P**l Sm*th



Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Just Zis Guy

Guest
Has anyone noticed that the self-proclaimed safety advocate now ends his signature with "let's make
speed cameras as unacceptable as drink-driving?"

--
Guy
===
I wonder if you wouldn't mind piecing out our imperfections with your thoughts; and while you're
about it perhaps you could think when we talk of bicycles, that you see them printing their proud
wheels i' the receiving earth; thanks awfully.

http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/09.shtml#103 http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/09.shtml#104
 
T

Tony W

Guest
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Has anyone noticed that the self-proclaimed safety advocate now ends his signature with "let's
> make speed cameras as unacceptable as
drink-driving?"

Yes -- he's been doing it for some time. I noticed it first because, with my dyslexia, I completely
ignored the word 'cameras' and thought it very strange that he had suddenly seen the light.

The guy is a fruit cake.

T
 
F

Frank

Guest
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Has anyone noticed that the self-proclaimed safety advocate now ends his signature with "let's
> make speed cameras as unacceptable as
drink-driving?"
>
> --
It's interesting to see Paul is part of a double act in uk.tosspot.

Paul argues that only a driver can decide what is dangerous and hence specific laws are too general
and often inappropriate to the situation and hence should not be applied.

Other poster's believe that drivers, no matter what damage they cause should only be held
responsible if it can be shown beyond reasonable doubt that they have broken the law, anything else
is just an honest mistake. Additionally if a driver is shown to have broken the law he should only
be punished with regard to the law he has broken, e.g. someone who kills many people when 29mph over
the limit should only be given 3 points and a few quid fine.

If you put the two together :eek:(
 
W

W K

Guest
"Tony W" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>
> "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Has anyone noticed that the self-proclaimed safety advocate now ends his signature with "let's
> > make speed cameras as unacceptable as
> drink-driving?"
>
>
> Yes -- he's been doing it for some time. I noticed it first because, with my dyslexia, I
> completely ignored the word 'cameras' and thought it very strange that he had suddenly seen
> the light.

Actually it might be because that slogan exists "speeding as...." He's trying to be clever, but the
fact remains that PS thinks speed cameras make everyone in to child killing automata. The same way
as no one can keep their attention on driving long enough unless they go over 70 mph.
 
C

Colin Blackburn

Guest
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>
> "Tony W" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > Has anyone noticed that the self-proclaimed safety advocate now ends his signature with "let's
> > > make speed cameras as unacceptable as
> > drink-driving?"
> >
> >
> > Yes -- he's been doing it for some time. I noticed it first because, with my dyslexia, I
> > completely ignored the word 'cameras' and thought it very strange that he had suddenly seen the
> > light.
>
> Actually it might be because that slogan exists "speeding as...." He's trying to be clever, but
> the fact remains that PS thinks speed cameras make everyone in to child killing automata. The same
> way as no one can keep their attention on driving long enough unless they go over 70 mph.

To be fair that was his disciple Raymond. He suggested that at low speeds there was just too little
happening for the brain to work properly.

Colin
 
T

Tim Woodall

Guest
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 10:15:18 -0000, W K <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> "Tony W" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> > Has anyone noticed that the self-proclaimed safety advocate now ends his signature with "let's
>> > make speed cameras as unacceptable as
>> drink-driving?"
>>
>>
>> Yes -- he's been doing it for some time. I noticed it first because, with my dyslexia, I
>> completely ignored the word 'cameras' and thought it very strange that he had suddenly seen
>> the light.
>
> Actually it might be because that slogan exists "speeding as...." He's trying to be clever, but
> the fact remains that PS thinks speed cameras make everyone in to child killing automata. The same
> way as no one can keep their attention on driving long enough unless they go over 70 mph.
>

No. No. No. No. No. You haven't been paying attention at the back.

The problem is that drivers have a fixed attention span (something between 1ns and 1us I guess) and
therefore they have to drive VERY fast in order to get from A to B during that time and also spend
less time on the road so they have less risk of an accident - It's a win-win situation.

(The saddest thing is I think PS actually believes this)

Regards,

Tim.

