New petition. Ban speedophiles.

rothbook · June 2007

Traffic surveys will be carried out after six and 12 months to help monitor its success.

If speeds have not dropped, residents will be asked whether they want extra action to be taken.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hamp ... 708179.stm

Like jub jub said, small pith's made an extraordinary howler here.

What, I wonder , are the views of the local residents, the majority of whom support the 20mph limit, make of the absurdly self-important attack on the scheme by a man who lives 700 miles away and refuses to say what his qualifications are on the subject...

Pingucp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cunobelin

PS: I see the promised audience on the BBC news didn't occur.

I hope it wasn't because of a complaint about the suitability of such an interview with someone who advocated using the details of dead people to avoid fines, altering number plates and getting other people to take our points.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Nah - it was considered inappropriate to show such a scary mug before the watershed.

<hr noshade size="1"><center>Wear the fox hat.
Cols d'cosse</center>

PRD · June 2007

You lot need to lighten up a bit, so have some fun:

http://www.galaxyarcade.co.uk/games/talivan_launch.php

http://www.galaxyarcade.co.uk/games/ckiller2.php

[:D]

Cunobelin · June 2007

The second game is very realistic if you allow it to run by itself.

Numpty in customised car drives dangerously down middle of road and over cross hatching in order to avoid a speed camera.

He that buys land buys many stones.
He that buys flesh buys many bones.
He that buys eggs buys many shells,
But he that buys good beer buys nothing else.
(Unattributed Trad.)

PRD · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Cunobelin

The second game is very realistic if you allow it to run by itself.

Numpty in customised car drives dangerously down middle of road and over cross hatching in order to avoid a speed camera.

He that buys land buys many stones.
He that buys flesh buys many bones.
He that buys eggs buys many shells,
But he that buys good beer buys nothing else.
(Unattributed Trad.)
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

but you still rack up the penalty points though

Cunobelin · June 2007

As I said - realistic!

The numpty still gets done and then bleat that the fines are unfair, and the camera caused their bad driving!

He that buys land buys many stones.
He that buys flesh buys many bones.
He that buys eggs buys many shells,
But he that buys good beer buys nothing else.
(Unattributed Trad.)

AlfieNoakes · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by PRD

You lot need to lighten up a bit, so have some fun:

http://www.galaxyarcade.co.uk/games/talivan_launch.php

http://www.galaxyarcade.co.uk/games/ckiller2.php

[:D]
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Yep - seen that one before, not too long ago. Can't for the life of me think where, though...

Mister Paul · June 2007

Oh, and Smeggy.

You know the truth. You know that you said that the right thing to do when you are severely fatigued is to accelerate, and denied that it would be better to pull over and take a rest.

You know that I can't respond on SS because your daddy has banned me. He's been wanting to for ages but hasn't been able to justify it because my arguments against his 'road safety' campaign have all been sensible, and my allegations about his previous encouragement of lawbreaking to evade convition for speeding, and his excitement about 'points brokering' (which funnily enough he hasn't mentioned this week when the subject has come up in the press). He's just found a little comment I made about you and, seeing as it is about someone else, he can pretend that it's nothing personal.

And the proof that you know the truth is that you have made a challenge that is specific to language used, knowing full well that I can't meet it. You couldn't be more general because you would then have no defence.

So, let's just cut to the chase shall we? You think that severe fatigue comes on at being made to drive for 15 minutes at 40mph on a motorway, and that the best way to counter this is to accelerate.

And that statement, which you irrefutably made, is one of the most ridiculous, immature and dangerous suggestions possible to make about driving. It does nothing to improve road safety. Smithy has taken it up and uses it in one of his lists (on a PR I believe), so he's as bad as you with your "my road!" attitude.

So, œ20 to the Motor Neurone Disease Association. Whenever you're ready. Though I doubt you'll have the integrity to admit that you can't get much more wrong than you are.

