Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Dobbing yourself in via Twitter
100 views
Skip to first unread message
Simon Mason
May 20, 2013, 12:31:09 PM5/20/13
to
A young driver boasted via Twitter that she had hit a cyclist while
driving her car yesterday. In a short while the police became aware of
this claim despite the fact she deleted her account PDQ after the
gaffe, but not before people had made screen grabs of her face, plus
evidence that seemed to show that she had used her phone to film her
speedo showing 95mph and other law breaking episodes.
I know that helmet cam evidence has brought road rage drivers who have
attacked cyclists to book via social media, but I have never heard of
a driver dobbing *themselves* in before now.
http://road.cc/content/news/84212-norwich-police-seek-driver-who-tweeted-about-collision-cyclist
--
Simon Mason
driving her car yesterday. In a short while the police became aware of
this claim despite the fact she deleted her account PDQ after the
gaffe, but not before people had made screen grabs of her face, plus
evidence that seemed to show that she had used her phone to film her
speedo showing 95mph and other law breaking episodes.
I know that helmet cam evidence has brought road rage drivers who have
attacked cyclists to book via social media, but I have never heard of
a driver dobbing *themselves* in before now.
http://road.cc/content/news/84212-norwich-police-seek-driver-who-tweeted-about-collision-cyclist
--
Simon Mason
nm...@cam.ac.uk
May 20, 2013, 1:08:05 PM5/20/13
to
In article <fc379080-2114-41be...@e9g2000vbg.googlegroups.com>,
There is an old, and politically incorrect, medical term: NFN.
Normal For Norfolk.
Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
Normal For Norfolk.
Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
Simon Mason
May 20, 2013, 1:21:27 PM5/20/13
to
On May 20, 6:08�pm, n...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
> In article <fc379080-2114-41be-bf9e-e949ceb7b...@e9g2000vbg.googlegroups.com>,
firm she just joined. Apparently, someone found out who her employers
are and suggested that people might boycott the firm which prompted
this statement which has been added to the story.
"I am Ian Fitch, deputy managing partner of Larking Gowen. Regarding
the tweets made by one of our employees on their personal twitter
account, please be assured that this is not a view held by Larking
Gowen and we most certainly do not condone this behaviour. We are
taking the incidents very seriously, and a full and detailed
investigation will be carried out and appropriate action taken. We
have already spoken to Norfolk Police."
ENDS
She must be regretting her boasts big style by now I would have
thought.
--
Simon Mason
> In article <fc379080-2114-41be-bf9e-e949ceb7b...@e9g2000vbg.googlegroups.com>,
> Simon Mason �<swldx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> >A young driver boasted via Twitter that she had hit a cyclist while
> >driving her car yesterday. In a short while the police became aware of
> >this claim despite the fact she deleted her account PDQ after the
> >gaffe, but not before people had made screen grabs of her face, plus
> >evidence that seemed to show that she had used her phone to film her
> >speedo showing 95mph and other law breaking episodes.
>
> >I know that helmet cam evidence has brought road rage drivers who have
> >attacked cyclists to book via social media, but I have never heard of
> >a driver dobbing *themselves* in before now.
>
> >http://road.cc/content/news/84212-norwich-police-seek-driver-who-twee...
>
>
>
> >A young driver boasted via Twitter that she had hit a cyclist while
> >driving her car yesterday. In a short while the police became aware of
> >this claim despite the fact she deleted her account PDQ after the
> >gaffe, but not before people had made screen grabs of her face, plus
> >evidence that seemed to show that she had used her phone to film her
> >speedo showing 95mph and other law breaking episodes.
>
> >I know that helmet cam evidence has brought road rage drivers who have
> >attacked cyclists to book via social media, but I have never heard of
> >a driver dobbing *themselves* in before now.
>
>
> There is an old, and politically incorrect, medical term: NFN.
> Normal For Norfolk.
>
> Regards,
> Nick Maclaren.
Looks like she is in big trouble now with her new bosses at the law
> There is an old, and politically incorrect, medical term: NFN.
> Normal For Norfolk.
>
> Regards,
> Nick Maclaren.
firm she just joined. Apparently, someone found out who her employers
are and suggested that people might boycott the firm which prompted
this statement which has been added to the story.
"I am Ian Fitch, deputy managing partner of Larking Gowen. Regarding
the tweets made by one of our employees on their personal twitter
account, please be assured that this is not a view held by Larking
Gowen and we most certainly do not condone this behaviour. We are
taking the incidents very seriously, and a full and detailed
investigation will be carried out and appropriate action taken. We
have already spoken to Norfolk Police."
ENDS
She must be regretting her boasts big style by now I would have
thought.
--
Simon Mason
Zebee Johnstone
May 20, 2013, 4:29:41 PM5/20/13
to
In uk.rec.cycling.moderated on Mon, 20 May 2013 18:21:27 +0100
you not have noticed she was so bloody stupid?"
OK, most law is about reading contracts but still... That amount of
self absorbed lack of awareness of consequences is something no
employer wants.
Guess it just shows that interviews are as useless as every jobseeker
thinks they are. And confirms the beliefs of those of us unfortunate
enough to have to conduct them.
There are times I think randomly picking resumes would be as useful.
(Heh... I wonder if giving extra weight to use of two wheelers
powered or unpowered would be a good idea? On the grounds of survival
means you have some idea of common sense?)
Zebee
Simon Mason <swld...@gmail.com> wrote:
> "I am Ian Fitch, deputy managing partner of Larking Gowen. Regarding
> the tweets made by one of our employees on their personal twitter
> account, please be assured that this is not a view held by Larking
> Gowen and we most certainly do not condone this behaviour. We are
> taking the incidents very seriously, and a full and detailed
> investigation will be carried out and appropriate action taken. We
> have already spoken to Norfolk Police."
>
> ENDS
>
> She must be regretting her boasts big style by now I would have
> thought.
And the law firm might well be talking to whoever hired her "How could
> "I am Ian Fitch, deputy managing partner of Larking Gowen. Regarding
> the tweets made by one of our employees on their personal twitter
> account, please be assured that this is not a view held by Larking
> Gowen and we most certainly do not condone this behaviour. We are
> taking the incidents very seriously, and a full and detailed
> investigation will be carried out and appropriate action taken. We
> have already spoken to Norfolk Police."
>
> ENDS
>
> She must be regretting her boasts big style by now I would have
> thought.
you not have noticed she was so bloody stupid?"
OK, most law is about reading contracts but still... That amount of
self absorbed lack of awareness of consequences is something no
employer wants.
Guess it just shows that interviews are as useless as every jobseeker
thinks they are. And confirms the beliefs of those of us unfortunate
enough to have to conduct them.
There are times I think randomly picking resumes would be as useful.
(Heh... I wonder if giving extra weight to use of two wheelers
powered or unpowered would be a good idea? On the grounds of survival
means you have some idea of common sense?)
Zebee
Simon Mason
May 20, 2013, 5:09:24 PM5/20/13
to
On May 20, 9:29�pm, Zebee Johnstone <zeb...@gmail.com> wrote:
> In uk.rec.cycling.moderated on Mon, 20 May 2013 18:21:27 +0100
>
> In uk.rec.cycling.moderated on Mon, 20 May 2013 18:21:27 +0100
>
> Simon Mason <swldx...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > "I am Ian Fitch, deputy managing partner of Larking Gowen. Regarding
> > the tweets made by one of our employees on their personal twitter
> > account, please be assured that this is not a view held by Larking
> > Gowen and we most certainly do not condone this behaviour. We are
> > taking the incidents very seriously, and a full and detailed
> > investigation will be carried out and appropriate action taken. We
> > have already spoken to Norfolk Police."
>
> > ENDS
>
> > She must be regretting her boasts big style by now I would have
> > thought.
>
> And the law firm might well be talking to whoever hired her "How could
> you not have noticed she was so bloody stupid?"
>
> OK, most law is about reading contracts but still... That amount of
> self absorbed lack of awareness of consequences is something no
> employer wants.
>
> Guess it just shows that interviews are as useless as every jobseeker
> thinks they are. �And confirms the beliefs of those of us unfortunate
> enough to have to conduct them.
> Zebee
> > "I am Ian Fitch, deputy managing partner of Larking Gowen. Regarding
> > the tweets made by one of our employees on their personal twitter
> > account, please be assured that this is not a view held by Larking
> > Gowen and we most certainly do not condone this behaviour. We are
> > taking the incidents very seriously, and a full and detailed
> > investigation will be carried out and appropriate action taken. We
> > have already spoken to Norfolk Police."
>
> > ENDS
>
> > She must be regretting her boasts big style by now I would have
> > thought.
>
> And the law firm might well be talking to whoever hired her "How could
> you not have noticed she was so bloody stupid?"
>
> OK, most law is about reading contracts but still... That amount of
> self absorbed lack of awareness of consequences is something no
> employer wants.
>
> Guess it just shows that interviews are as useless as every jobseeker
> thinks they are. �And confirms the beliefs of those of us unfortunate
> enough to have to conduct them.