--
God said, "div D = rho, div B = 0, curl E = - @B/@t, curl H = J + @D/@t," and there was light.

http://tjw.hn.org/ http://www.locofungus.btinternet.co.uk/
 
J

Just Zis Guy

Guest
Colin Blackburn wrote:

> To be fair that was his disciple Raymond. He suggested that at low speeds there was just too
> little happening for the brain to work properly.

Yes - amazing how I manage not to crash and burn every time I drive, really, when you consider that
I routinely fail to follow the Approved Safe Driving Practice of exceeding the speed limit.

Smith, by contrast, apparently thinks people can't possibly look at their speedo without running
over a child or something.

--
Guy
===
I wonder if you wouldn't mind piecing out our imperfections with your thoughts; and while you're
about it perhaps you could think when we talk of bicycles, that you see them printing their proud
wheels i' the receiving earth; thanks awfully.

http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/09.shtml#103 http://www.highwaycode.gov.uk/09.shtml#104
 
T

Tony W

Guest
"Tim Woodall" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> No. No. No. No. No. You haven't been paying attention at the back.
>
> The problem is that drivers have a fixed attention span (something between 1ns and 1us I guess)
> and therefore they have to drive VERY fast in order
to
> get from A to B during that time and also spend less time on the road so
they
> have less risk of an accident - It's a win-win situation.
>
> (The saddest thing is I think PS actually believes this)

Come on guys -- he's away for 10 days. Let's not be rude and talk behind his back. Let's enjoy the
peace & quiet. We can then be rude to his face when the sad little git reappears :)

Anyone who just can't live without the fix of a good argument can visit uk.tossers and troll there!!

T
 
P

Peter B

Guest
"Colin Blackburn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> To be fair that was his disciple Raymond. He suggested that at low speeds there was just too
> little happening for the brain to work properly.

A bit like when received wisdom was that it would be impossible to breathe at 30 mph or some such
rubbish, based on no facts whatsoever.

Pete
 
P

Peter B

Guest
"Tim Woodall" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 10:15:18 -0000, No. No. No. No. No. You haven't been paying attention at
> the back.
>
> The problem is that drivers have a fixed attention span (something between 1ns and 1us I guess)
> and therefore they have to drive VERY fast in order
to
> get from A to B during that time and also spend less time on the road so
they
> have less risk of an accident - It's a win-win situation.

Plus the main advantage of going fast is that you will have passed the scene of a potential
collision before it can happen.

A bit like if that train had gone faster it would have been past the point where Gary Hart parked
his car trailer on the track before he parked it there.

(The example is provided for the benefit of any lurkers from uk.tosspot)

Pete
 
T

Trevor Barton

Guest
Colin Blackburn <[email protected]> wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>>
>> "Tony W" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> >
>> > "Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> > news:[email protected]...
>> > > Has anyone noticed that the self-proclaimed safety advocate now ends his signature with
>> > > "let's make speed cameras as unacceptable as
>> > drink-driving?"
>> >
>> >
>> > Yes -- he's been doing it for some time. I noticed it first because, with my dyslexia, I
>> > completely ignored the word 'cameras' and thought it very strange that he had suddenly seen the
>> > light.
>>
>> Actually it might be because that slogan exists "speeding as...." He's trying to be clever, but
>> the fact remains that PS thinks speed cameras make everyone in to child killing automata. The
>> same way as no one can keep their attention on driving long enough unless they go over 70 mph.
>
> To be fair that was his disciple Raymond. He suggested that at low speeds there was just too
> little happening for the brain to work properly.

To be fair to P**l S***head, it's obviously correct that at low speeds there is too little happening
for the brain to work properly. Evidence
PS's posts themselves. Presumably even an expert like he posts from behind a stationary computer -
not moving at all therefore brain not working at all.

Well, I'd momentarily forgotten of course that PS is an *advanced* driver, so he probably can post
and drive, because he will undoubtedly be able to correctly evaluate the dangers of the situation
and compensate appropriately by speeding up a bit.

Trev
 
J

John B

Guest
Tony W wrote:

> "Tim Woodall" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > No. No. No. No. No. You haven't been paying attention at the back.
>
>
> Come on guys -- he's away for 10 days. Let's not be rude and talk behind his back. Let's enjoy the
> peace & quiet. We can then be rude to his face when the sad little git reappears :)

I've been wondering what this 10 day disappearance is for.

