out a bit, 20 is nothing :)
On Tue, 7 Oct 2003 22:21:51 +0100, "Michael Kent"
<inthemiczooog@SCOOBYDOOBYDOOblueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> Having been scared faecesless on my way from Bristol to Glos in Friday and also having heard
>> about the Tories plan to (perhaps) increase the max speed to 80mph on motorways I just might
>> think differently.
>>
>
>And also decrease inner city speeds to 20mph.
>
>That should even the cyclists out a bit, 20 is nothing :)
>
Well, Michael, they can't be all bad, can they? OK, perhaps they can.
Totally and absolutely OT.
I heard on a Discovery Channel today that the B-2 Stealth Bomber flew at no more than
120kmh/75mph!!!!!!!!! Most strange, in a stally manner.
<http://www.af.mil/news/factsheets/B_2_Spirit.html> (http://www.af.mil/news/factsheets/B_2_Spirit.html)
BTW, why is the Nighthawk F-117 given an "F" prefix? I guess it could just about fight itself out of
a paper bag at 600mph; otherwise "B" is the letter for me.
James
--
"Sorry mate, I didn't see you" is not a satisfactory excuse.
James Hodson <jUNDERSCOREhodson@ntlworld.com.invalid> wrote:
> BTW, why is the Nighthawk F-117 given an "F" prefix?
There wasn't the budget for another bomber.
--
Marc. Please note the above address is a spam trap, use marcc to reply Printing for clubs of all
types http://www.jaceeprint.demon.co.uk (http://www.jaceeprint.demon.co.uk/) Stickers, banners & clothing, for clubs,teams, magazines
and dealers.
James Hodson <jUNDERSCOREhodson@ntlworld.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:<01i6ov0dfq4jrisdvjg80c22497u3b9p3g@4ax.com>...
> BTW, why is the Nighthawk F-117 given an "F" prefix? I guess it could just about fight itself out
> of a paper bag at 600mph; otherwise "B" is the letter for me. James
It actually should probably have been an "A". The program defined it as the "Advanced Tactical
Aircraft" or "ATA".
The "F-117A" came from the designation system used at the test site for classified aircraft.
F-117A Webmaster www.f-117a.com
On 9 Oct 2003 10:55:35 -0700, webmaster@f-117a.com (F-117A Webmaster) wrote:
>James Hodson <jUNDERSCOREhodson@ntlworld.com.invalid> wrote in message
>news:<01i6ov0dfq4jrisdvjg80c22497u3b9p3g@4ax.com>...
>> BTW, why is the Nighthawk F-117 given an "F" prefix? I guess it could just about fight itself out
>> of a paper bag at 600mph; otherwise "B" is the letter for me. James
>
>It actually should probably have been an "A". The program defined it as the "Advanced Tactical
>Aircraft" or "ATA".
>
>The "F-117A" came from the designation system used at the test site for classified aircraft.
>
OK. Why not the A-15E Strike Eagle rather than the F-15E? Sorry ;-)
BTW, to get back towards this NG's charter: I'm sure at least one pilot or member of the ground crew
rides a bike.
James
--
"Sorry mate, I didn't see you" is not a satisfactory excuse.
James Hodson <jUNDERSCOREhodson@ntlworld.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:<tbabov85qckknj9vrtf8hc3orrvgg9955h@4ax.com>...
> On 9 Oct 2003 10:55:35 -0700, webmaster@f-117a.com (F-117A Webmaster) wrote:
>
> >James Hodson <jUNDERSCOREhodson@ntlworld.com.invalid> wrote in message
> >news:<01i6ov0dfq4jrisdvjg80c22497u3b9p3g@4ax.com>...
> >> BTW, why is the Nighthawk F-117 given an "F" prefix? I guess it could just about fight itself
> >> out of a paper bag at 600mph; otherwise "B" is the letter for me. James
> >
> >It actually should probably have been an "A". The program defined it as the "Advanced Tactical
> >Aircraft" or "ATA".
> >
> >The "F-117A" came from the designation system used at the test site for classified aircraft.
> >
>
> OK. Why not the A-15E Strike Eagle rather than the F-15E? Sorry ;-) James
James, First a little history: The F-117A was the "Advanced Tactical Aircraft" (ATA) program, the
B-2 was the "Advanced Tactical Bomber" (ATB) program, and the F/A-22 was the "Advanced Tactical
Fighter" (ATF) program. You can see from this how each platform was envisioned to fit in the air
force arsonal.
In regards to your post, according to "f-15estrikeeagle.com", the F-15E can carry and use air to air
missiles. Therefore, since it is both a "fighter" and an "attack" (ground pounder) aircraft, I
suppose the correct designation would be F/A-15E much like the F/A-18 and the
F/A-22. (The laters attack capability is quite marginal and probably should be called F-22 but
politics are involved) I agree though, not F-15E.
But not A-15. Since the -117 carries no air to air weapons (claims otherwise are incorrect), it
would be also probably be an "A" designation.
Sorry ;)
F-117A Webmaster www.f-117a.com
"James Hodson" <jUNDERSCOREhodson@ntlworld.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:01i6ov0dfq4jrisdvjg80c22497u3b9p3g@4ax.com...
> BTW, why is the Nighthawk F-117 given an "F" prefix? I guess it could just about fight itself out
> of a paper bag at 600mph; otherwise "B" is the letter for me.
Maybe for the same reason the F111 was given its prefix when it was really a
strike/reconnaissance aircraft.
Pete
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by
vBSEO 3.3.0
