On 01/10/2023 13:08, John J wrote:
> On Sunday, 1 October 2023 at 12:53:26 UTC+1, TimW wrote:
>> On 30/09/2023 14:23, Jack Harry Teesdale wrote:
>>> On 30/09/2023 13:34, Radio Man wrote:
>>>> I don't know what all the fuss is about. Why don't "The Motorists" just
>>>> cycle or walk instead? The "Motorists" who are too old, too fucked, too
>>>> fat, too idle, or too up themselves to walk or to cycle can get a taxi or
>>>> use the fantastic, efficient, reasonably priced public transport that the
>>>> wonderful Conservative party had the foresight to deregulate and
>>>> privatise for them.
>>>>
>>>> Grow Up, Motorists!
>>>>
>>>
>>> Do I sense a large hint of sarcasm in your post?
>>>
>>> Anyhow, the anti-motorist brigade would do well to remember it is
>>> motorists who pay a large slice of the taxes, without which there
>>> wouldn't be much less available for public spending.
>> There is no 'anti-motorist brigade' You have been tricked into the Tory
>> Culture Wars by reading the Daily Mail or something. Like there is no
>> right to asylum for being gay or a woman, there never were East European
>> Immigrants stealing carp from fish ponds, like most terrorists are white
>> right wingers, not Muslims. Don't be a fool. Don't just believe the Tory
>> claptrap.
>> TW
> Claptrap is not restricted to one party. There are as many lunatics on the labour benches (possibly more) as the Tories can muster. No matter which party is in power we're going to hell in a handbasket 😞

Wrong. While all politicians tell the occasional fib the whole method of
populists is to tell so many whoppers that people get angry and
confused. Hard right politics is at it's core a series of interconnected
lies and conspiracy theories. It isn't about rational decisions,
nurturing compassion and achieving good government - it's about rabble
rousing. Quite unlike a decent democratic socialist party.

Tim W

Ho ho, are you really a troll or just playing one, or maybe traininng?

I think it has become a very good revenue stream to catch people parking or
going over the speed limit since the Government have starved local
authorities of funding for many years now, and its not all going to be
fundable out of council tax or business rates.
I do't care which government gets in, in the end running a national debt if
interest rates rise is unsustainable and running a council without the help
from central taxation is also unsustainable. Its a bit like everyone has
painted themselves into a corner. If you have to rely on taxis and busses
and trains as a blind person, you soon find out how cheap owning a car will
seem.
Brian

--

--:
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Radio Man" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote in message
news:hBURM.181840$MU78.165776@usenetxs.com...
>I don't know what all the fuss is about. Why don't "The Motorists" just
> cycle or walk instead? The "Motorists" who are too old, too fucked, too
> fat, too idle, or too up themselves to walk or to cycle can get a taxi or
> use the fantastic, efficient, reasonably priced public transport that the
> wonderful Conservative party had the foresight to deregulate and
> privatise for them.
>
> Grow Up, Motorists!
>

On Sunday, 1 October 2023 at 13:22:53 UTC+1, TimW wrote:
> On 01/10/2023 13:08, John J wrote:
> > On Sunday, 1 October 2023 at 12:53:26 UTC+1, TimW wrote:
> >> On 30/09/2023 14:23, Jack Harry Teesdale wrote:
> >>> On 30/09/2023 13:34, Radio Man wrote:
> >>>> I don't know what all the fuss is about. Why don't "The Motorists" just
> >>>> cycle or walk instead? The "Motorists" who are too old, too fucked, too
> >>>> fat, too idle, or too up themselves to walk or to cycle can get a taxi or
> >>>> use the fantastic, efficient, reasonably priced public transport that the
> >>>> wonderful Conservative party had the foresight to deregulate and
> >>>> privatise for them.
> >>>>
> >>>> Grow Up, Motorists!
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Do I sense a large hint of sarcasm in your post?
> >>>
> >>> Anyhow, the anti-motorist brigade would do well to remember it is
> >>> motorists who pay a large slice of the taxes, without which there
> >>> wouldn't be much less available for public spending.
> >> There is no 'anti-motorist brigade' You have been tricked into the Tory
> >> Culture Wars by reading the Daily Mail or something. Like there is no
> >> right to asylum for being gay or a woman, there never were East European
> >> Immigrants stealing carp from fish ponds, like most terrorists are white
> >> right wingers, not Muslims. Don't be a fool. Don't just believe the Tory
> >> claptrap.
> >> TW
> > Claptrap is not restricted to one party. There are as many lunatics on the labour benches (possibly more) as the Tories can muster. No matter which party is in power we're going to hell in a handbasket 😞
> Wrong. While all politicians tell the occasional fib the whole method of
> populists is to tell so many whoppers that people get angry and
> confused. Hard right politics is at it's core a series of interconnected
> lies and conspiracy theories. It isn't about rational decisions,
> nurturing compassion and achieving good government - it's about rabble
> rousing. Quite unlike a decent democratic socialist party.
>
> Tim W
When you find one do tell us where

On 01/10/2023 11:27, S Mason wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 10:56:32 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> On 30/09/2023 20:18, S Mason wrote:
>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 18:23:21 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 30/09/2023 16:12, S Mason wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 15:01:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 14:30, charles wrote:
>>>>>>> In article <hBURM.181840$MU78.165776@usenetxs.com>,
>>>>>>> Radio Man <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I don't know what all the fuss is about. Why don't "The Motorists"
>>>>>>>> just cycle or walk instead? The "Motorists" who are too old, too
>>>>>>>> fucked, too fat, too idle, or too up themselves to walk or to
>>>>>>>> cycle can get a taxi or use the fantastic, efficient, reasonably
>>>>>>>> priced public transport that the wonderful Conservative party had
>>>>>>>> the foresight to deregulate and privatise for them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Grow Up, Motorists!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I used to cycle for local journeys but I was knocked off my bike -
>>>>>>> receiving a badly broken arm - I lost my nerve after that. Too
>>>>>>> many motorist who don't give adequate room when passing.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> On the roads rind here the LycraLouts™ insist on riding down the
>>>>>> center. They patently have no idea how to control a bicycle
>>>>>> accurately enough with anything less than a 1,5m gap either side and
>>>>>> more if they can arrange it, but of course they never took a test,
>>>>>> have no insurance , and these days have effective immunity under the
>>>>>> Law. Their very saddles stink with the odour of sanctity of their
>>>>>> non carbon emittiung bicycles.
>>>>>
>>>>> I hope you've got some sort of spittle guard on that keyboard of
>>>>> yours.
>>>>
>>>> No spittle. Just *facts*. You know the things that cause you to have a
>>>> panic attack and cover your ears.
>>>> And leap in to mount an *emotional* attack on the people who divulge
>>>> them to you.
>>>
>>> You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you on the arse.
>> Oh dear, more emotional fact free responses.
>> .
>> Darling boy, I made my career as a practising engineer. No a BBC
>> newscaster.
>> Machines respond to facts.
>> Not to idle opinions.
>> I cant make my car do another ten miles by promising it that I will fill
>> up at the next fuel station.
>> If my designs are not cosnsistent with the facts, they dont work.
>>
>> I said:
>> On the roads rind here the LycraLouts™ insist on riding down the
>> center.
>>
>> That is an actual fact.
>>
>> They patently have no idea how to control a bicycle accurately enough
>> with anything less than a 1,5m gap either side and more if they
>> can arrange it,
>>
>> That is also a fact. They are the most selfish road users ever. They
>> have been told how scared they must be of cars but how they can
>> prosecute a driver who doesn't leave a meter gap, which means they can
>> render themselves impossible to overtake, and they do. one mile
>> tailbacks
>>
>> but of course they never took a test,
>>
>> Is a fact.
>>
>> have no insurance ,
>>
>> is a fact.
>>
>> and these days have effective immunity under the Law.
>>
>> is a fact.
>>
>> Their very saddles stink with the odour of sanctity of their non
>> carbon emitting bicycles.
>>
>> Poetic license
>
> All perfectly legal. I thought you lot liked law and order, or is that
> only when it suits YOU?

