S
Simon Mason
Guest
From today's local paper. Oh dear!
http://qurl.net/1KH
--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net
http://qurl.net/1KH
--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net
S
Simon Mason
Guest
"Budstaff" <budstaffdotusegroup@btinternetdotcom> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Simon Mason" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> From today's local paper. Oh dear!
>>
>> http://qurl.net/1KH
>>
>> --
>> Simon Mason
>> http://www.simonmason.karoo.net
>>
> It was on topic really Simon, you just forgot to say that he should have
> gone out on his bike! ;-)
>
> Incredible story, though. Talk about feet of clay.
Yes. When I'm feeling down, I like to think "well at least I'm not this
guy", such as our old gaffer Lord Browne, or Mr Prescott and this cop is
another person whos shoes I am sure glad I'm not in!
--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Simon Mason" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> From today's local paper. Oh dear!
>>
>> http://qurl.net/1KH
>>
>> --
>> Simon Mason
>> http://www.simonmason.karoo.net
>>
> It was on topic really Simon, you just forgot to say that he should have
> gone out on his bike! ;-)
>
> Incredible story, though. Talk about feet of clay.
Yes. When I'm feeling down, I like to think "well at least I'm not this
guy", such as our old gaffer Lord Browne, or Mr Prescott and this cop is
another person whos shoes I am sure glad I'm not in!
--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net
M
Marc Brett
Guest
On Wed, 6 Jun 2007 16:22:37 +0100, "Simon Mason"
<[email protected]> wrote:
>From today's local paper. Oh dear!
>
> http://qurl.net/1KH
"Sounds like research to me" says District Judge Lettemoff, "No case to
answer".
<[email protected]> wrote:
>From today's local paper. Oh dear!
>
> http://qurl.net/1KH
"Sounds like research to me" says District Judge Lettemoff, "No case to
answer".
M
Martin Dann
Guest
Simon Mason wrote:
> From today's local paper. Oh dear!
>
> http://qurl.net/1KH
As an antiDD cop, he had to see what it was like to drive under the
influence. He was testing his reduced reactions. At 2:30 AM there should
have been little other traffic around so it was an ideal time to do this.
If it works for doing 159mph on motorways and 91 in a 30 zone then it
should work for this guy.
> From today's local paper. Oh dear!
>
> http://qurl.net/1KH
As an antiDD cop, he had to see what it was like to drive under the
influence. He was testing his reduced reactions. At 2:30 AM there should
have been little other traffic around so it was an ideal time to do this.
If it works for doing 159mph on motorways and 91 in a 30 zone then it
should work for this guy.
B
Budstaff
Guest
"Simon Mason" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> From today's local paper. Oh dear!
>
> http://qurl.net/1KH
>
> --
> Simon Mason
> http://www.simonmason.karoo.net
>
It was on topic really Simon, you just forgot to say that he should have
gone out on his bike! ;-)
Incredible story, though. Talk about feet of clay.
news:[email protected]...
> From today's local paper. Oh dear!
>
> http://qurl.net/1KH
>
> --
> Simon Mason
> http://www.simonmason.karoo.net
>
It was on topic really Simon, you just forgot to say that he should have
gone out on his bike! ;-)
Incredible story, though. Talk about feet of clay.
S
Simon Brooke
Guest
in message <[email protected]>, Budstaff
('budstaffdotusegroup@btinternetdotcom') wrote:
>
> "Simon Mason" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> From today's local paper. Oh dear!
>>
>> http://qurl.net/1KH
>>
> It was on topic really Simon, you just forgot to say that he should have
> gone out on his bike! ;-)
If he had been drinking he shouldn't have been on a bike either.
--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GP/CS s++: a++ C+++ ULBVCS*++++$ L+++ P--- E+>++ W+++ N++ K w--(---)
M- !d- PS++ PE-- Y+ PGP !t 5? X+ !R b++ !DI D G- e++ h*(-) r++ y+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
('budstaffdotusegroup@btinternetdotcom') wrote:
>
> "Simon Mason" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> From today's local paper. Oh dear!
>>
>> http://qurl.net/1KH
>>
> It was on topic really Simon, you just forgot to say that he should have
> gone out on his bike! ;-)
If he had been drinking he shouldn't have been on a bike either.