I suspect he won't tell us when he's released.

John B
 
W

W K

Guest
"Tony W" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]...

> Come on guys -- he's away for 10 days. Let's not be rude and talk behind his back. Let's enjoy the
> peace & quiet. We can then be rude to his face when the sad little git reappears :)
>
> Anyone who just can't live without the fix of a good argument can visit uk.tossers and
> troll there!!

I got a squeak out of him yesterday am.

He'd like to push that - "Ten facts about global warming THEY don't want you to know" Includes:
4: Without the Greenhouse Effect there would be no life on Earth.
 
C

Colin Blackburn

Guest
In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
> Colin Blackburn <[email protected]> wrote:
> > To be fair that was his disciple Raymond. He suggested that at low speeds there was just too
> > little happening for the brain to work properly.
>
> To be fair to P**l S***head, it's obviously correct that at low speeds there is too little
> happening for the brain to work properly. Evidence
> PS's posts themselves. Presumably even an expert like he posts from behind a stationary computer -
> not moving at all therefore brain not working at all.

Yebbut, he'sprobably taken his ECDL and no doubt the advanced version if there is one.

Colin
 
H

Huw Pritchard

Guest
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 11:33:53 +0000, W K did issue forth:

> "Ten facts about global warming THEY don't want you to know" Includes:
> 4: Without the Greenhouse Effect there would be no life on Earth.

That is true. There has always been (or at least for millions of years) a certain amount of
greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. Without this then all the heat needed by life would just bounce
straight back out into space again.

The thing that hasn't been mentioned is that right now the greenhouse effect *might* be heading out
of control (but we don't really know for sure), which would be bad.

--
Huw Pritchard | Replace bounce with huw | to reply by mail | www.secretworldgovernment.org
 
J

Just Zis Guy

Guest
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 11:33:53 -0000, "W K" <[email protected]> wrote:

>"Ten facts about global warming THEY don't want you to know"

Reminds me of the US auto industry's reaction to pollution controls in the 1960s. Deny, delay,
dissemble.

Guy
===
** WARNING ** This posting may contain traces of irony. http://www.chapmancentral.com (BT ADSL and
dynamic DNS permitting)
NOTE: BT Openworld have now blocked port 25 (without notice), so old mail addresses may no longer
work. Apologies.
 
J

John B

Guest
Colin Blackburn wrote:

> In article <[email protected]>, [email protected] says...
>
> >
> > To be fair to P**l S***head, it's obviously correct that at low speeds there is too little
> > happening for the brain to work properly. Evidence
> > PS's posts themselves. Presumably even an expert like he posts from behind a stationary computer
> > - not moving at all therefore brain not working at all.
>
> Yebbut, he'sprobably taken his ECDL and no doubt the advanced version if there is one.

So that's what he uses to drive with.

John B
 
A

Arthur Clune

Guest
Huw Pritchard <[email protected]> wrote:

: That is true. There has always been (or at least for millions of years) a certain amount of
: greenhouse gas in the atmosphere. Without this then all the heat needed by life would just bounce
: straight back out into space again.

Climate scientists tend to differenate between "the greenhouse effect" (necessary for life on earth)
and "climate change".

Arthur

--
Arthur Clune http://www.clune.org Power is delightful. Absolute power is absolutely delightful -
Lord Lester
 
T

Tony W

Guest
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 22 Jan 2003 11:33:53 -0000, "W K" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >"Ten facts about global warming THEY don't want you to know"
>
> Reminds me of the US auto industry's reaction to pollution controls in the 1960s. Deny, delay,
> dissemble.

So that's were the 'baccie boys got it from!!

T
 
G

Geraint Jones

Guest
"Just zis Guy, you know?" <[email protected]> wrote: ( Has anyone noticed that the
self-proclaimed safety advocate now ends his ) signature with "let's make speed cameras as
unacceptable as drink-driving?"

Ahem. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2696307.stm

It seems they just leap out and bash your battlefield aquarium in the nose.

(The label on the back window, rather misleadingly, says "Police Aware".)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.