Legality does not necessarily equate with good practice.
I see a report in the comic DE that Cambridge, home of the lightless
pavement riding bicycle is the worst town for lethal traffic accidents.

These are not legal. Neither is cycling the wrong way down a one way
street or lurching off the pavement in front of a car. Or going round a
roundabout the wrong way.

I would say only one in three cambridge cyclists are fit to be allowed
on the public roads when they decide that the pavement isn't where they
want to be..

--
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the
other is to refuse to believe what is true.”

—Soren Kierkegaard

On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 22:23:29 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 01/10/2023 11:27, S Mason wrote:
>> On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 10:56:32 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> On 30/09/2023 20:18, S Mason wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 18:23:21 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 30/09/2023 16:12, S Mason wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 15:01:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 14:30, charles wrote:
>>>>>>>> In article <hBURM.181840$MU78.165776@usenetxs.com>,
>>>>>>>> Radio Man <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I don't know what all the fuss is about. Why don't "The
>>>>>>>>> Motorists"
>>>>>>>>> just cycle or walk instead? The "Motorists" who are too old, too
>>>>>>>>> fucked, too fat, too idle, or too up themselves to walk or to
>>>>>>>>> cycle can get a taxi or use the fantastic, efficient, reasonably
>>>>>>>>> priced public transport that the wonderful Conservative party
>>>>>>>>> had the foresight to deregulate and privatise for them.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Grow Up, Motorists!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I used to cycle for local journeys but I was knocked off my bike
>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>> receiving a badly broken arm - I lost my nerve after that. Too
>>>>>>>> many motorist who don't give adequate room when passing.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On the roads rind here the LycraLouts™ insist on riding down the
>>>>>>> center. They patently have no idea how to control a bicycle
>>>>>>> accurately enough with anything less than a 1,5m gap either side
>>>>>>> and more if they can arrange it, but of course they never took a
>>>>>>> test, have no insurance , and these days have effective immunity
>>>>>>> under the Law. Their very saddles stink with the odour of sanctity
>>>>>>> of their non carbon emittiung bicycles.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I hope you've got some sort of spittle guard on that keyboard of
>>>>>> yours.
>>>>>
>>>>> No spittle. Just *facts*. You know the things that cause you to have
>>>>> a panic attack and cover your ears.
>>>>> And leap in to mount an *emotional* attack on the people who divulge
>>>>> them to you.
>>>>
>>>> You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you on the arse.
>>> Oh dear, more emotional fact free responses.
>>> .
>>> Darling boy, I made my career as a practising engineer. No a BBC
>>> newscaster.
>>> Machines respond to facts.
>>> Not to idle opinions.
>>> I cant make my car do another ten miles by promising it that I will
>>> fill up at the next fuel station.
>>> If my designs are not cosnsistent with the facts, they dont work.
>>>
>>> I said:
>>> On the roads rind here the LycraLouts™ insist on riding down the
>>> center.
>>>
>>> That is an actual fact.
>>>
>>> They patently have no idea how to control a bicycle accurately
>>> enough with anything less than a 1,5m gap either side and more if
>>> they
>>> can arrange it,
>>>
>>> That is also a fact. They are the most selfish road users ever. They
>>> have been told how scared they must be of cars but how they can
>>> prosecute a driver who doesn't leave a meter gap, which means they can
>>> render themselves impossible to overtake, and they do. one mile
>>> tailbacks
>>>
>>> but of course they never took a test,
>>>
>>> Is a fact.
>>>
>>> have no insurance ,
>>>
>>> is a fact.
>>>
>>> and these days have effective immunity under the Law.
>>>
>>> is a fact.
>>>
>>> Their very saddles stink with the odour of sanctity of their non
>>> carbon emitting bicycles.
>>>
>>> Poetic license
>>
>> All perfectly legal. I thought you lot liked law and order, or is that
>> only when it suits YOU?
>
> Legality does not necessarily equate with good practice.
> I see a report in the comic DE that Cambridge, home of the lightless
> pavement riding bicycle is the worst town for lethal traffic accidents.
>
> These are not legal. Neither is cycling the wrong way down a one way
> street or lurching off the pavement in front of a car. Or going round a
> roundabout the wrong way.
>
> I would say only one in three cambridge cyclists are fit to be allowed
> on the public roads when they decide that the pavement isn't where they
> want to be..

Lots of additional spittle-flecked stuff that you weren't talking about
in your original rant about law abiding cyclists.

Same old.

On 01/10/2023 22:40, S Mason wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 22:23:29 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> On 01/10/2023 11:27, S Mason wrote:
>>> On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 10:56:32 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 30/09/2023 20:18, S Mason wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 18:23:21 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 16:12, S Mason wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 15:01:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 14:30, charles wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In article <hBURM.181840$MU78.165776@usenetxs.com>,
>>>>>>>>> Radio Man <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> I don't know what all the fuss is about. Why don't "The
>>>>>>>>>> Motorists"
>>>>>>>>>> just cycle or walk instead? The "Motorists" who are too old, too
>>>>>>>>>> fucked, too fat, too idle, or too up themselves to walk or to
>>>>>>>>>> cycle can get a taxi or use the fantastic, efficient, reasonably
>>>>>>>>>> priced public transport that the wonderful Conservative party
>>>>>>>>>> had the foresight to deregulate and privatise for them.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Grow Up, Motorists!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I used to cycle for local journeys but I was knocked off my bike
>>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>>> receiving a badly broken arm - I lost my nerve after that. Too
>>>>>>>>> many motorist who don't give adequate room when passing.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On the roads rind here the LycraLouts™ insist on riding down the
>>>>>>>> center. They patently have no idea how to control a bicycle
>>>>>>>> accurately enough with anything less than a 1,5m gap either side
>>>>>>>> and more if they can arrange it, but of course they never took a
>>>>>>>> test, have no insurance , and these days have effective immunity
>>>>>>>> under the Law. Their very saddles stink with the odour of sanctity
>>>>>>>> of their non carbon emittiung bicycles.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I hope you've got some sort of spittle guard on that keyboard of
>>>>>>> yours.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No spittle. Just *facts*. You know the things that cause you to have
>>>>>> a panic attack and cover your ears.
>>>>>> And leap in to mount an *emotional* attack on the people who divulge
>>>>>> them to you.
>>>>>
>>>>> You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you on the arse.
>>>> Oh dear, more emotional fact free responses.
>>>> .
>>>> Darling boy, I made my career as a practising engineer. No a BBC
>>>> newscaster.
>>>> Machines respond to facts.
>>>> Not to idle opinions.
>>>> I cant make my car do another ten miles by promising it that I will
>>>> fill up at the next fuel station.
>>>> If my designs are not cosnsistent with the facts, they dont work.
>>>>
>>>> I said:
>>>> On the roads rind here the LycraLouts™ insist on riding down the
>>>> center.
>>>>
>>>> That is an actual fact.
>>>>
>>>> They patently have no idea how to control a bicycle accurately
>>>> enough with anything less than a 1,5m gap either side and more if
>>>> they
>>>> can arrange it,
>>>>
>>>> That is also a fact. They are the most selfish road users ever. They
>>>> have been told how scared they must be of cars but how they can
>>>> prosecute a driver who doesn't leave a meter gap, which means they can
>>>> render themselves impossible to overtake, and they do. one mile
>>>> tailbacks
>>>>
>>>> but of course they never took a test,
>>>>
>>>> Is a fact.
>>>>
>>>> have no insurance ,
>>>>
>>>> is a fact.
>>>>
>>>> and these days have effective immunity under the Law.
>>>>
>>>> is a fact.
>>>>
>>>> Their very saddles stink with the odour of sanctity of their non
>>>> carbon emitting bicycles.
>>>>
>>>> Poetic license
>>>
>>> All perfectly legal. I thought you lot liked law and order, or is that
>>> only when it suits YOU?
>>
>> Legality does not necessarily equate with good practice.
>> I see a report in the comic DE that Cambridge, home of the lightless
>> pavement riding bicycle is the worst town for lethal traffic accidents.
>>
>> These are not legal. Neither is cycling the wrong way down a one way
>> street or lurching off the pavement in front of a car. Or going round a
>> roundabout the wrong way.
>>
>> I would say only one in three cambridge cyclists are fit to be allowed
>> on the public roads when they decide that the pavement isn't where they
>> want to be..
>
> Lots of additional spittle-flecked stuff that you weren't talking about
> in your original rant about law abiding cyclists.
>
> Same old.
You are becoming a total fucking bore with your pathetic juvenile insults
whenever you cant make a rational case.