I thought that part of the checking process these days was for
prospective employers to sift through the candidates' social
networking history to look for any dodgy backgroundage. BTW, her
employers are Chartered Accountants and Business Advisers, not a law
firm - I misread the new intake of interns photo shoot with Ms Way in
it (4th in from the left).
http://goo.gl/OgMxw
--
Simon Mason
Jaimie Vandenbergh
May 20, 2013, 8:12:52 PM5/20/13
to
On Mon, 20 May 2013 21:29:41 +0100, Zebee Johnstone <zeb...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>(Heh... I wonder if giving extra weight to use of two wheelers
>powered or unpowered would be a good idea? On the grounds of survival
>means you have some idea of common sense?)
You might want to filter out the downhill riders and more committed
MBX/cyclocross/MTBers too!
Cheers - Jaimie
--
It is better, of course, to know useless things than to know nothing.
- Lucius Annaeus Seneca, 'Epistles'
wrote:
>(Heh... I wonder if giving extra weight to use of two wheelers
>powered or unpowered would be a good idea? On the grounds of survival
>means you have some idea of common sense?)
MBX/cyclocross/MTBers too!
Cheers - Jaimie
--
It is better, of course, to know useless things than to know nothing.
- Lucius Annaeus Seneca, 'Epistles'
Zebee Johnstone
May 20, 2013, 9:37:45 PM5/20/13
to
In uk.rec.cycling.moderated on Tue, 21 May 2013 01:12:52 +0100
racing" in my hobby list....
Zebee
Jaimie Vandenbergh <jai...@sometimes.sessile.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 20 May 2013 21:29:41 +0100, Zebee Johnstone <zeb...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>(Heh... I wonder if giving extra weight to use of two wheelers
>>powered or unpowered would be a good idea? On the grounds of survival
>>means you have some idea of common sense?)
>
> You might want to filter out the downhill riders and more committed
> MBX/cyclocross/MTBers too!
you are probably right. There's a reason I didn't put "sidecar
> On Mon, 20 May 2013 21:29:41 +0100, Zebee Johnstone <zeb...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>(Heh... I wonder if giving extra weight to use of two wheelers
>>powered or unpowered would be a good idea? On the grounds of survival
>>means you have some idea of common sense?)
>
> You might want to filter out the downhill riders and more committed
> MBX/cyclocross/MTBers too!
racing" in my hobby list....
Zebee
Jaimie Vandenbergh
May 20, 2013, 9:50:39 PM5/20/13
to
On Tue, 21 May 2013 02:37:45 +0100, Zebee Johnstone <zeb...@gmail.com>
>you are probably right. There's a reason I didn't put "sidecar
>racing" in my hobby list....
Yoinks. Proper scary, you impress me once again.
Cheers - Jaimie
--
To every complex problem there is a solution which is simple, neat and wrong.
-- HL Mencken
wrote:
>In uk.rec.cycling.moderated on Tue, 21 May 2013 01:12:52 +0100
>Jaimie Vandenbergh <jai...@sometimes.sessile.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, 20 May 2013 21:29:41 +0100, Zebee Johnstone <zeb...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>(Heh... I wonder if giving extra weight to use of two wheelers
>>>powered or unpowered would be a good idea? On the grounds of survival
>>>means you have some idea of common sense?)
>>
>> You might want to filter out the downhill riders and more committed
>> MBX/cyclocross/MTBers too!
( ^^^ BMX, I meant)
>In uk.rec.cycling.moderated on Tue, 21 May 2013 01:12:52 +0100
>Jaimie Vandenbergh <jai...@sometimes.sessile.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, 20 May 2013 21:29:41 +0100, Zebee Johnstone <zeb...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>(Heh... I wonder if giving extra weight to use of two wheelers
>>>powered or unpowered would be a good idea? On the grounds of survival
>>>means you have some idea of common sense?)
>>
>> You might want to filter out the downhill riders and more committed
>> MBX/cyclocross/MTBers too!
>you are probably right. There's a reason I didn't put "sidecar
>racing" in my hobby list....
Cheers - Jaimie
--
To every complex problem there is a solution which is simple, neat and wrong.
-- HL Mencken
Dr Zoidberg
May 21, 2013, 2:36:49 AM5/21/13
to
"Simon Mason" <swld...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fc379080-2114-41be...@e9g2000vbg.googlegroups.com...
--
Alex
Tosspot
May 21, 2013, 3:35:48 AM5/21/13
to
in 'MP5 - Expert Rating', but they spotted it and told me to remove it
since it wasn't relevant for the application, I disagreed, but there you
go...
soup
May 21, 2013, 3:36:09 AM5/21/13
to
Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> There are times I think randomly picking resumes would be as useful.
Isn't there a (possibly apocryphal) story about an employer throwing
> There are times I think randomly picking resumes would be as useful.
away half of a pile of CVs then when asked what he was doing said
"getting rid of a large proportion of the candidates" he was further
asked "what if the ideal candidate had been in the pile and he had been
just unlucky in being discarded sight unseen" the employer replied "well
we don't want any unlucky people to work here".
Tosspot
May 21, 2013, 3:36:55 AM5/21/13
to
On 20/05/13 19:21, Simon Mason wrote:
<snip>
> She must be regretting her boasts big style by now I would have
> thought.
Seems to be spreading.
http://ipayroadtax.com/no-such-thing-as-road-tax/i-knocked-a-cyclist-off-his-bike-i-have-right-of-way-he-doesnt-even-pay-road-tax/
Or a sensible url :-(
http://tinyurl.com/lxnuz4w
I have to say, and I am a few sheets to the wind, can she *really* be
that stupid?
<snip>
> She must be regretting her boasts big style by now I would have
> thought.
http://ipayroadtax.com/no-such-thing-as-road-tax/i-knocked-a-cyclist-off-his-bike-i-have-right-of-way-he-doesnt-even-pay-road-tax/
Or a sensible url :-(
http://tinyurl.com/lxnuz4w
I have to say, and I am a few sheets to the wind, can she *really* be
that stupid?
nm...@cam.ac.uk
May 21, 2013, 3:56:01 AM5/21/13
to
In article <AqydnV9UQ_Gf4gfM...@giganews.com>,
Who would you expect to tweet? The bird-brained, that's who.
Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
Simon Mason
May 21, 2013, 12:17:33 PM5/21/13
to
On May 21, 8:36�am, Tosspot <Frank.Le...@hint.gmail.com> wrote:
> On 20/05/13 19:21, Simon Mason wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > She must be regretting her boasts big style by now I would have
> > thought.
>
> Seems to be spreading.
>
> http://ipayroadtax.com/no-such-thing-as-road-tax/i-knocked-a-cyclist-...
> On 20/05/13 19:21, Simon Mason wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > She must be regretting her boasts big style by now I would have
> > thought.
>
> Seems to be spreading.
>
>
> Or a sensible url :-(
>
> http://tinyurl.com/lxnuz4w
>
> I have to say, and I am a few sheets to the wind, can she *really* be
> that stupid?
Nice to see Sky getting things right on the "Road Tax" front.
> Or a sensible url :-(
>
> http://tinyurl.com/lxnuz4w
>
> I have to say, and I am a few sheets to the wind, can she *really* be
> that stupid?
QUOTE:
"Road tax does not actually exist in the UK and roads are funded from
general taxation.
It is commonly confused with Vehicle Excise Duty, which is a car tax
paid on vehicles as a levy on emissions."
http://news.sky.com/story/1093752/drivers-twitter-boast-about-hitting-cyclist
--
Simon Mason
John Benn
May 21, 2013, 2:59:53 PM5/21/13
to
"Simon Mason" <swld...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:fc379080-2114-41be...@e9g2000vbg.googlegroups.com...
news:fc379080-2114-41be...@e9g2000vbg.googlegroups.com...
>A young driver boasted via Twitter that she had hit a cyclist while
> driving her car yesterday.
Why would someone boast about hitting a cyclist? It's nothing to be proud
> driving her car yesterday.
of.
Adam Funk
May 21, 2013, 3:45:10 PM5/21/13
to
Roger Merriman
May 21, 2013, 3:45:16 PM5/21/13
to
Adam Funk
May 21, 2013, 4:00:21 PM5/21/13
to
On 2013-05-21, Simon Mason wrote:
> On May 21, 8:36 am, Tosspot <Frank.Le...@hint.gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 20/05/13 19:21, Simon Mason wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> > She must be regretting her boasts big style by now I would have
>> > thought.
>>
>> Seems to be spreading.
>>
>> http://ipayroadtax.com/no-such-thing-as-road-tax/i-knocked-a-cyclist-...
>>
>> Or a sensible url :-(
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/lxnuz4w
>>
>> I have to say, and I am a few sheets to the wind, can she *really* be
>> that stupid?
>
> Nice to see Sky getting things right on the "Road Tax" front.
Nice? Astounding!
> On May 21, 8:36 am, Tosspot <Frank.Le...@hint.gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 20/05/13 19:21, Simon Mason wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>> > She must be regretting her boasts big style by now I would have
>> > thought.
>>
>> Seems to be spreading.
>>
>> http://ipayroadtax.com/no-such-thing-as-road-tax/i-knocked-a-cyclist-...