__________________________________________________________
Road Safety Expert

linfordlunchbox · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by rothbook

Traffic surveys will be carried out after six and 12 months to help monitor its success.

If speeds have not dropped, residents will be asked whether they want extra action to be taken.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hamp ... 708179.stm

Like jub jub said, small pith's made an extraordinary howler here.

What, I wonder , are the views of the local residents, the majority of whom support the 20mph limit, make of the absurdly self-important attack on the scheme by a man who lives 700 miles away and refuses to say what his qualifications are on the subject...
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

The success will be measured in measurements of statistics 5 years prior to and 5 years after the new limits are in force Martin. You cannot realistically get a true picture of the accident stats after 6 months !

"I'd clean my car with a baby elephant - if I had a baby elephant !"

Jaded · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by linfordlunchbox

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by rothbook

Traffic surveys will be carried out after six and 12 months to help monitor its success.

If speeds have not dropped, residents will be asked whether they want extra action to be taken.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hamp ... 708179.stm

Like jub jub said, small pith's made an extraordinary howler here.

What, I wonder , are the views of the local residents, the majority of whom support the 20mph limit, make of the absurdly self-important attack on the scheme by a man who lives 700 miles away and refuses to say what his qualifications are on the subject...
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

The success will be measured in measurements of statistics 5 years prior to and 5 years after the new limits are in force Martin. You cannot realistically get a true picture of the accident stats after 6 months !

"I'd clean my car with a baby elephant - if I had a baby elephant !"
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Ah, so all this bollocks that PS talks about speed cameras is just that then, bollocks?

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one

yggems · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

You know the truth. You know that you said that the right thing to do when you are severely fatigued is to accelerate, <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Is that really the best you have? Pathetic!

Google is your friend - well obviously not yours because you can't make it can't lie for you!

The œ20 stays in my pocket as you fully admit that you "can't meet it", it being my challenge that you misrepresented my text; you see language and the usage of it is so important, subtle differences like "couldn't" and "shouldn't" make all the difference - don't you think? This applies directly to your quote above - something else you won't be able to substantiate. Therein lies my 'defence'!

You are back-pedalling - to the point of "flooring it"

but did I expect any more from you? Of course not!

I don't expect you to admit your folly (or your various 'straw man arguments' but that's not important right now), so feel free to have the last word - I bet it's nothing to do with proving the lies you continue to perpetuate.

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister PaulSo, let's just cut to the chase shall we? You think that severe fatigue comes on at being made to drive for 15 minutes at 40mph on a motorway, and that the best way to counter this is to accelerate.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Yes, let us!
You accepted the condition. As a resolution I said the limit should not have been so low, not to 'accelerate' out of it - let alone 'flooring' it! Show where I said 'accelerate' as a resolution and you could claw back a little dignity (but only a little). If not then shame on you!

I predict your next post will be more side-stepping irrelevant b****x

Cunobelin · June 2007

Back to Pompey!

Let's not forgetthatthis is an extremely POPULAR move repeatedly asked for by those affected most - the residents, schools, and local community. THey are the ones who have been requesting these steps to be taken and the Council is respecting their wishes with this implementation. SImply doing something thath the majority of voters wanted.

It is the drivers passing through who are unhappy with this.

Or are we simply claiming that the residents have no right to a say in what happens in the local community and environment?

He that buys land buys many stones.
He that buys flesh buys many bones.
He that buys eggs buys many shells,
But he that buys good beer buys nothing else.
(Unattributed Trad.)

linfordlunchbox · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Jaded

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by linfordlunchbox

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by rothbook

Traffic surveys will be carried out after six and 12 months to help monitor its success.

If speeds have not dropped, residents will be asked whether they want extra action to be taken.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/hamp ... 708179.stm

Like jub jub said, small pith's made an extraordinary howler here.