*plonk*

--
Gun Control: The law that ensures that only criminals have guns.

On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 22:49:52 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 01/10/2023 22:40, S Mason wrote:
>> On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 22:23:29 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/10/2023 11:27, S Mason wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 10:56:32 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 30/09/2023 20:18, S Mason wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 18:23:21 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 16:12, S Mason wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 15:01:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 14:30, charles wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In article <hBURM.181840$MU78.165776@usenetxs.com>,
>>>>>>>>>> Radio Man <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know what all the fuss is about. Why don't "The
>>>>>>>>>>> Motorists"
>>>>>>>>>>> just cycle or walk instead? The "Motorists" who are too old,
>>>>>>>>>>> too fucked, too fat, too idle, or too up themselves to walk or
>>>>>>>>>>> to cycle can get a taxi or use the fantastic, efficient,
>>>>>>>>>>> reasonably priced public transport that the wonderful
>>>>>>>>>>> Conservative party had the foresight to deregulate and
>>>>>>>>>>> privatise for them.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Grow Up, Motorists!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I used to cycle for local journeys but I was knocked off my
>>>>>>>>>> bike -
>>>>>>>>>> receiving a badly broken arm - I lost my nerve after that. Too
>>>>>>>>>> many motorist who don't give adequate room when passing.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On the roads rind here the LycraLouts™ insist on riding down
>>>>>>>>> the center. They patently have no idea how to control a bicycle
>>>>>>>>> accurately enough with anything less than a 1,5m gap either side
>>>>>>>>> and more if they can arrange it, but of course they never took a
>>>>>>>>> test, have no insurance , and these days have effective immunity
>>>>>>>>> under the Law. Their very saddles stink with the odour of
>>>>>>>>> sanctity of their non carbon emittiung bicycles.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I hope you've got some sort of spittle guard on that keyboard of
>>>>>>>> yours.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No spittle. Just *facts*. You know the things that cause you to
>>>>>>> have a panic attack and cover your ears.
>>>>>>> And leap in to mount an *emotional* attack on the people who
>>>>>>> divulge them to you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you on the arse.
>>>>> Oh dear, more emotional fact free responses.
>>>>> .
>>>>> Darling boy, I made my career as a practising engineer. No a BBC
>>>>> newscaster.
>>>>> Machines respond to facts.
>>>>> Not to idle opinions.
>>>>> I cant make my car do another ten miles by promising it that I will
>>>>> fill up at the next fuel station.
>>>>> If my designs are not cosnsistent with the facts, they dont work.
>>>>>
>>>>> I said:
>>>>> On the roads rind here the LycraLouts™ insist on riding down the
>>>>> center.
>>>>>
>>>>> That is an actual fact.
>>>>>
>>>>> They patently have no idea how to control a bicycle accurately
>>>>> enough with anything less than a 1,5m gap either side and more
>>>>> if they
>>>>> can arrange it,
>>>>>
>>>>> That is also a fact. They are the most selfish road users ever. They
>>>>> have been told how scared they must be of cars but how they can
>>>>> prosecute a driver who doesn't leave a meter gap, which means they
>>>>> can render themselves impossible to overtake, and they do. one mile
>>>>> tailbacks
>>>>>
>>>>> but of course they never took a test,
>>>>>
>>>>> Is a fact.
>>>>>
>>>>> have no insurance ,
>>>>>
>>>>> is a fact.
>>>>>
>>>>> and these days have effective immunity under the Law.
>>>>>
>>>>> is a fact.
>>>>>
>>>>> Their very saddles stink with the odour of sanctity of their non
>>>>> carbon emitting bicycles.
>>>>>
>>>>> Poetic license
>>>>
>>>> All perfectly legal. I thought you lot liked law and order, or is
>>>> that only when it suits YOU?
>>>
>>> Legality does not necessarily equate with good practice.
>>> I see a report in the comic DE that Cambridge, home of the lightless
>>> pavement riding bicycle is the worst town for lethal traffic
>>> accidents.
>>>
>>> These are not legal. Neither is cycling the wrong way down a one way
>>> street or lurching off the pavement in front of a car. Or going round
>>> a roundabout the wrong way.
>>>
>>> I would say only one in three cambridge cyclists are fit to be allowed
>>> on the public roads when they decide that the pavement isn't where
>>> they want to be..
>>
>> Lots of additional spittle-flecked stuff that you weren't talking about
>> in your original rant about law abiding cyclists.
>>
>> Same old.
> You are becoming a total fucking bore with your pathetic juvenile
> insults whenever you cant make a rational case.
>
> *plonk*

And a sore LOOOOOOOOSER TOOOOOOOOOO!

LOL!