--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
-----BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK-----
Version: 3.1
GP/CS s++: a++ C+++ ULBVCS*++++$ L+++ P--- E+>++ W+++ N++ K w--(---)
M- !d- PS++ PE-- Y+ PGP !t 5? X+ !R b++ !DI D G- e++ h*(-) r++ y+++
------END GEEK CODE BLOCK------
B
Budstaff
Guest
"Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> in message <[email protected]>, Budstaff
> ('budstaffdotusegroup@btinternetdotcom') wrote:
>
>>
>> "Simon Mason" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> From today's local paper. Oh dear!
>>>
>>> http://qurl.net/1KH
>>>
>> It was on topic really Simon, you just forgot to say that he should have
>> gone out on his bike! ;-)
>
> If he had been drinking he shouldn't have been on a bike either.
>
I agree that if he was _drunk_ he shouldn't have been on a bike, but if this
was a marginal infringement of the drink driving breath alcohol limit (which
I _hope_ it was, given the guy's background, and despite the inveitable
schadenfreude that the case prompts), then I can't see anything against
having a couple of drinks then cycling.
We harp on on this newsgroup about other safety issues where the consensus
(or perhaps 'majority view' is a better phrase) is that as cyclists
statistically pose a vanishingly small physical threat to other road users
(and the stats by default include drinking cyclists), then personal safety
issues should be a matter of personal choice. If you're suggesting that the
same limit as for the driver of a one ton hundred mile an hour lump of metal
is appropriate, then I have to disagree. And of course such a limit, to be
enforced, would require the full panoply of the law and its equipment to be
applied, and down that road lies rider testing, road fund, MOT's and
compulsory insurance.
news:[email protected]...
> in message <[email protected]>, Budstaff
> ('budstaffdotusegroup@btinternetdotcom') wrote:
>
>>
>> "Simon Mason" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> From today's local paper. Oh dear!
>>>
>>> http://qurl.net/1KH
>>>
>> It was on topic really Simon, you just forgot to say that he should have
>> gone out on his bike! ;-)
>
> If he had been drinking he shouldn't have been on a bike either.
>
I agree that if he was _drunk_ he shouldn't have been on a bike, but if this
was a marginal infringement of the drink driving breath alcohol limit (which
I _hope_ it was, given the guy's background, and despite the inveitable
schadenfreude that the case prompts), then I can't see anything against
having a couple of drinks then cycling.
We harp on on this newsgroup about other safety issues where the consensus
(or perhaps 'majority view' is a better phrase) is that as cyclists
statistically pose a vanishingly small physical threat to other road users
(and the stats by default include drinking cyclists), then personal safety
issues should be a matter of personal choice. If you're suggesting that the
same limit as for the driver of a one ton hundred mile an hour lump of metal
is appropriate, then I have to disagree. And of course such a limit, to be
enforced, would require the full panoply of the law and its equipment to be
applied, and down that road lies rider testing, road fund, MOT's and
compulsory insurance.
H
Howard
Guest
WhOn Jun 6, 4:22 pm, "Simon Mason" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> From today's local paper. Oh dear!
>
> http://qurl.net/1KH
>
> Simon Masonhttp://www.simonmason.karoo.net
Hi Simon. See you are getting out with the lads from Hull Thurday
these days!
What a tw*t! This joker is the one who, in cahoots with Hull City
Council's anti-cyclist, pro-motorist chief 'road safety' officer, is
always banging on about cycle helmets. The two of them even took to
sending officers out to stop cyclists wearing helmets, giving them a
card to enter a draw for some crappy bike-shaped object for been good
little cyclists!
Meanwhile after the disgraced Humberside CPO David Westwood scrapped
the forces traffic section, according to the police themselves 1 in 5
of drivers in the area don't bother with insurance and over 50% of all
crashes resulting in a fatality are 'hit and runs'.
This wouldn't be the first case of a Humberside police force officer
drinking and driving. It was all kept out of the press but you
doubtlessly remember that double fatality a while ago on the Riplinham
road between South Cave and Hull when a police officer and his mate
lost control at high speed and crashed. There was load of guff in the
local press about what a wonderful officer he was and so on. They
forgot to mention ( or so I heard via someone who whose partner works
in the force) that they were both paralytic after spending all night
boozing at a local rugby club!
wrote:
> From today's local paper. Oh dear!
>
> http://qurl.net/1KH
>
> Simon Masonhttp://www.simonmason.karoo.net
Hi Simon. See you are getting out with the lads from Hull Thurday
these days!
What a tw*t! This joker is the one who, in cahoots with Hull City
Council's anti-cyclist, pro-motorist chief 'road safety' officer, is
always banging on about cycle helmets. The two of them even took to
sending officers out to stop cyclists wearing helmets, giving them a
card to enter a draw for some crappy bike-shaped object for been good
little cyclists!
