Have we become a nation of cycle haters?

[Dammit]

You are a total moron.

Is a sneeze involuntary? Yes.

Are we, as sentient (I'm giving you more credit that you deserve here) beings aware that we might sneeze? Yes.

Therefore, should be (maybe, just maybe) be prepared for it to happen?

Or should we drive in such a way that if we do sneeze we lose control and kill someone?

And I'll ignore the rest of your victim blaming, trolling rubbish as it's totally irrelevant to the point - yet more "LOOK OVER THERE! LOOK OVER THERE!" drivel.

[Dammit]

And once more, I sincerely urge you to send your licence back to the DVLA- you REALLY shouldn't have it.

[NoNeed]

Dammit said:

You are a total moron.


And I'll ignore the rest of your victim blaming, trolling rubbish as it's totally irrelevant to the point - yet more "LOOK OVER THERE! LOOK OVER THERE!" drivel.

More insults and crap. Oh and a look over there comment from the person that went on about pushing prams into lakes. lol

[Dammit]

Hah, you're not even trying to answer my last point then?

Well done, have the Losers award - a pointy hat, you can find your own corner.

[Dammit]

It's probably not your fault that you can't argue coherently- maybe you sneezed?

[NoNeed]

Dammit said:

Hah, you're not even trying to answer my last point then?

Well done, have the Losers award - a pointy hat, you can find your own corner.

More insults.



I think you lack of ability to actually have a grown up discussion combined with your constant need for somebody to blame means one of two things.

1. you have a low mental age (this I doubt)
2. you have some sort of personality disorder.


Either way discussion with you is pointless. I will let you go and find somebodies life to needlessly destroy.

[Dammit]

Sadly, I really believe that you will make good on your last line. But it won't be your fault you killed them - because sneezing.

Well done for being such a poor loser- but it was inevitable, really.

I wait with interest to see what indefensible, ridiculous behaviour your champion next.

[Dammit]

And well done for the "if he doesn't agree with me he must have a personality disorder", when your position is that it's ok to kill people. LOL, as you say.

[heebeegeetee]

NoNeed said:

You twisted those outdated statistics a little didn't you?


from that report 17-25% of all fatal accidents were SOLELY the cyclists fault, and riding into the back in broad daylight was only 25 % rising to 33% in rural areas. More interestingly 15% involved cyclists alone, I take that to mean no cars.


So whether no lights, glare from the sun or some other distraction it does seem to me from that report that drivers are only found responsible by police in 60-75% of incidents. We don't have a breakdown of how many of those were prosecuted nor what reasons the driver gave.

None of that crap - you were talking specifically about cycling with no lights, I just let you know the scale of the problem, which is that's it's a fraction of the problem of car drivers driving while not watching where they're going in broad daylight.

NoNeed said:

1. Ok then what should the van driver involved in a collision at 39 seconds be charged with? unsafe load?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tINaMUG1Nxs


2. Oh and a sneeze is not a voluntary act, from this wiki page.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sneeze

1. Possibly, otherwise nothing.

2. FFS, nobody said involuntary!

I reckon your skills at debating match your driving.

[NoNeed]

Dammit said:

And well done for the "if he doesn't agree with me he must have a personality disorder", when your position is that it's ok to kill people. LOL, as you say.

At no point have I said you have a personality disorder for not agreeing with me, your reading skills are shocking. At no point have I said that it is OK to kill people, again your reading skills are terrible.

[Mr Gear]

NoNeed said:

2. you have some sort of personality disorder.

Are my reading skills up the spout too?

[NoNeed]

heebeegeetee said:

I reckon your skills at debating match your driving.

So you have seen me drive? You are qualified to assess my driving that you have seen?

[NoNeed]

Mr Gear said:

NoNeed said:

2. you have some sort of personality disorder.

Are my reading skills up the spout too?

Yes, and if you had quoted the whole paragraph you could see why.


Taking things out of context will achieve nothing. I stated two reasons fo why I believe there is a personality dissorder and neither were anything to do with a difference of opinion.