On 01/10/2023 12:53, TimW wrote:
> On 30/09/2023 14:23, Jack Harry Teesdale wrote:
>> On 30/09/2023 13:34, Radio Man wrote:
>>> I don't know what all the fuss is about. Why don't "The Motorists" just
>>> cycle or walk instead? The "Motorists" who are too old, too fucked, too
>>> fat, too idle, or too up themselves to walk or to cycle can get a
>>> taxi or
>>> use the fantastic, efficient, reasonably priced public transport that
>>> the
>>> wonderful Conservative party had the foresight to deregulate and
>>> privatise for them.
>>>
>>> Grow Up, Motorists!
>>>
>>
>> Do I sense a large hint of sarcasm in your post?
>>
>> Anyhow, the anti-motorist brigade would do well to remember it is
>> motorists who pay a large slice of the taxes, without which there
>> wouldn't be much less available for public spending.
>
> There is no 'anti-motorist brigade' You have been tricked into the Tory
> Culture Wars by reading the Daily Mail or something. Like there is no
> right to asylum for being gay or a woman, there never were East European
> Immigrants stealing carp from fish ponds, like most terrorists are white
> right wingers, not Muslims. Don't be a fool. Don't just believe the Tory
> claptrap.
> TW

So, you think ULEZ zones, no car neighbourhoods and 20 mph Blanket speed
limits in Wales are not 'anti-motorist'?

On 01/10/2023 13:22, TimW wrote:
>>
>
> Wrong. While all politicians tell the occasional fib the whole method of
> populists is to tell so many whoppers that people get angry and
> confused. Hard right politics is at it's core a series of interconnected
> lies and conspiracy theories. It isn't about rational decisions,
> nurturing compassion and achieving good government - it's about rabble
> rousing. Quite unlike a decent democratic socialist party.

Comparing hard right with moderate socialist is no more valid that
comparing the socialism of Russia with the current UK government.

Andy

On 01 Oct 2023 at 13:22:47 BST, "TimW" <timw@nomailta.co.uk> wrote:

> Wrong. While all politicians tell the occasional fib the whole method of
> populists is to tell so many whoppers that people get angry and
> confused. Hard right politics is at it's core a series of interconnected
> lies and conspiracy theories. It isn't about rational decisions,
> nurturing compassion and achieving good government - it's about rabble
> rousing. Quite unlike a decent democratic socialist party.

So that excludes Labour then, whose supports sport placards advocating
violence against their political opponents.

--
Socialism: For people who lack the charisma to be train spotters.

Ann Sheridan

On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 06:01:05 GMT, Radio Man
<no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:

>On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 00:35:22 +0100, Rambo wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 12:34:21 GMT, Radio Man <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>I don't know what all the fuss is about. Why don't "The Motorists" just
>>>cycle or walk instead? The "Motorists" who are too old, too fucked, too
>>>fat, too idle, or too up themselves to walk or to cycle can get a taxi
>>>or use the fantastic, efficient, reasonably priced public transport that
>>>the wonderful Conservative party had the foresight to deregulate and
>>>privatise for them.
>>>
>>>Grow Up, Motorists!
>>
>> ""too old, too fucked, too fat, too idle, or too up themselves""
>> sounds like a self parody there Mr Reay !
>
>Pissed again, Dumbo Dick?

You need some fresh insults Mr Reay.

On Mon, 02 Oct 2023 22:07:49 +0100, Rambo wrote:

> On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 06:01:05 GMT, Radio Man <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 00:35:22 +0100, Rambo wrote:
>>
>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 12:34:21 GMT, Radio Man
>>> <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>I don't know what all the fuss is about. Why don't "The Motorists"
>>>>just cycle or walk instead? The "Motorists" who are too old, too
>>>>fucked, too fat, too idle, or too up themselves to walk or to cycle
>>>>can get a taxi or use the fantastic, efficient, reasonably priced
>>>>public transport that the wonderful Conservative party had the
>>>>foresight to deregulate and privatise for them.
>>>>
>>>>Grow Up, Motorists!
>>>
>>> ""too old, too fucked, too fat, too idle, or too up themselves""
>>> sounds like a self parody there Mr Reay !
>>
>>Pissed again, Dumbo Dick?
>
> You need some fresh insults Mr Reay.

You need a brain transplant, Mr Dumbo.

On 30/09/2023 11:34, S Mason wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 15:25:37 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:
>
>> On 30 Sep 2023 at 16:08:41 BST, "John J" <johnjessop46@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Saturday, 30 September 2023 at 15:01:08 UTC+1, The Natural
>>> Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 30/09/2023 14:30, charles wrote:
>>>>> In article <hBURM.181840$MU78....@usenetxs.com>,
>>>>> Radio Man <no....@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> I don't know what all the fuss is about. Why don't "The Motorists"
>>>>>> just cycle or walk instead?
>>
>> So that would be 6 miles to Morrison's and 6 miles back - carrying two
>> large shopping bags each. And that's not counting the two large folds on
>> the Downs in between. Admittedly there is a village shop some 3 miles
>> from here.
>>
>
> Cargo bike.

They're only for the clowns' entry into the circus ring, May Sun.

But you are well aware of that.

On 01/10/2023 16:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 01/10/2023 22:40, S Mason wrote:
>> On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 22:23:29 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/10/2023 11:27, S Mason wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 10:56:32 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 30/09/2023 20:18, S Mason wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 18:23:21 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 16:12, S Mason wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 15:01:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 14:30, charles wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In article <hBURM.181840$MU78.165776@usenetxs.com>,
>>>>>>>>>> Radio Man <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know what all the fuss is about. Why don't "The
>>>>>>>>>>> Motorists"
>>>>>>>>>>> just cycle or walk instead? The "Motorists" who are too old, too
>>>>>>>>>>> fucked, too fat, too idle, or too up themselves to walk or to
>>>>>>>>>>> cycle can get a taxi or use the fantastic, efficient, reasonably
>>>>>>>>>>> priced public transport that the wonderful Conservative party
>>>>>>>>>>> had the foresight to deregulate and privatise for them.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Grow Up, Motorists!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I used to cycle for local journeys but I was knocked off my bike
>>>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>>>> receiving a badly broken arm - I lost my nerve after that. Too
>>>>>>>>>> many motorist who don't give adequate room when passing.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On the roads rind here the LycraLouts™ insist on riding down the
>>>>>>>>> center. They patently have no idea how to control a bicycle
>>>>>>>>> accurately enough with anything less than a 1,5m gap either side
>>>>>>>>> and more if they can arrange it, but of course they never took a
>>>>>>>>> test, have no insurance , and these days have effective immunity
>>>>>>>>> under the Law. Their very saddles stink with the odour of sanctity
>>>>>>>>> of their non carbon emittiung bicycles.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I hope you've got some sort of spittle guard on that keyboard of
>>>>>>>> yours.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No spittle. Just *facts*. You know the things that cause you to have
>>>>>>> a panic attack and cover your ears.
>>>>>>> And leap in to mount an *emotional* attack on the people who divulge
>>>>>>> them to you.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you on the arse.
>>>>> Oh dear, more emotional fact free responses.
>>>>> .
>>>>> Darling boy, I made my career as a practising engineer. No a BBC
>>>>> newscaster.
>>>>> Machines respond to facts.
>>>>> Not to idle opinions.
>>>>> I cant make my car do another ten miles by promising it that I will
>>>>> fill up at the next fuel station.
>>>>> If my designs are not cosnsistent with the facts, they dont work.
>>>>>
>>>>> I said:
>>>>> On the roads rind here the LycraLouts™ insist on riding down the
>>>>> center.
>>>>>
>>>>> That is an actual fact.
>>>>>
>>>>> They patently have no idea how to control a bicycle accurately
>>>>> enough with anything less than a 1,5m gap either side and more if
>>>>> they
>>>>> can arrange it,
>>>>>
>>>>> That is also a fact. They are the most selfish road users ever. They
>>>>> have been told how scared they must be of cars but how they can
>>>>> prosecute a driver who doesn't leave a meter gap, which means they can
>>>>> render themselves impossible to overtake, and they do. one mile
>>>>> tailbacks
>>>>>
>>>>> but of course they never took a test,
>>>>>
>>>>> Is a fact.
>>>>>
>>>>> have no insurance ,
>>>>>
>>>>> is a fact.
>>>>>
>>>>> and these days have effective immunity under the Law.
>>>>>
>>>>> is a fact.
>>>>>
>>>>> Their very saddles stink with the odour of sanctity of their non
>>>>> carbon emitting bicycles.
>>>>>
>>>>> Poetic license
>>>>
>>>> All perfectly legal. I thought you lot liked law and order, or is that
>>>> only when it suits YOU?
>>>
>>> Legality does not necessarily equate with good practice.
>>> I see a report in the comic DE that Cambridge, home of the lightless
>>> pavement riding bicycle is the worst town for lethal traffic accidents.
>>>
>>> These are not legal. Neither is cycling the wrong way down a one way
>>> street or lurching off the pavement in front of a car. Or going round a
>>> roundabout the wrong way.
>>>
>>> I would say only one in three cambridge cyclists are fit to be allowed
>>> on the public roads when they decide that the pavement isn't where they
>>> want to be..
>>
>> Lots of additional spittle-flecked stuff that you weren't talking about
>> in your original rant about law abiding cyclists.
>>
>> Same old.
> You are becoming a total fucking bore with your pathetic juvenile insults
> whenever you cant make a rational case.
>
> *plonk*