Meanwhile after the disgraced Humberside CPO David Westwood scrapped
the forces traffic section, according to the police themselves 1 in 5
of drivers in the area don't bother with insurance and over 50% of all
crashes resulting in a fatality are 'hit and runs'.
This wouldn't be the first case of a Humberside police force officer
drinking and driving. It was all kept out of the press but you
doubtlessly remember that double fatality a while ago on the Riplinham
road between South Cave and Hull when a police officer and his mate
lost control at high speed and crashed. There was load of guff in the
local press about what a wonderful officer he was and so on. They
forgot to mention ( or so I heard via someone who whose partner works
in the force) that they were both paralytic after spending all night
boozing at a local rugby club!
S
Simon Brooke
Guest
in message <[email protected]>, Budstaff
('[email protected]') wrote:
>
> "Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> in message <[email protected]>, Budstaff
>> ('budstaffdotusegroup@btinternetdotcom') wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Simon Mason" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> From today's local paper. Oh dear!
>>>>
>>>> http://qurl.net/1KH
>>>>
>>> It was on topic really Simon, you just forgot to say that he should
>>> have
>>> gone out on his bike! ;-)
>>
>> If he had been drinking he shouldn't have been on a bike either.
>>
> I agree that if he was _drunk_ he shouldn't have been on a bike, but if
> this was a marginal infringement of the drink driving breath alcohol
> limit (which I _hope_ it was, given the guy's background, and despite the
> inveitable schadenfreude that the case prompts), then I can't see
> anything against having a couple of drinks then cycling.
>
> We harp on on this newsgroup about other safety issues where the
> consensus (or perhaps 'majority view' is a better phrase) is that as
> cyclists statistically pose a vanishingly small physical threat to other
> road users (and the stats by default include drinking cyclists), then
> personal safety issues should be a matter of personal choice. If you're
> suggesting that the same limit as for the driver of a one ton hundred
> mile an hour lump of metal is appropriate, then I have to disagree. And
> of course such a limit, to be enforced, would require the full panoply of
> the law and its equipment to be applied, and down that road lies rider
> testing, road fund, MOT's and compulsory insurance.
Fair enough; yes, you're right.
--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
See one nuclear war, you've seen them all.
('[email protected]') wrote:
>
> "Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> in message <[email protected]>, Budstaff
>> ('budstaffdotusegroup@btinternetdotcom') wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Simon Mason" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> From today's local paper. Oh dear!
>>>>
>>>> http://qurl.net/1KH
>>>>
>>> It was on topic really Simon, you just forgot to say that he should
>>> have
>>> gone out on his bike! ;-)
>>
>> If he had been drinking he shouldn't have been on a bike either.
>>
> I agree that if he was _drunk_ he shouldn't have been on a bike, but if
> this was a marginal infringement of the drink driving breath alcohol
> limit (which I _hope_ it was, given the guy's background, and despite the
> inveitable schadenfreude that the case prompts), then I can't see
> anything against having a couple of drinks then cycling.
>
> We harp on on this newsgroup about other safety issues where the
> consensus (or perhaps 'majority view' is a better phrase) is that as
> cyclists statistically pose a vanishingly small physical threat to other
> road users (and the stats by default include drinking cyclists), then
> personal safety issues should be a matter of personal choice. If you're
> suggesting that the same limit as for the driver of a one ton hundred
> mile an hour lump of metal is appropriate, then I have to disagree. And
> of course such a limit, to be enforced, would require the full panoply of
> the law and its equipment to be applied, and down that road lies rider
> testing, road fund, MOT's and compulsory insurance.
Fair enough; yes, you're right.
--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/
See one nuclear war, you've seen them all.
M
On 7 Jun, 09:29, Howard <[email protected]> wrote:
> WhOn Jun 6, 4:22 pm, "Simon Mason" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > From today's local paper. Oh dear!
>
> > http://qurl.net/1KH
>
> > Simon Masonhttp://www.simonmason.karoo.net
>
> Hi Simon. See you are getting out with the lads from Hull Thursday
> these days!
>
Hi Howard- yes I 'm getting a good kicking every two weeks by the
tough guys. All of the "also rans" that I would have beaten looking at
previous years have all cleared off! Still, not doing too bad, got a
20-46 on the Gilberdyke 8 mile course two days ago which I was really
chuffed about.
Hope they throw the book as this cop though.
--
Simon Mason
> WhOn Jun 6, 4:22 pm, "Simon Mason" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > From today's local paper. Oh dear!