>>
>> Or a sensible url :-(
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/lxnuz4w
>>
>> I have to say, and I am a few sheets to the wind, can she *really* be
>> that stupid?
>
> Nice to see Sky getting things right on the "Road Tax" front.
Adam Funk
May 21, 2013, 4:00:56 PM5/21/13
to
I am Ian Fitch,deputy managing partner of Larking Gowen. Regarding
the tweets made by one of our employees on their personal twitter
account,please be assured that this is not a view held by Larking
Gowen and we most certainly do not condone this behaviour. We are
taking the incidents very seriously, and a full and detailed
investigation will be carried out and appropriate action taken. We
have already spoken to Norfolk Police.
The firm's website is here, in case anyone wants to write in.
taking the incidents very seriously, and a full and detailed
investigation will be carried out and appropriate action taken. We
have already spoken to Norfolk Police.
http://www.larking-gowen.co.uk/
Scion
May 22, 2013, 6:45:43 AM5/22/13
to
Simon Mason put finger to keyboard:
Surely if VED was a levy on emissions it would be an additional fuel tax?
Message has been deleted
Tosspot
May 22, 2013, 6:46:34 AM5/22/13
to
John Benn
May 22, 2013, 6:47:23 AM5/22/13
to
"Roger Merriman" <NE...@sarlet.com> wrote in message
news:1l38mvi.1fspz321vd51juN%NE...@sarlet.com...
Exactly.
news:1l38mvi.1fspz321vd51juN%NE...@sarlet.com...
Zebee Johnstone
May 22, 2013, 6:49:15 AM5/22/13
to
In uk.rec.cycling.moderated on Wed, 22 May 2013 11:46:34 +0100
Phil W Lee <ph...@lee-family.me.uk> wrote:
> Zebee Johnstone <zeb...@gmail.com> considered Tue, 21 May 2013
> I believe it was LJK Setright who said: "If whatever neanderthal man
> first dreamed up the wheel had ever envisioned it being used on
> anything as cockeyed as a motorcycle racing outfit, he's have hit the
> roof of his cave"
>
> He may have a point.
>
> Are you the trapeze artist, or the pilot?
I was the swinger. THe mobile ballast. Half of the steering and a
portion of the braking.
Most fun you can have with your clothes on and in my experience can be
more fun than times I've had them off...
Zebee
Phil W Lee <ph...@lee-family.me.uk> wrote:
> Zebee Johnstone <zeb...@gmail.com> considered Tue, 21 May 2013
> first dreamed up the wheel had ever envisioned it being used on
> anything as cockeyed as a motorcycle racing outfit, he's have hit the
> roof of his cave"
>
> He may have a point.
>
> Are you the trapeze artist, or the pilot?
I was the swinger. THe mobile ballast. Half of the steering and a
portion of the braking.
Most fun you can have with your clothes on and in my experience can be
more fun than times I've had them off...
Zebee
Dr Zoidberg
May 22, 2013, 9:17:14 AM5/22/13
to
"Tosspot" <Frank...@hint.gmail.com> wrote in message
news:4a2dnZbskpUITgbM...@giganews.com...
--
Alex
mrc7-...@cam.ac.uk
May 22, 2013, 9:58:19 AM5/22/13
to
In message <e1vs6ax...@news.ducksburg.com>
It's the kind of statement that would certainly get a laugh and applause
of appreciation if mentioned by a top gear presenter in front of a group
of like minded "road tax idiots" in the studio.
Mike
--
o/ \\ // |\ ,_ o Mike Clark
<\__,\\ // __o | \ / /\, "A mountain climbing, cycling, skiing,
"> || _`\<,_ |__\ \> | caving, antibody engineer and
` || (_)/ (_) | \corn computer user" http://www.antibody.me.uk/
of appreciation if mentioned by a top gear presenter in front of a group
of like minded "road tax idiots" in the studio.
Mike
--
o/ \\ // |\ ,_ o Mike Clark
<\__,\\ // __o | \ / /\, "A mountain climbing, cycling, skiing,
"> || _`\<,_ |__\ \> | caving, antibody engineer and
` || (_)/ (_) | \corn computer user" http://www.antibody.me.uk/
Adam Funk
May 22, 2013, 5:30:20 PM5/22/13
to
On 2013-05-22, mrc7-...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
> In message <e1vs6ax...@news.ducksburg.com>
> Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2013-05-21, John Benn wrote:
>>
>> > "Simon Mason" <swld...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> > news:fc379080-2114-41be...@e9g2000vbg.googlegroups.com...
>> >>A young driver boasted via Twitter that she had hit a cyclist while
>> >> driving her car yesterday.
>> >
>> > Why would someone boast about hitting a cyclist? It's nothing to be
>> > proud of.
>>
>> It's different for the "road tax" idiots.
>
> It's the kind of statement that would certainly get a laugh and applause
> of appreciation if mentioned by a top gear presenter in front of a group
> of like minded "road tax idiots" in the studio.
Well, yes, & such people should be disqualified from driving for
> In message <e1vs6ax...@news.ducksburg.com>
> Adam Funk <a24...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2013-05-21, John Benn wrote:
>>
>> > "Simon Mason" <swld...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>> > news:fc379080-2114-41be...@e9g2000vbg.googlegroups.com...
>> >>A young driver boasted via Twitter that she had hit a cyclist while
>> >> driving her car yesterday.
>> >
>> > Why would someone boast about hitting a cyclist? It's nothing to be
>> > proud of.
>>
>> It's different for the "road tax" idiots.
>
> It's the kind of statement that would certainly get a laugh and applause
> of appreciation if mentioned by a top gear presenter in front of a group
> of like minded "road tax idiots" in the studio.
having dangerous personality defects.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Scion
May 23, 2013, 4:22:07 AM5/23/13
to
Phil W Lee put finger to keyboard:
> Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> considered Wed, 22 May 2013 11:45:43 +0100
> If you want to be picky, it's a levy on /potential/ emissions.
It's road (use) tax in all but name.
The recent tweaking to put cars into VED bands is a political sop to the
green lobby.
> But what sky reported is much closer to the truth than we've become used
> to seeing from journos of any ilk, so they are to be congratulated.
A stopped clock, and all that. Possibly a newbie journo, all keen,
actually did some research rather than punch random buttons on the cliche-
o-matic.
> Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> considered Wed, 22 May 2013 11:45:43 +0100
> the perfect time to write:
>
>
It's road (use) tax in all but name.
The recent tweaking to put cars into VED bands is a political sop to the
green lobby.
> But what sky reported is much closer to the truth than we've become used
> to seeing from journos of any ilk, so they are to be congratulated.
A stopped clock, and all that. Possibly a newbie journo, all keen,
actually did some research rather than punch random buttons on the cliche-
o-matic.
Tom Gardner
May 23, 2013, 6:33:12 AM5/23/13
to
Phil W Lee wrote:
> She has apparently been suspended from her job, if Anglia News are to
> be believed.
> Police enquiries are said to be "ongoing", which probably means they
> are getting a warrant to seize her online records from twitter,
> facebook, etc (and crawling over her internet access devices to
> identify any other accounts which may contain evidence).
>
> She seems to have achieved the anatomically impossible, and f****d
> herself.
> Thankfully, that is unlikely to result in progeny who may perpetuate
> the line.
Unfortunately if she will soon be "spending more time with
her family", she will have more time to create her family :(
And maybe more inclination, if it is now her best career option.
Old engineering aphorism: "you can't make something foolproof,
because fools are so damn ingenious"
Idiotic attitudes, such as she has displayed, are unfortunately
not limited to those that drive cars.
> She has apparently been suspended from her job, if Anglia News are to
> be believed.
> Police enquiries are said to be "ongoing", which probably means they
> are getting a warrant to seize her online records from twitter,
> facebook, etc (and crawling over her internet access devices to
> identify any other accounts which may contain evidence).
>
> She seems to have achieved the anatomically impossible, and f****d
> herself.
> Thankfully, that is unlikely to result in progeny who may perpetuate
> the line.
Unfortunately if she will soon be "spending more time with
her family", she will have more time to create her family :(
And maybe more inclination, if it is now her best career option.
Old engineering aphorism: "you can't make something foolproof,
because fools are so damn ingenious"
Idiotic attitudes, such as she has displayed, are unfortunately
not limited to those that drive cars.
mrc7-...@cam.ac.uk
May 23, 2013, 6:37:50 AM5/23/13
to
In message <knkgsm$hv2$1...@dont-email.me>
But VED is collected centrally by the Treasury and most roads are
maintained by local authorities who collect tax directly from district
residents and businesses.
maintained by local authorities who collect tax directly from district
residents and businesses.
almo...@gmail.com
May 23, 2013, 7:03:46 AM5/23/13
to
On Monday, May 20, 2013 5:31:09 PM UTC+1, Simon Mason wrote:
> A young driver boasted via Twitter that she had hit a cyclist while
>
> A young driver boasted via Twitter that she had hit a cyclist while
>
> driving her car yesterday. In a short while the police became aware of
>
> this claim despite the fact she deleted her account PDQ after the
>
> gaffe, but not before people had made screen grabs of her face, plus
>
> evidence that seemed to show that she had used her phone to film her
>
> speedo showing 95mph and other law breaking episodes.