Simon Mason of uk.rec.cycling; champion bridge jumper-offer.

You've probably done the best thing.

On 01/10/2023 16:55, S Mason wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 22:49:52 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> On 01/10/2023 22:40, S Mason wrote:
>>> On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 22:23:29 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 01/10/2023 11:27, S Mason wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 10:56:32 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 20:18, S Mason wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 18:23:21 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 16:12, S Mason wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 15:01:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 14:30, charles wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In article <hBURM.181840$MU78.165776@usenetxs.com>,
>>>>>>>>>>> Radio Man <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know what all the fuss is about. Why don't "The
>>>>>>>>>>>> Motorists"
>>>>>>>>>>>> just cycle or walk instead? The "Motorists" who are too old,
>>>>>>>>>>>> too fucked, too fat, too idle, or too up themselves to walk or
>>>>>>>>>>>> to cycle can get a taxi or use the fantastic, efficient,
>>>>>>>>>>>> reasonably priced public transport that the wonderful
>>>>>>>>>>>> Conservative party had the foresight to deregulate and
>>>>>>>>>>>> privatise for them.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Grow Up, Motorists!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I used to cycle for local journeys but I was knocked off my
>>>>>>>>>>> bike -
>>>>>>>>>>> receiving a badly broken arm - I lost my nerve after that. Too
>>>>>>>>>>> many motorist who don't give adequate room when passing.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On the roads rind here the LycraLouts™ insist on riding down
>>>>>>>>>> the center. They patently have no idea how to control a bicycle
>>>>>>>>>> accurately enough with anything less than a 1,5m gap either side
>>>>>>>>>> and more if they can arrange it, but of course they never took a
>>>>>>>>>> test, have no insurance , and these days have effective immunity
>>>>>>>>>> under the Law. Their very saddles stink with the odour of
>>>>>>>>>> sanctity of their non carbon emittiung bicycles.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I hope you've got some sort of spittle guard on that keyboard of
>>>>>>>>> yours.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No spittle. Just *facts*. You know the things that cause you to
>>>>>>>> have a panic attack and cover your ears.
>>>>>>>> And leap in to mount an *emotional* attack on the people who
>>>>>>>> divulge them to you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you on the arse.
>>>>>> Oh dear, more emotional fact free responses.
>>>>>> .
>>>>>> Darling boy, I made my career as a practising engineer. No a BBC
>>>>>> newscaster.
>>>>>> Machines respond to facts.
>>>>>> Not to idle opinions.
>>>>>> I cant make my car do another ten miles by promising it that I will
>>>>>> fill up at the next fuel station.
>>>>>> If my designs are not cosnsistent with the facts, they dont work.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I said:
>>>>>> On the roads rind here the LycraLouts™ insist on riding down the
>>>>>> center.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is an actual fact.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They patently have no idea how to control a bicycle accurately
>>>>>> enough with anything less than a 1,5m gap either side and more
>>>>>> if they
>>>>>> can arrange it,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is also a fact. They are the most selfish road users ever. They
>>>>>> have been told how scared they must be of cars but how they can
>>>>>> prosecute a driver who doesn't leave a meter gap, which means they
>>>>>> can render themselves impossible to overtake, and they do. one mile
>>>>>> tailbacks
>>>>>>
>>>>>> but of course they never took a test,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is a fact.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> have no insurance ,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> is a fact.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> and these days have effective immunity under the Law.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> is a fact.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Their very saddles stink with the odour of sanctity of their non
>>>>>> carbon emitting bicycles.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Poetic license
>>>>>
>>>>> All perfectly legal. I thought you lot liked law and order, or is
>>>>> that only when it suits YOU?
>>>>
>>>> Legality does not necessarily equate with good practice.
>>>> I see a report in the comic DE that Cambridge, home of the lightless
>>>> pavement riding bicycle is the worst town for lethal traffic
>>>> accidents.
>>>>
>>>> These are not legal. Neither is cycling the wrong way down a one way
>>>> street or lurching off the pavement in front of a car. Or going round
>>>> a roundabout the wrong way.
>>>>
>>>> I would say only one in three cambridge cyclists are fit to be allowed
>>>> on the public roads when they decide that the pavement isn't where
>>>> they want to be..
>>>
>>> Lots of additional spittle-flecked stuff that you weren't talking about
>>> in your original rant about law abiding cyclists.
>>>
>>> Same old.
>> You are becoming a total fucking bore with your pathetic juvenile
>> insults whenever you cant make a rational case.
>>
>> *plonk*
>
> And a sore LOOOOOOOOSER TOOOOOOOOOO!
>
> LOL!

Oi! May Sun!

Yes... YOU!

Aren't you the very same May Sun who has been deceitfully claiming for
years that you have a large number of posters killfiled and never see
their posts, but then spend hours every week responding in detail to
them whilst pretending that you haven't seen them?

:-)

LOL indeed...