What, I wonder , are the views of the local residents, the majority of whom support the 20mph limit, make of the absurdly self-important attack on the scheme by a man who lives 700 miles away and refuses to say what his qualifications are on the subject...
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

The success will be measured in measurements of statistics 5 years prior to and 5 years after the new limits are in force Martin. You cannot realistically get a true picture of the accident stats after 6 months !

"I'd clean my car with a baby elephant - if I had a baby elephant !"
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Ah, so all this bollocks that PS talks about speed cameras is just that then, bollocks?

--
[Warning] This post may contain a baby elephant or traces of one
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

I have always been in favour of dropping the speed limits in residential areas Jaded.

I have never claimed to speak for mr smith, and would not either as I've never had any contact with him. I prefer to say as I see, and I'm happy to change my opinion given a strong enough argument [;)]

What I favour and what is borne out in the stats could be two very different things !

"I'd clean my car with a baby elephant - if I had a baby elephant !"

Cunobelin · June 2007

"Agree with me or I'll let the tyres down on the horse box......"

Is that what you meant by a "strong enough argument"?

Strong, not statistically proven, but could be you could feel threatened and it could alter the way you park your horse box,make you think about it's security and could alter the way you use it. (If you actually thought I meant it)

Seriously though I think that the statistics are irrelevant in this case.

If a resident, their children or the elderly feel threatened by the speed of the traffic, and this in any way restricts their activities, then there is a problem.

This may only be a "perception" of danger, but if we can lessen this perception and add to the quality of their lives, surely it is justifiable?

What is needed is a qualitative measure of the resident's feelings towards these changes, it's effect on the mobility of the elderly, do the parents feel their children are safer and now letthem cycle or walk to school.

Not quantitative, but equally valid, and in many ways more insughtful than a simple number of accidents.

Therein lies the difference in the objectives of the locals and the speeding lobby.

He that buys land buys many stones.
He that buys flesh buys many bones.
He that buys eggs buys many shells,
But he that buys good beer buys nothing else.
(Unattributed Trad.)

Mister Paul · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister PaulSo, let's just cut to the chase shall we? You think that severe fatigue comes on at being made to drive for 15 minutes at 40mph on a motorway, and that the best way to counter this is to accelerate.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Yes, let us!
You accepted the condition. As a resolution I said the limit should not have been so low, not to 'accelerate' out of it - let alone 'flooring' it! Show where I said 'accelerate' as a resolution and you could claw back a little dignity (but only a little). If not then shame on you!

I predict your next post will be more side-stepping irrelevant b****x

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

great! That got you back. Now, to your points-

You accepted the condition.
A lie. what condition? Sleep apnoea? Yes, that's a medical condition, but it has nothing to do with driving at night and fatigue. It doesn't make you fall asleep. You don't know what you were talking about.

Or are you talking about general fatigue? Yup, I accept that this affects driving. And there are easy and safe ways to manage this. Accelerating (your idea) is neither safe -in fact, it's highly dangerous- nor is it any way near as effective as the alternatives. Your hilarious, ridiculous claim is that you can become 'severely fatigued' after 15 minutes of driving at 40mph on a motorway at night. It's rubbish. There's no scientific support to this, it's not the experience of the majority of drivers. In fact, you're the only person I've ever heard try to use this as an excuse against speed limits.

You know that you said that you suffered severe fatigue as a result of being made to drive at 40mph, at night, for only 15 miutes. That's pathetic. The truth is that you don't like the speed limit, and think that advocating blame for something which you then can claim causes dangerous driving is a good argument against the limit. you add to this hilarity by then claiming that this 'severe fatigue' instantly disappeared when you accelerated away from the roadworks. (œ20 to the MNDA from you then)

See? Argument completely demolished in a couple of minutes.

the truth is, young smeggy -and hopeful you'll get some maturity some day- that you are responsible for your driving standards. You are responsible for anticipating and managing any fatigue or tiredness when driving. You are responsible for doing this in the safest way possible. One of the methods that you speed apologists use is to completely advocate responsibility onto the things that you don't like, in an attempt to discredit it.