>
>
>
> I know that helmet cam evidence has brought road rage drivers who have
>
> attacked cyclists to book via social media, but I have never heard of
>
> a driver dobbing *themselves* in before now.
>
>
>
> http://road.cc/content/news/84212-norwich-police-seek-driver-who-tweeted-about-collision-cyclist
>
>
>
> --
>
> this claim despite the fact she deleted her account PDQ after the
>
> gaffe, but not before people had made screen grabs of her face, plus
>
> evidence that seemed to show that she had used her phone to film her
>
> speedo showing 95mph and other law breaking episodes.
>
>
>
> I know that helmet cam evidence has brought road rage drivers who have
>
> attacked cyclists to book via social media, but I have never heard of
>
> a driver dobbing *themselves* in before now.
>
>
>
> http://road.cc/content/news/84212-norwich-police-seek-driver-who-tweeted-about-collision-cyclist
>
>
>
>
> Simon Mason
http://www.itv.com/news/anglia/2013-05-22/cycle-tweet-girl-breaks-her-silence/
She apologises for the tweet. As for the collision "I didn't feel that he even touched my car ... apart from his handlebar donked the wing mirror".
She has no concept for the seriousness of what she nearly did to this guy. Note the phrasing "he touched", "his handlebar donked". No mention of traveling on the wrong side of the road head-on to him. She is a long way from realising what she did, and I hope the book is thrown at her.
Adam Funk
May 23, 2013, 8:15:19 AM5/23/13
to
On 2013-05-23, mrc7-...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
> In message <knkgsm$hv2$1...@dont-email.me>
> Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Phil W Lee put finger to keyboard:
>>
>> > Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> considered Wed, 22 May 2013 11:45:43 +0100
>> > the perfect time to write:
>> >>Surely if VED was a levy on emissions it would be an additional fuel
>> >>tax?
>> >
>> > If you want to be picky, it's a levy on /potential/ emissions.
>>
>> It's road (use) tax in all but name.
For the £0 band?
> In message <knkgsm$hv2$1...@dont-email.me>
> Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Phil W Lee put finger to keyboard:
>>
>> > Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> considered Wed, 22 May 2013 11:45:43 +0100
>> > the perfect time to write:
>> >>Surely if VED was a levy on emissions it would be an additional fuel
>> >>tax?
>> >
>> > If you want to be picky, it's a levy on /potential/ emissions.
>>
>> It's road (use) tax in all but name.
>> The recent tweaking to put cars into VED bands is a political sop to the
>> green lobby.
>>
>
> But VED is collected centrally by the Treasury and most roads are
> maintained by local authorities who collect tax directly from district
> residents and businesses.
cigarettes should entitle them to public smoking facilities, the right
to blow smoke in other people's faces, or the right litter.
Simon Mason
May 23, 2013, 8:45:20 AM5/23/13
to
On May 23, 1:15�pm, Adam Funk <a240...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
a whining smoker speaking on a jingle. She said and I quote " I pay my
tax on cigarettes and should be allowed to smoke in pubs".
--
Simon Mason
> On 2013-05-23, mrc7--u...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
>
> > But VED is collected centrally by the Treasury and most roads are
> > maintained by local authorities who collect tax directly from district
> > residents and businesses.
>
> Exactly. �Road tax idiots might as well argue that the high taxes on
> cigarettes should entitle them to public smoking facilities, the right
> to blow smoke in other people's faces, or the right litter.
You may jest but when the smoking ban came in '08 a radio station had
>
> > But VED is collected centrally by the Treasury and most roads are
> > maintained by local authorities who collect tax directly from district
> > residents and businesses.
>
> Exactly. �Road tax idiots might as well argue that the high taxes on
> cigarettes should entitle them to public smoking facilities, the right
> to blow smoke in other people's faces, or the right litter.
a whining smoker speaking on a jingle. She said and I quote " I pay my
tax on cigarettes and should be allowed to smoke in pubs".
--
Simon Mason
Scion
May 23, 2013, 9:27:09 AM5/23/13
to
Adam Funk put finger to keyboard:
> On 2013-05-23, mrc7-...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
>
>> In message <knkgsm$hv2$1...@dont-email.me>
>> Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Phil W Lee put finger to keyboard:
>>>
>>> > Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> considered Wed, 22 May 2013 11:45:43
>>> > +0100 the perfect time to write:
>
>>> >>Surely if VED was a levy on emissions it would be an additional fuel
>>> >>tax?
>>> >
>>> > If you want to be picky, it's a levy on /potential/ emissions.
>>>
>>> It's road (use) tax in all but name.
>
> For the £0 band?
Yes. "The recent tweaking to put cars into VED bands is a political sop to
> Exactly. Road tax idiots might as well argue that the high taxes on
> cigarettes should entitle them to public smoking facilities, the right
> to blow smoke in other people's faces, or the right litter.
What is a "road tax idiot"?
> On 2013-05-23, mrc7-...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
>
>> In message <knkgsm$hv2$1...@dont-email.me>
>> Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> Phil W Lee put finger to keyboard:
>>>
>>> > Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> considered Wed, 22 May 2013 11:45:43
>>> > +0100 the perfect time to write:
>
>>> >>Surely if VED was a levy on emissions it would be an additional fuel
>>> >>tax?
>>> >
>>> > If you want to be picky, it's a levy on /potential/ emissions.
>>>
>>> It's road (use) tax in all but name.
>
> For the £0 band?
the green lobby."
>>>
>>>
>> But VED is collected centrally by the Treasury and most roads are
>> maintained by local authorities who collect tax directly from district
>> residents and businesses.
LAs also get money from central Govt funds.
>>>
>>>
>> But VED is collected centrally by the Treasury and most roads are
>> maintained by local authorities who collect tax directly from district
>> residents and businesses.
> Exactly. Road tax idiots might as well argue that the high taxes on
> cigarettes should entitle them to public smoking facilities, the right
> to blow smoke in other people's faces, or the right litter.
Andy Leighton
May 23, 2013, 9:27:30 AM5/23/13
to
On Thu, 23 May 2013 12:03:46 +0100,
almo...@gmail.com <almo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> She apologises for the tweet. As for the collision "I
> didn't feel that he even touched my car ... apart from
> his handlebar donked the wing mirror".
Well the two stories don't match at all. The guy on the bike
almo...@gmail.com <almo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> She apologises for the tweet. As for the collision "I
> didn't feel that he even touched my car ... apart from
> his handlebar donked the wing mirror".
describes being thown onto her bonnet.
Also she was quite certain she knocked someone off their bike
in the tweet, now she seems to be changing her story somewhat.
I thought it was a very soft interview by Anglia. For example
they never mentioned her other tweets showing less than
responsible behaviour on the roads. But maybe the lawyer
would have called a halt to it if they showed too many (any?)
teeth.
--
Andy Leighton => an...@azaal.plus.com
"The Lord is my shepherd, but we still lost the sheep dog trials"
- Robert Rankin, _They Came And Ate Us_
Rob Morley
May 23, 2013, 9:36:43 AM5/23/13
to
On Thu, 23 May 2013 14:27:09 +0100
Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> What is a "road tax idiot"?
Someone who thinks he has more right to use the road than other classes
Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> What is a "road tax idiot"?
of road user because "I pay road tax".
mrc7-...@cam.ac.uk
May 23, 2013, 10:20:10 AM5/23/13
to
In message <knl36f$hv2$4...@dont-email.me>
income and the income from VED is not hypothecated for a specific
purpose in allocation to local government spending. Indeed the local
authorities by and large have to prioritise their spending according to
local considerations and this might well involve them deciding to
prioritise support for other services.
Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> Adam Funk put finger to keyboard:
>
> > On 2013-05-23, mrc7-...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
> >
> >> In message <knkgsm$hv2$1...@dont-email.me>
> >> Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Phil W Lee put finger to keyboard:
> >>>
> >>> > Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> considered Wed, 22 May 2013 11:45:43
> >>> > +0100 the perfect time to write:
> >
> >>> >>Surely if VED was a levy on emissions it would be an additional fuel
> >>> >>tax?
> >>> >
> >>> > If you want to be picky, it's a levy on /potential/ emissions.
> >>>
> >>> It's road (use) tax in all but name.
> >
> > For the £0 band?
>
> Yes. "The recent tweaking to put cars into VED bands is a political sop to
> the green lobby."
>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> But VED is collected centrally by the Treasury and most roads are
> >> maintained by local authorities who collect tax directly from district
> >> residents and businesses.
>
> LAs also get money from central Govt funds.
>
Yes but VED makes up only a small proportion of central Government
> Adam Funk put finger to keyboard:
>
> > On 2013-05-23, mrc7-...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
> >
> >> In message <knkgsm$hv2$1...@dont-email.me>
> >> Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Phil W Lee put finger to keyboard:
> >>>
> >>> > Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> considered Wed, 22 May 2013 11:45:43
> >>> > +0100 the perfect time to write:
> >
> >>> >>Surely if VED was a levy on emissions it would be an additional fuel
> >>> >>tax?
> >>> >
> >>> > If you want to be picky, it's a levy on /potential/ emissions.