On Mon, 02 Oct 2023 20:28:45 -0500, JNugent wrote:

> On 01/10/2023 16:55, S Mason wrote:
>> On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 22:49:52 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> On 01/10/2023 22:40, S Mason wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 22:23:29 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 01/10/2023 11:27, S Mason wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 10:56:32 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 20:18, S Mason wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 18:23:21 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 16:12, S Mason wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 15:01:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 14:30, charles wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <hBURM.181840$MU78.165776@usenetxs.com>,
>>>>>>>>>>>> Radio Man <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know what all the fuss is about. Why don't "The
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Motorists"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> just cycle or walk instead? The "Motorists" who are too old,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> too fucked, too fat, too idle, or too up themselves to walk
>>>>>>>>>>>>> or to cycle can get a taxi or use the fantastic, efficient,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> reasonably priced public transport that the wonderful
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Conservative party had the foresight to deregulate and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> privatise for them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Grow Up, Motorists!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I used to cycle for local journeys but I was knocked off my
>>>>>>>>>>>> bike -
>>>>>>>>>>>> receiving a badly broken arm - I lost my nerve after that.
>>>>>>>>>>>> Too many motorist who don't give adequate room when passing.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On the roads rind here the LycraLouts™ insist on riding down
>>>>>>>>>>> the center. They patently have no idea how to control a
>>>>>>>>>>> bicycle accurately enough with anything less than a 1,5m gap
>>>>>>>>>>> either side and more if they can arrange it, but of course
>>>>>>>>>>> they never took a test, have no insurance , and these days
>>>>>>>>>>> have effective immunity under the Law. Their very saddles
>>>>>>>>>>> stink with the odour of sanctity of their non carbon emittiung
>>>>>>>>>>> bicycles.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I hope you've got some sort of spittle guard on that keyboard
>>>>>>>>>> of yours.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No spittle. Just *facts*. You know the things that cause you to
>>>>>>>>> have a panic attack and cover your ears.
>>>>>>>>> And leap in to mount an *emotional* attack on the people who
>>>>>>>>> divulge them to you.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you on the arse.
>>>>>>> Oh dear, more emotional fact free responses.
>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>> Darling boy, I made my career as a practising engineer. No a BBC
>>>>>>> newscaster.
>>>>>>> Machines respond to facts.
>>>>>>> Not to idle opinions.
>>>>>>> I cant make my car do another ten miles by promising it that I
>>>>>>> will fill up at the next fuel station.
>>>>>>> If my designs are not cosnsistent with the facts, they dont work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I said:
>>>>>>> On the roads rind here the LycraLouts™ insist on riding down the
>>>>>>> center.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is an actual fact.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They patently have no idea how to control a bicycle
>>>>>>> accurately enough with anything less than a 1,5m gap either
>>>>>>> side and more if they
>>>>>>> can arrange it,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is also a fact. They are the most selfish road users ever.
>>>>>>> They have been told how scared they must be of cars but how they
>>>>>>> can prosecute a driver who doesn't leave a meter gap, which means
>>>>>>> they can render themselves impossible to overtake, and they do.
>>>>>>> one mile tailbacks
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> but of course they never took a test,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is a fact.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> have no insurance ,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> is a fact.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> and these days have effective immunity under the Law.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> is a fact.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Their very saddles stink with the odour of sanctity of their
>>>>>>> non carbon emitting bicycles.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Poetic license
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All perfectly legal. I thought you lot liked law and order, or is
>>>>>> that only when it suits YOU?
>>>>>
>>>>> Legality does not necessarily equate with good practice.
>>>>> I see a report in the comic DE that Cambridge, home of the lightless
>>>>> pavement riding bicycle is the worst town for lethal traffic
>>>>> accidents.
>>>>>
>>>>> These are not legal. Neither is cycling the wrong way down a one way
>>>>> street or lurching off the pavement in front of a car. Or going
>>>>> round a roundabout the wrong way.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would say only one in three cambridge cyclists are fit to be
>>>>> allowed on the public roads when they decide that the pavement isn't
>>>>> where they want to be..
>>>>
>>>> Lots of additional spittle-flecked stuff that you weren't talking
>>>> about in your original rant about law abiding cyclists.
>>>>
>>>> Same old.
>>> You are becoming a total fucking bore with your pathetic juvenile
>>> insults whenever you cant make a rational case.
>>>
>>> *plonk*
>>
>> And a sore LOOOOOOOOSER TOOOOOOOOOO!
>>
>> LOL!
>
> Oi! May Sun!
>
> Yes... YOU!
>
> Aren't you the very same May Sun who has been deceitfully claiming for
> years that you have a large number of posters killfiled and never see
> their posts, but then spend hours every week responding in detail to
> them whilst pretending that you haven't seen them?

No,

>
> :-)
>
> LOL indeed...

Muddleheaded muppet.

On 02/10/2023 21:44, Tim Streater wrote:
> On 01 Oct 2023 at 13:22:47 BST, "TimW" <timw@nomailta.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> Wrong. While all politicians tell the occasional fib the whole method of
>> populists is to tell so many whoppers that people get angry and
>> confused. Hard right politics is at it's core a series of interconnected
>> lies and conspiracy theories. It isn't about rational decisions,
>> nurturing compassion and achieving good government - it's about rabble
>> rousing. Quite unlike a decent democratic socialist party.
>
> So that excludes Labour then, whose supports sport placards advocating
> violence against their political opponents.
>
You don't hear Tories, for all their unpleasantness, talking about
'Labour Scum'

--
The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all
private property.

Karl Marx

On 03/10/2023 02:26, JNugent wrote:
> On 01/10/2023 16:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>> On 01/10/2023 22:40, S Mason wrote:
>>> On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 22:23:29 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 01/10/2023 11:27, S Mason wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 10:56:32 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 20:18, S Mason wrote:
>>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 18:23:21 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 16:12, S Mason wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 15:01:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 14:30, charles wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In article <hBURM.181840$MU78.165776@usenetxs.com>,
>>>>>>>>>>>         Radio Man <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know what all the fuss is about. Why don't "The
>>>>>>>>>>>> Motorists"
>>>>>>>>>>>> just cycle or walk instead? The "Motorists" who are too old,
>>>>>>>>>>>> too
>>>>>>>>>>>> fucked, too fat, too idle, or too up themselves to walk or to
>>>>>>>>>>>> cycle can get a taxi or use the fantastic, efficient,
>>>>>>>>>>>> reasonably
>>>>>>>>>>>> priced public transport that the wonderful Conservative party
>>>>>>>>>>>> had the foresight to deregulate and privatise for them.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Grow Up, Motorists!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I used to cycle for local journeys but I was knocked off my bike
>>>>>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>>>>>> receiving a badly broken arm - I lost my nerve after that.  Too
>>>>>>>>>>> many motorist who don't give adequate room when passing.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On the roads rind here the LycraLouts™ insist on riding down  the
>>>>>>>>>> center. They patently have no idea how to control a bicycle
>>>>>>>>>> accurately enough with anything less than a 1,5m gap either side
>>>>>>>>>> and more if they can arrange it, but of course they never took a
>>>>>>>>>> test, have no insurance , and these days have effective immunity
>>>>>>>>>> under the Law. Their very saddles stink with the odour of
>>>>>>>>>> sanctity
>>>>>>>>>> of their non carbon emittiung bicycles.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I hope you've got some sort of spittle guard on that keyboard of
>>>>>>>>> yours.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No spittle. Just *facts*. You know the things that cause you to
>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>> a panic attack and cover your ears.
>>>>>>>> And leap in to mount an *emotional* attack on the people who
>>>>>>>> divulge
>>>>>>>> them to you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you on the arse.
>>>>>> Oh dear, more emotional fact free responses.
>>>>>> .
>>>>>> Darling boy, I made my career as a practising engineer. No a BBC
>>>>>> newscaster.
>>>>>> Machines respond to facts.
>>>>>> Not to idle opinions.
>>>>>> I cant make my car do another ten miles by promising it that I will
>>>>>> fill up at the next fuel station.
>>>>>> If my designs are not cosnsistent with the facts, they dont work.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I said:
>>>>>> On the roads rind here the LycraLouts™ insist on riding down  the
>>>>>> center.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is an actual fact.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     They patently have no idea how to control a bicycle accurately
>>>>>>     enough with anything less than a 1,5m gap either side and more if
>>>>>>     they
>>>>>> can arrange it,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is also a fact. They are the most selfish road users ever. They
>>>>>> have been told how scared they must be of cars but how they can
>>>>>> prosecute a driver who doesn't leave a meter gap, which means they
>>>>>> can
>>>>>> render themselves impossible to overtake, and they do. one mile
>>>>>> tailbacks
>>>>>>
>>>>>> but of course they never took a test,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is a fact.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     have no insurance ,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> is a fact.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     and these days have effective immunity under the Law.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> is a fact.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     Their very saddles stink with the odour of sanctity of their non
>>>>>>     carbon emitting bicycles.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Poetic license
>>>>>
>>>>> All perfectly legal. I thought you lot liked law and order, or is that
>>>>> only when it suits YOU?
>>>>
>>>> Legality does not necessarily equate with good practice.
>>>> I see a report in the comic DE that Cambridge, home of the lightless
>>>> pavement riding bicycle is the worst town for lethal traffic accidents.
>>>>
>>>> These are not legal. Neither is cycling the wrong way down a one way
>>>> street or lurching off the pavement in front of a car. Or going round a
>>>> roundabout the wrong way.
>>>>
>>>> I would say only one in three cambridge cyclists are fit to be allowed
>>>> on the public roads when they decide that the pavement isn't where they
>>>> want to be..
>>>
>>> Lots of additional spittle-flecked stuff that you weren't talking about
>>> in your original rant about law abiding cyclists.
>>>
>>> Same old.
>> You are becoming a total fucking bore with your pathetic juvenile insults
>> whenever you cant make a rational case.
>>
>> *plonk*
>
> Simon Mason of uk.rec.cycling; champion bridge jumper-offer.
>
> You've probably done the best thing.