Those of us who have done or still do drive professionally, at all hours of the day or night, know that your suggestion holds no water at all. Maybe you should talk to those who know and live it, rather than a bloke who wonders around in a camper van pretending to be a road safety expert with no relevant qualification at all. And who had his arguments soundly demolished over here and suddenly disappeared (he's never been banned). Now he just lurks amongst those of you he can use, and use him, and who are never going to tell him that he is stark naked.

Smeg, if you get severely fatigued when driving, it's your fault. If an accident happens as a result of this, it's your fault.

Oh, and you used another hollow argument in discussion with me over there -I can't respond there because your daddy has banned me (funny how threatened he gets -you'll see that you continue to argue in the same way over here without being kicked out). 20mph limits do not make people obsess with their speedometer. That practice is completely unnecessary. If you do that it's your fault for not developing proper driving skills. And if an accident happens because you can't keep to the speed limit without being distracted by your speedometer, it's your fault. Someone like you whose dirving is this poor should never have passed their test in the first place. Let's make the tests tougher if you manage to slip through.

Gosh, I'd forgotten how easy and how much fun it is demolishing these playground arguments.

Any more?

__________________________________________________________
Road Safety Expert

rothbook · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> You know that you said that you suffered severe fatigue as a result of being made to drive at 40mph, at night, for only 15 miutes. <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Smegma did indeed say this, but even if you accept that Jub Jub overstated the case by saying smegma fall asleep when he is forced to drive below 40-this is no more than what every pro-camera poster does on the Crapspeed forums!

The srapspeed forum is full of nutters slagging off posters here, the police, traffic wardens, cyclists. Search on "nazi" if you don't believe me. People, incidentally, who equate speed cameras with nazism should be dragged by the hair to Auschwitz to see what nazism really means, but I digress.

Small Pith is a coward. He bans dissent. A mild remark from Jub Jub and Jub Jub is banned! No arguments, you can't even discuss the banning:

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"> If anyone wants to comment on the matter, please do so by PM or by email. Discussions of administrator decisions are not normally a suitable topic for a public forum.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

http://tinyurl.com/ytgc9v

No debate. No openness. No dissent. No arguments. Stalinistic repression of free speech and rank hypocrisy from a man who allows posters on his forum to make vile, cowardly attacks on people here.

What's the man so afraid of?

If his argument's robust, why not allow people to challenge him?

Small Pith's running scared, terrifed of exposure. I feel sorry for him for undergoing such a public breakdown.

Mister Paul · June 2007

Oooh isn't it exciting. Jub Jub uses some poetic license. Smithy jumps on it as the opportunity to get rid of someone who has constantly and legitimately challenged his colander of arguments. And he passes it off as protection of poor, offended Smeggy.

I just take solace in the fact that most of us dip in from our real lives to rattle the cages from time to time. It seems that the high-posting minority on the SS site have been trapped in there for years. They should try cycling.

Oh, and Mr Smith, you're lying again. You can't have been watching carefully, as the thread where Smeggy made all the boo-boos was on here, and was deleted a long while ago. Unless you really do spend half your time watching us on here, and adding it to your thousands of pretend research hours.
__________________________________________________________
Road Safety Expert

Tourist Tony · June 2007

Now, now little Master Knobcheese; you know, because I've told you several times, that the condition you suffer from is narcolepsy.
You do realise that you should hand back your licence because of your medical condition. You don't even need to wait for the ink to dry.
Are you also a Scientologist?

If I had a stalker, I would hug it and kiss it and call it George...or Dick

Mister Paul · June 2007

Oh, and Smeggy (you do know what your name means don't you?),

You really need to make clear whether you are talking about falling asleep, tiredness or fatigue. And you need to give clear definitions. You see, when you came over here with your 'fully alert-severe fatigue-fully alert nonsense soem time ago, you said that sleep apnoea, which makes you tired, is a proven cause of this. I mention you talking about falling asleep, and you backtrack and say that you weren't talking about tiredness, but fatigue.