> >>>
> >>> It's road (use) tax in all but name.
> >
> > For the £0 band?
>
> Yes. "The recent tweaking to put cars into VED bands is a political sop to
> the green lobby."
>
> >>>
> >>>
> >> But VED is collected centrally by the Treasury and most roads are
> >> maintained by local authorities who collect tax directly from district
> >> residents and businesses.
>
> LAs also get money from central Govt funds.
>
income and the income from VED is not hypothecated for a specific
purpose in allocation to local government spending. Indeed the local
authorities by and large have to prioritise their spending according to
local considerations and this might well involve them deciding to
prioritise support for other services.
Scion
May 23, 2013, 10:28:03 AM5/23/13
to
Rob Morley put finger to keyboard:
Ah right, thanks. I've seen the phrase a few times over the last couple of
days and wasn't sure if it was what you just said, a derogatory term for
any motorist or a poke at people (and government agencies) who call VED
"road tax".
days and wasn't sure if it was what you just said, a derogatory term for
any motorist or a poke at people (and government agencies) who call VED
"road tax".
Scion
May 23, 2013, 10:28:25 AM5/23/13
to
mrc7--urcm put finger to keyboard:
I realise that, and I don't begrudge my road tax going into a central pot
- it's a tiny proportion of motoring costs anyway.
Regardless, to use a car on the road it must show a "tax disc" which in
the majority of cases is paid for, independently of the distance
travelled, emissions, er, emitted and so on. So I stand by my statement
that VED is a road (use) tax in all but name.
- it's a tiny proportion of motoring costs anyway.
Regardless, to use a car on the road it must show a "tax disc" which in
the majority of cases is paid for, independently of the distance
travelled, emissions, er, emitted and so on. So I stand by my statement
that VED is a road (use) tax in all but name.
mrc7-...@cam.ac.uk
May 23, 2013, 10:52:11 AM5/23/13
to
In message <knl8la$hv2$7...@dont-email.me>
VED has about as much relationship to paying for the roads as NI
contributions have to paying for the national health service. Both of
them can have their origins traced back to a way of introducing
increased taxation with a politically soothing rhetoric, but both of
them are now changed up and down in values simply in order for the
Treasury to help balance its total tax income against its total
budgetary allocation. You don't pay NI in proportion to your health
needs and you don't pay VED in proportion to your road use. Indeed as
has been pointed out to you there are classes of vehicle where the
charge is �0 for issuing of an annual VED licence.
Since the issuing of an annual VED disc is also tied up with checks on
vehicle safety (MOT) and also insurance you could also argue that at
least a proportion of the cost of the licence has to cover those costs
as well, which have nothing to do with the costs of maintaining the
roads. But even here you then have some classes of vehicles paying �0
for this process.
If you're so taken up with the idea of the need to visibly issue a tax
on somebody giving them a licence for the "use" of a road why hasn't it
struck you that pedestrians don't pay a licence fee for their use of the
roads and pavements?
contributions have to paying for the national health service. Both of
them can have their origins traced back to a way of introducing
increased taxation with a politically soothing rhetoric, but both of
them are now changed up and down in values simply in order for the
Treasury to help balance its total tax income against its total
budgetary allocation. You don't pay NI in proportion to your health
needs and you don't pay VED in proportion to your road use. Indeed as
has been pointed out to you there are classes of vehicle where the
charge is �0 for issuing of an annual VED licence.
Since the issuing of an annual VED disc is also tied up with checks on
vehicle safety (MOT) and also insurance you could also argue that at
least a proportion of the cost of the licence has to cover those costs
as well, which have nothing to do with the costs of maintaining the
roads. But even here you then have some classes of vehicles paying �0
for this process.
If you're so taken up with the idea of the need to visibly issue a tax
on somebody giving them a licence for the "use" of a road why hasn't it
struck you that pedestrians don't pay a licence fee for their use of the
roads and pavements?
Scion
May 23, 2013, 11:06:13 AM5/23/13
to
Andy Leighton put finger to keyboard:
> On Thu, 23 May 2013 12:03:46 +0100,
> almo...@gmail.com <almo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> She apologises for the tweet. As for the collision "I didn't feel that
>> he even touched my car ... apart from his handlebar donked the wing
>> mirror".
>
> Well the two stories don't match at all. The guy on the bike describes
> being thown onto her bonnet.
Yes. "I was thrown up onto the bonnet, I hit the side of windsrceen and
the wing mirror. I bounced back off the car and went through a hedge for
about 20 metres."
But then: "I managed to keep control of the bike."
He's either mistaken about the last part or exaggerating the first part. I
suspect the latter. *60 feet* through a hedge?
> Also she was quite certain she knocked someone off their bike in the
> tweet, now she seems to be changing her story somewhat.
Back-pedalling massively, you could say.
I wonder if she was still driving as she tweeted?
> On Thu, 23 May 2013 12:03:46 +0100,
> almo...@gmail.com <almo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> She apologises for the tweet. As for the collision "I didn't feel that
>> he even touched my car ... apart from his handlebar donked the wing
>> mirror".
>
> Well the two stories don't match at all. The guy on the bike describes
> being thown onto her bonnet.
the wing mirror. I bounced back off the car and went through a hedge for
about 20 metres."
But then: "I managed to keep control of the bike."
He's either mistaken about the last part or exaggerating the first part. I
suspect the latter. *60 feet* through a hedge?
> Also she was quite certain she knocked someone off their bike in the
> tweet, now she seems to be changing her story somewhat.
I wonder if she was still driving as she tweeted?
thirty-six
May 23, 2013, 11:18:42 AM5/23/13
to
On May 23, 8:08�am, Phil W Lee <p...@lee-family.me.uk> wrote:
> "Dr Zoidberg" <AlexNOOOO!!!!!...@drzoidberg.co.uk> considered Wed, 22
> May 2013 14:17:14 +0100 the perfect time to write:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >"Tosspot" <Frank.Le...@hint.gmail.com> wrote in message
> dock though.
For the record: With all disrespect intended, I'll stay seated where
I am. :-)
> "Dr Zoidberg" <AlexNOOOO!!!!!...@drzoidberg.co.uk> considered Wed, 22
> May 2013 14:17:14 +0100 the perfect time to write:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >"Tosspot" <Frank.Le...@hint.gmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:4a2dnZbskpUITgbM...@giganews.com...
> >> On 21/05/13 08:36, Dr Zoidberg wrote:
>
> >>> "Simon Mason" <swldx...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> >> On 21/05/13 08:36, Dr Zoidberg wrote:
>
> >>>news:fc379080-2114-41be...@e9g2000vbg.googlegroups.com...
> >>>> A young driver boasted via Twitter that she had hit a cyclist while
> >>>> driving her car yesterday. In a short while the police became aware of
> >>>> this claim despite the fact she deleted her account PDQ after the
> >>>> gaffe, but not before people had made screen grabs of her face, plus
> >>>> evidence that seemed to show that she had used her phone to film her
> >>>> speedo showing 95mph and other law breaking episodes.
>
> >>>> I know that helmet cam evidence has brought road rage drivers who have
> >>>> attacked cyclists to book via social media, but I have never heard of
> >>>> a driver dobbing *themselves* in before now.
>
> >>>>http://road.cc/content/news/84212-norwich-police-seek-driver-who-twee...
> >>>> A young driver boasted via Twitter that she had hit a cyclist while
> >>>> driving her car yesterday. In a short while the police became aware of
> >>>> this claim despite the fact she deleted her account PDQ after the
> >>>> gaffe, but not before people had made screen grabs of her face, plus
> >>>> evidence that seemed to show that she had used her phone to film her
> >>>> speedo showing 95mph and other law breaking episodes.
>
> >>>> I know that helmet cam evidence has brought road rage drivers who have
> >>>> attacked cyclists to book via social media, but I have never heard of
> >>>> a driver dobbing *themselves* in before now.
>
>
> >>> Bikers do it all the time, boasting and using footage of their rides.
>
> >> Yes, but in fairness they don't generally boast about hitting cyclists.
>
> >True, but they do end up in court from time to time.
>
> There is a considerable difference between the witness stand and the
> >>> Bikers do it all the time, boasting and using footage of their rides.
>
> >> Yes, but in fairness they don't generally boast about hitting cyclists.
>
> >True, but they do end up in court from time to time.
>
> dock though.
For the record: With all disrespect intended, I'll stay seated where
I am. :-)
Simon Mason
May 23, 2013, 11:40:42 AM5/23/13
to
On May 23, 3:52�pm, mrc7--u...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
> In message <knl8la$hv...@dont-email.me>
>
> > Regardless, to use a car on the road it must show a "tax disc" which in
> > the majority of cases is paid for, independently of the distance
> > travelled, emissions, er, emitted and so on. So I stand by my statement
> > that VED is a road (use) tax in all but name.
>
> VED has about as much relationship to paying for the roads as NI
> contributions have to paying for the national health service.
Indeed - I have to send a letter to the local rag every couple of
years or so (a bit like a tetanus booster) when so many drivers have
written in about potholes and their paying "road tax".