>
> > http://qurl.net/1KH
>
> > Simon Masonhttp://www.simonmason.karoo.net
>
> Hi Simon. See you are getting out with the lads from Hull Thursday
> these days!
>
Hi Howard- yes I 'm getting a good kicking every two weeks by the
tough guys. All of the "also rans" that I would have beaten looking at
previous years have all cleared off! Still, not doing too bad, got a
20-46 on the Gilberdyke 8 mile course two days ago which I was really
chuffed about.
Hope they throw the book as this cop though.
--
Simon Mason
W
wafflycat
Guest
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Hi Howard- yes I 'm getting a good kicking every two weeks by the
> tough guys. All of the "also rans" that I would have beaten looking at
> previous years have all cleared off! Still, not doing too bad, got a
> 20-46 on the Gilberdyke 8 mile course two days ago which I was really
> chuffed about.
You speedy gonzales you! ;-)
news:[email protected]...
>
> Hi Howard- yes I 'm getting a good kicking every two weeks by the
> tough guys. All of the "also rans" that I would have beaten looking at
> previous years have all cleared off! Still, not doing too bad, got a
> 20-46 on the Gilberdyke 8 mile course two days ago which I was really
> chuffed about.
You speedy gonzales you! ;-)
S
Simon Mason
Guest
"wafflycat" <w*a*ff£y£cat*@£btco*nn£ect.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>
>> Hi Howard- yes I 'm getting a good kicking every two weeks by the
>> tough guys. All of the "also rans" that I would have beaten looking at
>> previous years have all cleared off! Still, not doing too bad, got a
>> 20-46 on the Gilberdyke 8 mile course two days ago which I was really
>> chuffed about.
>
> You speedy gonzales you! ;-)
Thanks H.
It was ideal for me, pan flat and with a nice nagging wind,
just up my street as that is what my commute is like every day. The guys who
are good on hills had no advantage this time. Whether it would have
translated to a sub 26 min 10 miler, of course I'll never know but I feel as
though I'm getter better, just got to work on cornering as at the moment I
slow right down for them.
--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net
news:[email protected]...
>
> <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>
>> Hi Howard- yes I 'm getting a good kicking every two weeks by the
>> tough guys. All of the "also rans" that I would have beaten looking at
>> previous years have all cleared off! Still, not doing too bad, got a
>> 20-46 on the Gilberdyke 8 mile course two days ago which I was really
>> chuffed about.
>
> You speedy gonzales you! ;-)
Thanks H.
It was ideal for me, pan flat and with a nice nagging wind,just up my street as that is what my commute is like every day. The guys who
are good on hills had no advantage this time. Whether it would have
translated to a sub 26 min 10 miler, of course I'll never know but I feel as
though I'm getter better, just got to work on cornering as at the moment I
slow right down for them.
--
Simon Mason
http://www.simonmason.karoo.net
A
Al C-F
Guest
Simon Brooke wrote:
>
> If he had been drinking he shouldn't have been on a bike either.
>
How else does one get home from a pub that's beyond walking distance?
>
> If he had been drinking he shouldn't have been on a bike either.
>
How else does one get home from a pub that's beyond walking distance?
A
Alan Braggins
Guest
In article <[email protected]>, Al C-F wrote:
>Simon Brooke wrote:
>
>> If he had been drinking he shouldn't have been on a bike either.
>
>How else does one get home from a pub that's beyond walking distance?
By not drinking alcohol in such a pub, or by getting a lift from a
non-drinking friend. (Though I'm personally of the opinion that the
lower risk to other people from the lower energy of a bicycle makes
it acceptable to cycle at a level of impairment which is not
acceptable when driving.)
>Simon Brooke wrote:
>
>> If he had been drinking he shouldn't have been on a bike either.
>
>How else does one get home from a pub that's beyond walking distance?
By not drinking alcohol in such a pub, or by getting a lift from a
non-drinking friend. (Though I'm personally of the opinion that the
lower risk to other people from the lower energy of a bicycle makes
it acceptable to cycle at a level of impairment which is not
acceptable when driving.)
B
Budstaff
Guest
"Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> in message <[email protected]>, Budstaff
> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
>>
>> "Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> in message <[email protected]>, Budstaff
>>> ('budstaffdotusegroup@btinternetdotcom') wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Simon Mason" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>> From today's local paper. Oh dear!