My life is immeasurably improved.

--
No Apple devices were knowingly used in the preparation of this post.

On Tue, 03 Oct 2023 08:41:26 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> On 03/10/2023 02:26, JNugent wrote:
>> On 01/10/2023 16:49, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>> On 01/10/2023 22:40, S Mason wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 22:23:29 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 01/10/2023 11:27, S Mason wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 01 Oct 2023 10:56:32 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 20:18, S Mason wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 18:23:21 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 16:12, S Mason wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 15:01:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 14:30, charles wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In article <hBURM.181840$MU78.165776@usenetxs.com>,
>>>>>>>>>>>>         Radio Man <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know what all the fuss is about. Why don't "The
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Motorists"
>>>>>>>>>>>>> just cycle or walk instead? The "Motorists" who are too old,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> too fucked, too fat, too idle, or too up themselves to walk
>>>>>>>>>>>>> or to cycle can get a taxi or use the fantastic, efficient,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> reasonably priced public transport that the wonderful
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Conservative party had the foresight to deregulate and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> privatise for them.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Grow Up, Motorists!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I used to cycle for local journeys but I was knocked off my
>>>>>>>>>>>> bike -
>>>>>>>>>>>> receiving a badly broken arm - I lost my nerve after that. 
>>>>>>>>>>>> Too many motorist who don't give adequate room when passing.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On the roads rind here the LycraLouts™ insist on riding down 
>>>>>>>>>>> the center. They patently have no idea how to control a
>>>>>>>>>>> bicycle accurately enough with anything less than a 1,5m gap
>>>>>>>>>>> either side and more if they can arrange it, but of course
>>>>>>>>>>> they never took a test, have no insurance , and these days
>>>>>>>>>>> have effective immunity under the Law. Their very saddles
>>>>>>>>>>> stink with the odour of sanctity of their non carbon emittiung
>>>>>>>>>>> bicycles.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I hope you've got some sort of spittle guard on that keyboard
>>>>>>>>>> of yours.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No spittle. Just *facts*. You know the things that cause you to
>>>>>>>>> have a panic attack and cover your ears.
>>>>>>>>> And leap in to mount an *emotional* attack on the people who
>>>>>>>>> divulge them to you.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You wouldn't know a fact if it bit you on the arse.
>>>>>>> Oh dear, more emotional fact free responses.
>>>>>>> .
>>>>>>> Darling boy, I made my career as a practising engineer. No a BBC
>>>>>>> newscaster.
>>>>>>> Machines respond to facts.
>>>>>>> Not to idle opinions.
>>>>>>> I cant make my car do another ten miles by promising it that I
>>>>>>> will fill up at the next fuel station.
>>>>>>> If my designs are not cosnsistent with the facts, they dont work.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I said:
>>>>>>> On the roads rind here the LycraLouts™ insist on riding down  the
>>>>>>> center.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is an actual fact.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     They patently have no idea how to control a bicycle
>>>>>>>     accurately enough with anything less than a 1,5m gap either
>>>>>>>     side and more if they
>>>>>>> can arrange it,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is also a fact. They are the most selfish road users ever.
>>>>>>> They have been told how scared they must be of cars but how they
>>>>>>> can prosecute a driver who doesn't leave a meter gap, which means
>>>>>>> they can render themselves impossible to overtake, and they do.
>>>>>>> one mile tailbacks
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> but of course they never took a test,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is a fact.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     have no insurance ,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> is a fact.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     and these days have effective immunity under the Law.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> is a fact.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     Their very saddles stink with the odour of sanctity of
>>>>>>>     their non carbon emitting bicycles.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Poetic license
>>>>>>
>>>>>> All perfectly legal. I thought you lot liked law and order, or is
>>>>>> that only when it suits YOU?
>>>>>
>>>>> Legality does not necessarily equate with good practice.
>>>>> I see a report in the comic DE that Cambridge, home of the lightless
>>>>> pavement riding bicycle is the worst town for lethal traffic
>>>>> accidents.
>>>>>
>>>>> These are not legal. Neither is cycling the wrong way down a one way
>>>>> street or lurching off the pavement in front of a car. Or going
>>>>> round a roundabout the wrong way.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would say only one in three cambridge cyclists are fit to be
>>>>> allowed on the public roads when they decide that the pavement isn't
>>>>> where they want to be..
>>>>
>>>> Lots of additional spittle-flecked stuff that you weren't talking
>>>> about in your original rant about law abiding cyclists.
>>>>
>>>> Same old.
>>> You are becoming a total fucking bore with your pathetic juvenile
>>> insults whenever you cant make a rational case.
>>>
>>> *plonk*
>>
>> Simon Mason of uk.rec.cycling; champion bridge jumper-offer.
>>
>> You've probably done the best thing.
>
> My life is immeasurably improved.

TBF, It couldn't have got much sadder, could it.

On 30/09/2023 17:34, S Mason wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 15:25:37 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:
>
>> On 30 Sep 2023 at 16:08:41 BST, "John J" <johnjessop46@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Saturday, 30 September 2023 at 15:01:08 UTC+1, The Natural
>>> Philosopher wrote:
>>>> On 30/09/2023 14:30, charles wrote:
>>>>> In article <hBURM.181840$MU78....@usenetxs.com>,
>>>>> Radio Man <no....@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>> I don't know what all the fuss is about. Why don't "The Motorists"
>>>>>> just cycle or walk instead?
>>
>> So that would be 6 miles to Morrison's and 6 miles back - carrying two
>> large shopping bags each. And that's not counting the two large folds on
>> the Downs in between. Admittedly there is a village shop some 3 miles
>> from here.
>>
>
> Cargo bike.