Here is the last one.
http://www.swldxer.co.uk/vedletter.jpg
--
Simon Mason
> In message <knl8la$hv...@dont-email.me>
>
> > Regardless, to use a car on the road it must show a "tax disc" which in
> > the majority of cases is paid for, independently of the distance
> > travelled, emissions, er, emitted and so on. So I stand by my statement
> > that VED is a road (use) tax in all but name.
>
> VED has about as much relationship to paying for the roads as NI
> contributions have to paying for the national health service.
years or so (a bit like a tetanus booster) when so many drivers have
written in about potholes and their paying "road tax".
Here is the last one.
http://www.swldxer.co.uk/vedletter.jpg
--
Simon Mason
Rob Morley
May 23, 2013, 12:02:30 PM5/23/13
to
On Thu, 23 May 2013 15:28:03 +0100
Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> a derogatory term for any motorist
Unlikely, I'd have thought, as I think the large majority of adult
Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> a derogatory term for any motorist
cyclists also drive.
Peter Clinch
May 23, 2013, 2:03:56 PM5/23/13
to
Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.c...@dundee.ac.uk http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
Dr Zoidberg
May 23, 2013, 2:42:52 PM5/23/13
to
"Scion" <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:knl81g$hv2$5...@dont-email.me...
that's just petty name calling. Quite often it's motorists doing it just to
make themselves feel superior.
I'm well aware that it's official name is Vehicle Excise Duty, and that any
funds received don't go directly to the roads, but it's a long established
term for the annual cost of a small disk of paper that lets you use your car
on the road.
Everyone knows exactly what is meant by Road Tax, Tax Disk and so on, just
as they do when they talk about hoovering the carpet (possibly with a
dyson), being on the dole, or any number of other terms that aren't strictly
correct.
Now, claiming that you have greater rights because you paid more for your
tax disk on the other hand... that is a bit silly :0)
--
Alex
Simon Mason
May 24, 2013, 2:30:35 AM5/24/13
to
On May 23, 7:42�pm, "Dr Zoidberg" <AlexNOOOO!!!!!...@drzoidberg.co.uk>
wrote:
>
> Everyone knows exactly what is meant by Road Tax, Tax Disk and so on, just
> as they do when they talk about hoovering the carpet (possibly with a
> dyson), being on the dole, or any number of other terms that aren't strictly
> correct.
>
Well, I for one have stopped calling the radio a "wireless" and nearly
everyone I know still refers to "wing mirrors" including the
protagonists in this case.
However, I call them door mirrors 'cos that is what they are now -
things move on.
--
Simon Mason
wrote:
>
> Everyone knows exactly what is meant by Road Tax, Tax Disk and so on, just
> as they do when they talk about hoovering the carpet (possibly with a
> dyson), being on the dole, or any number of other terms that aren't strictly
> correct.
>
everyone I know still refers to "wing mirrors" including the
protagonists in this case.
However, I call them door mirrors 'cos that is what they are now -
things move on.
--
Simon Mason
nm...@cam.ac.uk
May 24, 2013, 4:28:09 AM5/24/13
to
In article <b4e282c3-96b4-462b...@c7g2000vbv.googlegroups.com>,
Good heavens, WHY? English is saturated with words and terms that
don't mean what they say (in literal terms). I tend to refer to
the "road fund tax" as the MOT, which dates me :-) But you probably
use terms like pavement!
Where I dislike terminological abuse is when it is part of a
propaganda campaign or otherwise has harmful effects - and the
latter definitely applies to "road tax" (which, as far as I know,
always was incorrect - it was road fund tax). And, of course,
"road bike"!
The recent and classic amusement here was when the Blessed Margaret
tried imposing a propaganda term "Community Charge" and the whole
population reacted by using the opposite one "Poll Tax". We all
know who won :-)
Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
don't mean what they say (in literal terms). I tend to refer to
the "road fund tax" as the MOT, which dates me :-) But you probably
use terms like pavement!
Where I dislike terminological abuse is when it is part of a
propaganda campaign or otherwise has harmful effects - and the
latter definitely applies to "road tax" (which, as far as I know,
always was incorrect - it was road fund tax). And, of course,
"road bike"!
The recent and classic amusement here was when the Blessed Margaret
tried imposing a propaganda term "Community Charge" and the whole
population reacted by using the opposite one "Poll Tax". We all
know who won :-)
Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
bugbear
May 24, 2013, 5:28:24 AM5/24/13
to
almo...@gmail.com
May 24, 2013, 7:10:07 AM5/24/13
to
On Thursday, May 23, 2013 7:42:52 PM UTC+1, Dr Zoidberg wrote:
> Now, claiming that you have greater rights because you paid more for your
>
> tax disk on the other hand... that is a bit silly :0)
>
Unfortunately the roads are occupied by at least a vocal minority who think precisely that. If you doubt it, take a peek through the door to URC and read the tenor of some of the contributions. Or maybe they are so busy trawling all corners of the Daily Wail and Dirty Des' huge organ looking for examples of a cyclist behaving badly that they don't have much time to get out onto the roads.
> Now, claiming that you have greater rights because you paid more for your
>
> tax disk on the other hand... that is a bit silly :0)
>
Scion
May 24, 2013, 7:10:55 AM5/24/13
to
mrc7--urcm put finger to keyboard:
> In message <knl8la$hv2$7...@dont-email.me>
> Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> mrc7--urcm put finger to keyboard:
>>
>> > In message <knl36f$hv2$4...@dont-email.me>
>> > Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Adam Funk put finger to keyboard:
>> >>
>> >> > On 2013-05-23, mrc7-...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> In message <knkgsm$hv2$1...@dont-email.me>
>> >> >> Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> Phil W Lee put finger to keyboard:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> > Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> considered Wed, 22 May 2013
>> >> >>> > 11:45:43 +0100 the perfect time to write:
>> >> >
>> >> >>> >>Surely if VED was a levy on emissions it would be an
>> >> >>> >>additional fuel tax?
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > If you want to be picky, it's a levy on /potential/ emissions.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> It's road (use) tax in all but name.
>> >> >
>> >> > For the £0 band?
> In message <knl8la$hv2$7...@dont-email.me>
> Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> mrc7--urcm put finger to keyboard:
>>
>> > In message <knl36f$hv2$4...@dont-email.me>
>> > Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Adam Funk put finger to keyboard:
>> >>
>> >> > On 2013-05-23, mrc7-...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> In message <knkgsm$hv2$1...@dont-email.me>
>> >> >> Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> Phil W Lee put finger to keyboard:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> > Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> considered Wed, 22 May 2013
>> >> >>> > 11:45:43 +0100 the perfect time to write:
>> >> >
>> >> >>> >>Surely if VED was a levy on emissions it would be an
>> >> >>> >>additional fuel tax?
>> >> >>> >
>> >> >>> > If you want to be picky, it's a levy on /potential/ emissions.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> It's road (use) tax in all but name.
>> >> >
> Since the issuing of an annual VED disc is also tied up with checks on
> vehicle safety (MOT) and also insurance you could also argue that at
> least a proportion of the cost of the licence has to cover those costs
> as well, which have nothing to do with the costs of maintaining the
> roads. But even here you then have some classes of vehicles paying £0
> for this process.
> If you're so taken up with the idea of the need to visibly issue a tax
> on somebody giving them a licence for the "use" of a road
> why hasn't it
> struck you that pedestrians don't pay a licence fee for their use of the
> roads and pavements?
for their use of roads and pavements.
I wouldn't want to think that you are being deliberately obtuse so I must
assume you have misread or misunderstood what I have written in this
thread - all of the points you raised in your last post seem to be
addressing issues I haven't raised.
almo...@gmail.com
May 24, 2013, 7:11:27 AM5/24/13
to
On Friday, May 24, 2013 9:28:09 AM UTC+1, nm...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
But you probably use terms like pavement!
>
>
>
er... what's wrong with pavement? Has the World moved on and left me behind.... AGAIN?
But you probably use terms like pavement!
>
>
>
Scion
May 24, 2013, 7:12:03 AM5/24/13
to
Rob Morley put finger to keyboard:
Some people are decidedly anti-motorist, anyway.
nm...@cam.ac.uk
May 24, 2013, 7:18:02 AM5/24/13
to
In article <00357881-d0fc-4127...@googlegroups.com>,
side of a road set aside for the use of pedestrians. The carriageway
can also be paved, and the pavement is often tarmaced.
(b) Yes :-)
Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
<almo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>But you probably use terms like pavement!
>>
>>
>er... what's wrong with pavement? Has the World moved on and left
>me behind.... AGAIN?
(a) Because it means an area that is paved, and not an area at the
>>
>But you probably use terms like pavement!
>>
>>
>er... what's wrong with pavement? Has the World moved on and left
>me behind.... AGAIN?
side of a road set aside for the use of pedestrians. The carriageway
can also be paved, and the pavement is often tarmaced.
(b) Yes :-)
Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
Simon Mason
May 24, 2013, 7:24:22 AM5/24/13
to
On May 24, 10:28�am, bugbear <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim>
wrote:
Poor thing seems to be playing the victim card now and seemingly can't
remember what she originally wrote which was:
QUOTE:
"Definitely knocked a cyclist off his bike earlier. I have right of
way - he doesn't even pay road tax!"