>>>>>
>>>>> http://qurl.net/1KH
>>>>>
>>>> It was on topic really Simon, you just forgot to say that he should
>>>> have
>>>> gone out on his bike! ;-)
>>>
>>> If he had been drinking he shouldn't have been on a bike either.
>>>
>> I agree that if he was _drunk_ he shouldn't have been on a bike, but if
>> this was a marginal infringement of the drink driving breath alcohol
>> limit (which I _hope_ it was, given the guy's background, and despite the
>> inveitable schadenfreude that the case prompts), then I can't see
>> anything against having a couple of drinks then cycling.
>>
>> We harp on on this newsgroup about other safety issues where the
>> consensus (or perhaps 'majority view' is a better phrase) is that as
>> cyclists statistically pose a vanishingly small physical threat to other
>> road users (and the stats by default include drinking cyclists), then
>> personal safety issues should be a matter of personal choice. If you're
>> suggesting that the same limit as for the driver of a one ton hundred
>> mile an hour lump of metal is appropriate, then I have to disagree. And
>> of course such a limit, to be enforced, would require the full panoply of
>> the law and its equipment to be applied, and down that road lies rider
>> testing, road fund, MOT's and compulsory insurance.
>
> Fair enough; yes, you're right.
>
Given the level of blood alcohol disclosed in court today, _you_ were right.
Group hug. ;-)
news:[email protected]...
> in message <[email protected]>, Budstaff
> ('[email protected]') wrote:
>
>>
>> "Simon Brooke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>> in message <[email protected]>, Budstaff
>>> ('budstaffdotusegroup@btinternetdotcom') wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Simon Mason" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>> From today's local paper. Oh dear!
>>>>>
>>>>> http://qurl.net/1KH
>>>>>
>>>> It was on topic really Simon, you just forgot to say that he should
>>>> have
>>>> gone out on his bike! ;-)
>>>
>>> If he had been drinking he shouldn't have been on a bike either.
>>>
>> I agree that if he was _drunk_ he shouldn't have been on a bike, but if
>> this was a marginal infringement of the drink driving breath alcohol
>> limit (which I _hope_ it was, given the guy's background, and despite the
>> inveitable schadenfreude that the case prompts), then I can't see
>> anything against having a couple of drinks then cycling.
>>
>> We harp on on this newsgroup about other safety issues where the
>> consensus (or perhaps 'majority view' is a better phrase) is that as
>> cyclists statistically pose a vanishingly small physical threat to other
>> road users (and the stats by default include drinking cyclists), then
>> personal safety issues should be a matter of personal choice. If you're
>> suggesting that the same limit as for the driver of a one ton hundred
>> mile an hour lump of metal is appropriate, then I have to disagree. And
>> of course such a limit, to be enforced, would require the full panoply of
>> the law and its equipment to be applied, and down that road lies rider
>> testing, road fund, MOT's and compulsory insurance.
>
> Fair enough; yes, you're right.
>
Given the level of blood alcohol disclosed in court today, _you_ were right.
Group hug. ;-)
M
Mike Sales
Guest
Are there figures for the number of pedestrians, or indeed cyclists or
motorists, killed or injured by drunken cyclists? Given that there are so
few killed by cyclists drunk or sober, I would guess that there was no need
for a column in any table of victims of drunks.
Mike Sales
motorists, killed or injured by drunken cyclists? Given that there are so
few killed by cyclists drunk or sober, I would guess that there was no need
for a column in any table of victims of drunks.
Mike Sales
D
Dave Larrington
Guest
In news:[email protected],
Al C-F <[email protected]> tweaked the
Babbage-Engine to tell us:
> Simon Brooke wrote:
>
>>
>> If he had been drinking he shouldn't have been on a bike either.
>>
>
> How else does one get home from a pub that's beyond walking distance?
One phones a member of one's domestic staff and orders them to collect one
in a suitable means of transport[1], of course ;-)
1 - post-chaise, Bentley, Bell Jet Ranger, tandem, etc. etc.
--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
It is impossible to eat a banana without looking like a tw*t.
Al C-F <[email protected]> tweaked the
Babbage-Engine to tell us:
> Simon Brooke wrote:
>
>>
>> If he had been drinking he shouldn't have been on a bike either.
>>
>
> How else does one get home from a pub that's beyond walking distance?
One phones a member of one's domestic staff and orders them to collect one
in a suitable means of transport[1], of course ;-)
1 - post-chaise, Bentley, Bell Jet Ranger, tandem, etc. etc.
--
Dave Larrington
<http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk>
It is impossible to eat a banana without looking like a tw*t.
Similar threads