You're just weedling yourself into another hole.

__________________________________________________________
Road Safety Expert

The Bosscp · June 2007

isn't it the same thing?

Mister Paul · June 2007

You'd think so, wouldn't you Bonjy? But oh no, according to Smeggy there are real differences. he has to say this though, otherwise my claim that he thinks he is at risk of falling asleep too easily are valid, and he owes the MNDA œ20.

__________________________________________________________
Road Safety Expert

The Bosscp · June 2007

What's the MNDA - is that a drug?

Mister Paul · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss

What's the MNDA - is that a drug?

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

It's the charity that you owe œ10 to Bonjy.

__________________________________________________________
Road Safety Expert

The Bosscp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by The Boss

What's the MNDA - is that a drug?

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

It's the charity that you owe œ10 to Bonjy.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

on what grounds would that audacious claim rest?

Mister Paul · June 2007

Oh Bonj, you remember well. Don't let's rake over old ground again. It won't do you any good.

__________________________________________________________
Road Safety Expert

The Bosscp · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

Oh Bonj, you remember well. Don't let's rake over old ground again. It won't do you any good.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Oh so you've FORGOT!?

Mister Paul · June 2007

Nope Bonj.

You owe œ10 to the charity of my choice.

__________________________________________________________
Road Safety Expert

The Bosscp · June 2007

But you can't remember, or don't know, why?

yggems · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by Mister Paul

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by yggems
I predict your next post will be more side-stepping irrelevant b****x
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
More side-stepping irrelevant b****x<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">[:D]

The truth is that it is you who has no argument. All you do is apply your 'Chinese whisper' tactic and base your argument on that. Let me show you your folly in clear detail:

Mr Paul: "Or how on earth you think that severe fatigue can be safely countered by flooring the accelerator. "

Smeggy: "I'll Paypal œ20 to the account of your choice if you show where I stated or implied:
"severe fatigue can be safely countered by flooring the accelerator"
Formatting preserved

To which you reply: "instantly disappeared when you accelerated away from the roadworks. (œ20 to the MNDA from you then)."

So where did the 'flooring the accelerator' go? This was the challenge, there is no room for interpretation. You have failed yet you are claiming yourself as victorious. You're back-pedalling because I have demonstrated your failed attempt at manipulation, for all to see.

Feel free to keep digging!

Mister Paul · June 2007

ha ha ha ha ha. you're hilarious!

So you've given up trying to justify your ridiculous and dangerous proposition then? And you're trying to distract by winning a point by complaining about poetic license, or not using the exact words?

You clearly have, as you haven't responded to any of the destruction of your speed-apology poorly made up claim. Or is that response coming later?

Let's just run through it again. Your statements-

You're fully alert on a motorway at night. No signs of tiredness or fatigue (if there is a difference)

You come to some roadworks with a 40mph limit for 15 minutes.

This causes you instant severe fatigue.

When the roadworks end you accelerate to your normal motorway speed (which we can safely assume is above 70mph, and your severe fatigue instantly disappears.

Admit is Smeg. You're wrong. There's no such condition. You made up a scenario to try to justify your speeding. It doesn't work!!

Instead of continuing to try to uphold your argument, you instead choose to argue about the words that I use, in the silly belief that we're all going to forget that you have such a poor, dangerous grasp of driving. It doesn't work.

Just as long as we know. You have no valid argument, so you revert to arguing about specific words. You've dropped your argument. Lost. given up. Realised that no-one, except those desperate to try to justify their poor, dangerous driving by pretending that it is about road safety, will buy it. Because we're not stupid. You are. You really think that you're onto a winner. When in fact you've latched on to a minority, deceptive group led by a man with no road safety training, a hidden agenda, and a massive problem with authority.

Your hilarious. Come back and try again when you've had some more driving experience.

__________________________________________________________
Road Safety Expert

New petition. Ban speedophiles.

Comments

Categories