The comment included the hashtag #Bloodycyclists
Thing is, there was an independent witness in the cyclist's riding
partner so his evidence will be crucial as she now claims that she did
not knock him off after all, despite her previous boast.
--
Simon Mason
wrote:
Poor thing seems to be playing the victim card now and seemingly can't
remember what she originally wrote which was:
QUOTE:
"Definitely knocked a cyclist off his bike earlier. I have right of
way - he doesn't even pay road tax!"
The comment included the hashtag #Bloodycyclists
Thing is, there was an independent witness in the cyclist's riding
partner so his evidence will be crucial as she now claims that she did
not knock him off after all, despite her previous boast.
--
Simon Mason
Simon Mason
May 24, 2013, 7:33:02 AM5/24/13
to
On May 24, 9:28�am, n...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
> In article <b4e282c3-96b4-462b-81da-6d9e886d8...@c7g2000vbv.googlegroups.com>,
Incidentally, a newpaper advert used the headline grabber "road tax"
but in the legal blurb referred to "Vehicle Excise Duty".
http://www.swldxer.co.uk/roadtax.jpg
http://www.swldxer.co.uk/roadtax1.jpg
--
Simon Mason
> In article <b4e282c3-96b4-462b-81da-6d9e886d8...@c7g2000vbv.googlegroups.com>,
> Simon Mason �<swldx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On May 23, 7:42 pm, "Dr Zoidberg" <AlexNOOOO!!!!!...@drzoidberg.co.uk>
> >wrote:
>
> >> Everyone knows exactly what is meant by Road Tax, Tax Disk and so on, just
> >> as they do when they talk about hoovering the carpet (possibly with a
> >> dyson), being on the dole, or any number of other terms that aren't strictly
> >> correct.
>
> >Well, I for one have stopped calling the radio a "wireless" and nearly
> >everyone I know still refers to "wing mirrors" including the
> >protagonists in this case.
> >However, I call them door mirrors 'cos that is what they are now -
> >things move on.
>
> Good heavens, WHY? �English is saturated with words and terms that
> don't mean what they say (in literal terms). �I tend to refer to
> the "road fund tax" as the MOT, which dates me :-) �But you probably
> use terms like pavement!
I actually say "path" in a northern accent.
>
> >On May 23, 7:42 pm, "Dr Zoidberg" <AlexNOOOO!!!!!...@drzoidberg.co.uk>
> >wrote:
>
> >> Everyone knows exactly what is meant by Road Tax, Tax Disk and so on, just
> >> as they do when they talk about hoovering the carpet (possibly with a
> >> dyson), being on the dole, or any number of other terms that aren't strictly
> >> correct.
>
> >Well, I for one have stopped calling the radio a "wireless" and nearly
> >everyone I know still refers to "wing mirrors" including the
> >protagonists in this case.
> >However, I call them door mirrors 'cos that is what they are now -
> >things move on.
>
> Good heavens, WHY? �English is saturated with words and terms that
> don't mean what they say (in literal terms). �I tend to refer to
> the "road fund tax" as the MOT, which dates me :-) �But you probably
> use terms like pavement!
Incidentally, a newpaper advert used the headline grabber "road tax"
but in the legal blurb referred to "Vehicle Excise Duty".
http://www.swldxer.co.uk/roadtax.jpg
http://www.swldxer.co.uk/roadtax1.jpg
--
Simon Mason
Peter Clinch
May 24, 2013, 7:53:22 AM5/24/13
to
On 23/05/2013 19:42, Dr Zoidberg wrote:
> It *is* pretty common to insult people just for using the words though
> and that's just petty name calling. Quite often it's motorists doing it
> just to make themselves feel superior.
>
> I'm well aware that it's official name is Vehicle Excise Duty, and that
> any funds received don't go directly to the roads, but it's a long
> established term for the annual cost of a small disk of paper that lets
> you use your car on the road.
>
> Everyone knows exactly what is meant by Road Tax, Tax Disk and so on,
> just as they do when they talk about hoovering the carpet (possibly with
> a dyson), being on the dole, or any number of other terms that aren't
> strictly correct.
Yes, everyone knows what it is. The real problem isn't the use of the
> It *is* pretty common to insult people just for using the words though
> and that's just petty name calling. Quite often it's motorists doing it
> just to make themselves feel superior.
>
> I'm well aware that it's official name is Vehicle Excise Duty, and that
> any funds received don't go directly to the roads, but it's a long
> established term for the annual cost of a small disk of paper that lets
> you use your car on the road.
>
> Everyone knows exactly what is meant by Road Tax, Tax Disk and so on,
> just as they do when they talk about hoovering the carpet (possibly with
> a dyson), being on the dole, or any number of other terms that aren't
> strictly correct.
phrase "Road Tax", it's the assumptions that often go with the term when
shouted out of car windows by RTIs, such as:
- since the RTI pays it (s)he is more entitled to use the road than a
cyclist (up to and including it being fine to knock them off, and never
in the context of a driver of a zero-rated VED car);
- the cyclist is not in a car and therefore does not have one (for why
would one cycle if one could drive?) and therefore will not have paid it.
These people are eejits, and noting that their much vaunted Road Tax and
its conferring of elevated rights to themselves is actually something
they are remarkably ill-informed about is part of the process of
pointing that out.
Alan Braggins
May 24, 2013, 7:53:30 AM5/24/13
to
In article <knlnn8$955$1...@dont-email.me>, Dr Zoidberg wrote:
>Everyone knows exactly what is meant by Road Tax, Tax Disk and so on, just
>as they do when they talk about hoovering the carpet (possibly with a
>dyson), being on the dole, or any number of other terms that aren't strictly
>correct.
>
>Now, claiming that you have greater rights because you paid more for your
>tax disk on the other hand... that is a bit silly :0)
If it was true that everyone knew exactly what road tax was, then they
>Everyone knows exactly what is meant by Road Tax, Tax Disk and so on, just
>as they do when they talk about hoovering the carpet (possibly with a
>dyson), being on the dole, or any number of other terms that aren't strictly
>correct.
>
>Now, claiming that you have greater rights because you paid more for your
>tax disk on the other hand... that is a bit silly :0)
wouldn't think that it was something that gave them greater rights to
use the road.
Now, it's _possible_ that they know perfectly well that they don't have
greater rights and are deliberately lying when they claim they do, but
I don't think it's fair to assume that.
Rob Morley
May 24, 2013, 7:53:52 AM5/24/13
to
On Fri, 24 May 2013 12:12:03 +0100
vulnerable road users, don't think that other people's safety deserves
their attention, then they get a derogatory tag - hardly unfair, is it?
Not that I ever use the term, nor can I think of anyone I know IRL who
uses it.
Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> Rob Morley put finger to keyboard:
>
> > On Thu, 23 May 2013 15:28:03 +0100 Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> a derogatory term for any motorist
> >
> > Unlikely, I'd have thought, as I think the large majority of adult
> > cyclists also drive.
>
> cf the bikers' term "Cagers".
>
> Some people are decidedly anti-motorist, anyway.
When they park where they shouldn't, use their vehicles to bully more
> Rob Morley put finger to keyboard:
>
> > On Thu, 23 May 2013 15:28:03 +0100 Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >> a derogatory term for any motorist
> >
> > Unlikely, I'd have thought, as I think the large majority of adult
> > cyclists also drive.
>
> cf the bikers' term "Cagers".
>
> Some people are decidedly anti-motorist, anyway.
vulnerable road users, don't think that other people's safety deserves
their attention, then they get a derogatory tag - hardly unfair, is it?
Not that I ever use the term, nor can I think of anyone I know IRL who
uses it.
Simon Mason
May 24, 2013, 8:28:32 AM5/24/13
to
On May 24, 12:53�pm, Peter Clinch <p.j.cli...@dundee.ac.uk> wrote:
> On 23/05/2013 19:42, Dr Zoidberg wrote:
>
> > It *is* pretty common to insult people just for using the words though
> > and that's just petty name calling. Quite often it's motorists doing it
> > just to make themselves feel superior.
>
> > I'm well aware that it's official name is Vehicle Excise Duty, and that
> > any funds received don't go directly to the roads, but it's a long
> > established term for the annual cost of a small disk of paper that lets
> > you use your car on the road.
>
> > Everyone knows exactly what is meant by Road Tax, Tax Disk and so on,
> > just as they do when they talk about hoovering the carpet (possibly with
> > a dyson), being on the dole, or any number of other terms that aren't
> > strictly correct.
>
> Yes, everyone knows what it is. �The real problem isn't the use of the
> phrase "Road Tax", it's the assumptions that often go with the term when
> shouted out of car windows by RTIs, such as:
>
> - since the RTI pays it (s)he is more entitled to use the road than a
> cyclist (up to and including it being fine to knock them off, and never
> in the context of a driver of a zero-rated VED car);
>
> - the cyclist is not in a car and therefore does not have one (for why
> would one cycle if one could drive?) and therefore will not have paid it.