Edited by NoNeed on Sunday 27th July 17:54

[Dammit]

Do you think you could get your carer to check your posts before you make them, as you really aren't making any sense now.

Might save you some embarrassment.

[NoNeed]

Dammit said:

Do you think you could get your carer to check your posts before you make them, as you really aren't making any sense now.

Might save you some embarrassment.

I'm not embarrassed, but I don't mind helping if you are stuck.

your last statement was.

Dammit said:

And well done for the "if he doesn't agree with me he must have a personality disorder", when your position is that it's ok to kill people. LOL, as you say.

to which I replied

NoNeed said:

At no point have I said you have a personality disorder for not agreeing with me, your reading skills are shocking. At no point have I said that it is OK to kill people, again your reading skills are terrible.

I'm not sure which bit you are stuck on but I said that I think you have a personality disorder as you are constantly throwing insults and looking for somebody to blame. Your last statement quite clearly states that I said you had a personality disorder due to you not agreeing with me, which to anybody that can read would be quite clear. The same could be said for your"it's OK to kill" comment which I have never made but that didn't stop you saying

Maybe you were just being deliberately obtuse, which would fit nicely with my personality observation.


Hope that helped.

[Dammit]

So, to recap.

Your position is that if I am driving along and (whilst sneezing) kill you, I should suffer no legal or social sanction as it would be unfair to ruin my life.

My position is that this is not desirable in a civilised society as we should have a structure of rules which promote personal responsibility - i.e. I SHOULD have to make some sort of payment for the act of killing you into the social purse as it were, probably in the form of a custodial sentence and long driving ban.

You continued to make your assertion that "these things happen, no-one's to blame" for acts that any sane individual would term negligent.

I tried to use other examples where negligent behaviours led to the harm of others.

You stepped up your attempts to blame the victim, bringing in lots of irrelevant stuff about cyclists which only served to prove that you are a bigot.

I basically gave up as you are clearly Strong In Your Faith with regards people should be free to kill others due to negligence and get away with it.

You continued to whine, and we now find ourselves here.

[Dammit]

(Ask the nice person who cuts up your food to check that your next post doesn't directly contradict your previous ones, as you've got a bit of a problem in that area).

[NoNeed]

Dammit said:

So, to recap.

Your position is that if I am driving along and (whilst sneezing) kill you, I should suffer no legal or social sanction as it would be unfair to ruin my life.

My position is that this is not desirable in a civilised society as we should have a structure of rules which promote personal responsibility - i.e. I SHOULD have to make some sort of payment for the act of killing you into the social purse as it were, probably in the form of a custodial sentence and long driving ban.

You continued to make your assertion that "these things happen, no-one's to blame" for acts that any sane individual would term negligent.

I was going to point out that you forgot the insults but then you added another post.


Glad I wasn't wrong about your personality issue.



So in your civilised society, what rules should cyclists follow? and if they are responsible for an accident what sanctions and punishment should they receive?

Or do you want the motorists to bear total responsibility even for actions that aren't his own?

It comes back to what I originally said, cyclist could ride in a manner that minimises danger but they choose not to due to some sort of pride in a small piece of tarmac they are on. They also completley ignore the highway code.

and example that immediately springs to mind is never ride more than two abreast, and ride in single file on narrow or busy roads and when riding round bends.

I see that ignored daily yet if that results in a fatality that following the highway code would have avoided would you still want the car driver prosecuted?

[anonymous-user]

NoNeed said:

I haven't tried to change any discussion, not at all. And an involuntary natural act that you are powerless to stop could well be the actual cause of an accident.

So how many accidents have you caused through 'involuntary natural acts'

If zero then what the fk are you talking about exactly?

[heebeegeetee]

NoNeed said:

So you have seen me drive? You are qualified to assess my driving that you have seen?

Anyone who reckons that people could be killed by so much as a sneeze... must be one heck of a st driver if they cut people that close and still think it would be an accident if they hit them.