Only about 5 grand !!.

On 10/8/2023 5:52 PM, Andrew wrote:
> On 30/09/2023 17:34, S Mason wrote:
>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 15:25:37 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:
>>
>>> On 30 Sep 2023 at 16:08:41 BST, "John J" <johnjessop46@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Saturday, 30 September 2023 at 15:01:08 UTC+1, The Natural
>>>> Philosopher wrote:
>>>>> On 30/09/2023 14:30, charles wrote:
>>>>>> In article <hBURM.181840$MU78....@usenetxs.com>,
>>>>>> Radio Man <no....@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>> I don't know what all the fuss is about. Why don't "The Motorists"
>>>>>>> just cycle or walk instead?
>>>
>>> So that would be 6 miles to Morrison's and 6 miles back - carrying two
>>> large shopping bags each. And that's not counting the two large folds on
>>> the Downs in between. Admittedly there is a village shop some 3 miles
>>> from here.
>>>
>>
>> Cargo bike.
>
> Only about 5 grand !!.

They are somewhere between 2 and 6.

A cheap one, gives good starting materials. This one has a hub motor, so no
crank motor type issues, and the drive train will likely last longer.

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2021/11/rad-powers-radwagon-4-is-a-great-e-bike-at-a-surprisingly-low-price/

Paul

Andrew <Andrew97d@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On 30/09/2023 17:34, S Mason wrote:
> > On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 15:25:37 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:
> >
> >> On 30 Sep 2023 at 16:08:41 BST, "John J" <johnjessop46@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Saturday, 30 September 2023 at 15:01:08 UTC+1, The Natural
> >>> Philosopher wrote:
> >>>> On 30/09/2023 14:30, charles wrote:
> >>>>> In article <hBURM.181840$MU78....@usenetxs.com>,
> >>>>> Radio Man <no....@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
> >>>>>> I don't know what all the fuss is about. Why don't "The Motorists"
> >>>>>> just cycle or walk instead?
> >>
> >> So that would be 6 miles to Morrison's and 6 miles back - carrying two
> >> large shopping bags each. And that's not counting the two large folds on
> >> the Downs in between. Admittedly there is a village shop some 3 miles
> >> from here.
> >>
> >
> > Cargo bike.
>
> Only about 5 grand !!.

Angle grinder - DIY.

There are a lot of plans available for trailers that you can build simply
from steel tube, aluminium or even PVC pipe. I built one using bolted
aluminium angle to take a couple of plastic crates for shopping - used old
bike wheels and a pipe bending spring for the tow hitch.

Random example for a large (if light) load:
https://www.instructables.com/No-Weld-Bike-Trailer-for-Kayaks-More/

If you're more adventurous you could weld such a thing to a steel framed
bike to make it integrated, but most use cases are covered by a trailer and
you can leave that at home when you don't need it.

If the loads are heavy, fit an e-bike conversion kit to the bike.

Theo

On 10/10/2023 13:41, Theo wrote:
> Andrew <Andrew97d@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On 30/09/2023 17:34, S Mason wrote:
>>> On Sat, 30 Sep 2023 15:25:37 +0000, Tim Streater wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 30 Sep 2023 at 16:08:41 BST, "John J" <johnjessop46@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Saturday, 30 September 2023 at 15:01:08 UTC+1, The Natural
>>>>> Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>> On 30/09/2023 14:30, charles wrote:
>>>>>>> In article <hBURM.181840$MU78....@usenetxs.com>,
>>>>>>> Radio Man <no....@thank.you.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>>> I don't know what all the fuss is about. Why don't "The Motorists"
>>>>>>>> just cycle or walk instead?
>>>>
>>>> So that would be 6 miles to Morrison's and 6 miles back - carrying two
>>>> large shopping bags each. And that's not counting the two large folds on
>>>> the Downs in between. Admittedly there is a village shop some 3 miles
>>>> from here.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Cargo bike.
>>
>> Only about 5 grand !!.
>
> Angle grinder - DIY.
>
> There are a lot of plans available for trailers that you can build simply
> from steel tube, aluminium or even PVC pipe. I built one using bolted
> aluminium angle to take a couple of plastic crates for shopping - used old
> bike wheels and a pipe bending spring for the tow hitch.
>
> Random example for a large (if light) load:
> https://www.instructables.com/No-Weld-Bike-Trailer-for-Kayaks-More/
>
> If you're more adventurous you could weld such a thing to a steel framed
> bike to make it integrated, but most use cases are covered by a trailer and
> you can leave that at home when you don't need it.
>
> If the loads are heavy, fit an e-bike conversion kit to the bike.
>
> Theo

Don't trailers have to be type approved before they can be legally used
on the roads?

SH <i.love@spam.com> wrote:
> On 10/10/2023 13:41, Theo wrote:
> > There are a lot of plans available for trailers that you can build simply
> > from steel tube, aluminium or even PVC pipe. I built one using bolted
> > aluminium angle to take a couple of plastic crates for shopping - used old
> > bike wheels and a pipe bending spring for the tow hitch.
> >
> > Random example for a large (if light) load:
> > https://www.instructables.com/No-Weld-Bike-Trailer-for-Kayaks-More/
> >
> > If you're more adventurous you could weld such a thing to a steel framed
> > bike to make it integrated, but most use cases are covered by a trailer and
> > you can leave that at home when you don't need it.
> >
> > If the loads are heavy, fit an e-bike conversion kit to the bike.
>
>
> Don't trailers have to be type approved before they can be legally used
> on the roads?

Nothing for bikes needs to be type approved. You are free to DIY, and many
people do. Similarly pedalled e-bikes up to 15mph don't - it's only when
they become motorbikes.

Theo

On 10/10/2023 14:28, Theo wrote:
> SH <i.love@spam.com> wrote:
>> On 10/10/2023 13:41, Theo wrote:
>>> There are a lot of plans available for trailers that you can build simply
>>> from steel tube, aluminium or even PVC pipe. I built one using bolted
>>> aluminium angle to take a couple of plastic crates for shopping - used old
>>> bike wheels and a pipe bending spring for the tow hitch.
>>>
>>> Random example for a large (if light) load:
>>> https://www.instructables.com/No-Weld-Bike-Trailer-for-Kayaks-More/
>>>
>>> If you're more adventurous you could weld such a thing to a steel framed
>>> bike to make it integrated, but most use cases are covered by a trailer and
>>> you can leave that at home when you don't need it.
>>>
>>> If the loads are heavy, fit an e-bike conversion kit to the bike.
>>
>>
>> Don't trailers have to be type approved before they can be legally used
>> on the roads?
>
> Nothing for bikes needs to be type approved. You are free to DIY, and many
> people do. Similarly pedalled e-bikes up to 15mph don't - it's only when
> they become motorbikes.

Practically (although not legally) neither do home-made trailers for
cars. Yes, they are supposed to be put through IVA to be approved
individually, but it is not retrospective and trailers built before
(IIRC) 2012 remain legal. There is of course no way for the authorities
to prove when an unapproved trailer was built.