>
The galling aspect of this young woman's attitude is that at age 21,
> On 23/05/2013 19:42, Dr Zoidberg wrote:
>
> > It *is* pretty common to insult people just for using the words though
> > and that's just petty name calling. Quite often it's motorists doing it
> > just to make themselves feel superior.
>
> > I'm well aware that it's official name is Vehicle Excise Duty, and that
> > any funds received don't go directly to the roads, but it's a long
> > established term for the annual cost of a small disk of paper that lets
> > you use your car on the road.
>
> > Everyone knows exactly what is meant by Road Tax, Tax Disk and so on,
> > just as they do when they talk about hoovering the carpet (possibly with
> > a dyson), being on the dole, or any number of other terms that aren't
> > strictly correct.
>
> Yes, everyone knows what it is. �The real problem isn't the use of the
> phrase "Road Tax", it's the assumptions that often go with the term when
> shouted out of car windows by RTIs, such as:
>
> - since the RTI pays it (s)he is more entitled to use the road than a
> cyclist (up to and including it being fine to knock them off, and never
> in the context of a driver of a zero-rated VED car);
>
> - the cyclist is not in a car and therefore does not have one (for why
> would one cycle if one could drive?) and therefore will not have paid it.
>
the amount of tax she has paid, "road" or otherwise would be
miniscule, especially as she seems to have been suspended before even
paying any income tax/NI at all, let alone the Council Tax which had
really paid for the road she was driving on.
--
Simon Mason
Adam Funk
May 24, 2013, 8:30:15 AM5/24/13
to
On 2013-05-24, Simon Mason wrote:
> I actually say "path" in a northern accent.
Good for you.
> I actually say "path" in a northern accent.
> Incidentally, a newpaper advert used the headline grabber "road tax"
> but in the legal blurb referred to "Vehicle Excise Duty".
>
> http://www.swldxer.co.uk/roadtax.jpg
humanity!
Adam Funk
May 24, 2013, 8:30:17 AM5/24/13
to
On 2013-05-23, mrc7-...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
> If you're so taken up with the idea of the need to visibly issue a tax
> on somebody giving them a licence for the "use" of a road why hasn't it
> struck you that pedestrians don't pay a licence fee for their use of the
> roads and pavements?
Coin-operated pelican crossings, anyone?
> If you're so taken up with the idea of the need to visibly issue a tax
> on somebody giving them a licence for the "use" of a road why hasn't it
> struck you that pedestrians don't pay a licence fee for their use of the
> roads and pavements?
Adam Funk
May 24, 2013, 8:30:17 AM5/24/13
to
On 2013-05-23, Dr Zoidberg wrote:
>
> "Scion" <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
> news:knl81g$hv2$5...@dont-email.me...
>> Rob Morley put finger to keyboard:
>>
>>> On Thu, 23 May 2013 14:27:09 +0100 Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> What is a "road tax idiot"?
>>>
>>> Someone who thinks he has more right to use the road than other classes
>>> of road user because "I pay road tax".
>>
>> Ah right, thanks. I've seen the phrase a few times over the last couple of
>> days and wasn't sure if it was what you just said, a derogatory term for
>> any motorist or a poke at people (and government agencies) who call VED
>> "road tax".
I mean the latter. (Some of my best friends & I are motorists.)
>
> "Scion" <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
> news:knl81g$hv2$5...@dont-email.me...
>> Rob Morley put finger to keyboard:
>>
>>> On Thu, 23 May 2013 14:27:09 +0100 Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>>> What is a "road tax idiot"?
>>>
>>> Someone who thinks he has more right to use the road than other classes
>>> of road user because "I pay road tax".
>>
>> Ah right, thanks. I've seen the phrase a few times over the last couple of
>> days and wasn't sure if it was what you just said, a derogatory term for
>> any motorist or a poke at people (and government agencies) who call VED
>> "road tax".
> It *is* pretty common to insult people just for using the words though and
> that's just petty name calling. Quite often it's motorists doing it just to
> make themselves feel superior.
>
> I'm well aware that it's official name is Vehicle Excise Duty, and that any
> funds received don't go directly to the roads, but it's a long established
> term for the annual cost of a small disk of paper that lets you use your car
> on the road.
>
> Everyone knows exactly what is meant by Road Tax, Tax Disk and so on, just
> as they do when they talk about hoovering the carpet (possibly with a
> dyson), being on the dole, or any number of other terms that aren't strictly
> correct.
>
>
> Now, claiming that you have greater rights because you paid more for your
> tax disk on the other hand... that is a bit silly :0)
people who us it tend to think that way.
Adam Funk
May 24, 2013, 8:30:19 AM5/24/13
to
On 2013-05-23, Simon Mason wrote:
> On May 23, 1:15 pm, Adam Funk <a240...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>> cigarettes should entitle them to public smoking facilities, the right
>> to blow smoke in other people's faces, or the right litter.
>
> You may jest but when the smoking ban came in '08 a radio station had
> a whining smoker speaking on a jingle. She said and I quote " I pay my
> tax on cigarettes and should be allowed to smoke in pubs".
Well, there you go!
> On May 23, 1:15 pm, Adam Funk <a240...@ducksburg.com> wrote:
>> On 2013-05-23, mrc7--u...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
>
>>
>> > But VED is collected centrally by the Treasury and most roads are
>> > maintained by local authorities who collect tax directly from district
>> > residents and businesses.
>>
>> Exactly. Road tax idiots might as well argue that the high taxes on
>
>>
>> > But VED is collected centrally by the Treasury and most roads are
>> > maintained by local authorities who collect tax directly from district
>> > residents and businesses.
>>
>> cigarettes should entitle them to public smoking facilities, the right
>> to blow smoke in other people's faces, or the right litter.
>
> You may jest but when the smoking ban came in '08 a radio station had
> a whining smoker speaking on a jingle. She said and I quote " I pay my
> tax on cigarettes and should be allowed to smoke in pubs".
Well, there you go!
The Luggage
May 24, 2013, 8:47:32 AM5/24/13
to
On May 24, 9:28�am, n...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
> In article <b4e282c3-96b4-462b-81da-6d9e886d8...@c7g2000vbv.googlegroups.com>,
> In article <b4e282c3-96b4-462b-81da-6d9e886d8...@c7g2000vbv.googlegroups.com>,
> Simon Mason �<swldx...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >On May 23, 7:42 pm, "Dr Zoidberg" <AlexNOOOO!!!!!...@drzoidberg.co.uk>
> >wrote:
>
> >> Everyone knows exactly what is meant by Road Tax, Tax Disk and so on, just
> >> as they do when they talk about hoovering the carpet (possibly with a
> >> dyson), being on the dole, or any number of other terms that aren't strictly
> >> correct.
>
> >Well, I for one have stopped calling the radio a "wireless" and nearly
> >everyone I know still refers to "wing mirrors" including the
> >protagonists in this case.
> >However, I call them door mirrors 'cos that is what they are now -
> >things move on.
>
> Good heavens, WHY? �English is saturated with words and terms that
> don't mean what they say (in literal terms). �I tend to refer to
> the "road fund tax" as the MOT, which dates me :-) �But you probably
> use terms like pavement!
And how long ago did the MOT have anything to do with the Ministry of
>
> >On May 23, 7:42 pm, "Dr Zoidberg" <AlexNOOOO!!!!!...@drzoidberg.co.uk>
> >wrote:
>
> >> Everyone knows exactly what is meant by Road Tax, Tax Disk and so on, just
> >> as they do when they talk about hoovering the carpet (possibly with a
> >> dyson), being on the dole, or any number of other terms that aren't strictly
> >> correct.
>
> >Well, I for one have stopped calling the radio a "wireless" and nearly
> >everyone I know still refers to "wing mirrors" including the
> >protagonists in this case.
> >However, I call them door mirrors 'cos that is what they are now -
> >things move on.
>
> Good heavens, WHY? �English is saturated with words and terms that
> don't mean what they say (in literal terms). �I tend to refer to
> the "road fund tax" as the MOT, which dates me :-) �But you probably
> use terms like pavement!
Transport?
TL
Rob Morley
May 24, 2013, 8:50:24 AM5/24/13
to
On Fri, 24 May 2013 13:47:32 +0100
The Luggage <alan.p....@googlemail.com> wrote:
> And how long ago did the MOT have anything to do with the Ministry of
> Transport?
1981
The Luggage <alan.p....@googlemail.com> wrote:
> And how long ago did the MOT have anything to do with the Ministry of
> Transport?
kimble
May 24, 2013, 9:10:14 AM5/24/13
to
On 24/05/13 07:30, Simon Mason wrote:
> Well, I for one have stopped calling the radio a "wireless"
And 'wireless' now means IEEE 802.11...
> Well, I for one have stopped calling the radio a "wireless"
Kim.
--
nm...@cam.ac.uk
May 24, 2013, 9:25:18 AM5/24/13
to
In article <gu447a-...@willow.ductilebiscuit.net>,
Nah. There are lots and lots of other standards to choose from,
some of which are even published.
I have also seen what might be the next meaning of wireless, when
I saw a reference to how to enable Ethernet for wireless ....
Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
some of which are even published.
I have also seen what might be the next meaning of wireless, when
I saw a reference to how to enable Ethernet for wireless ....
Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
Danny Colyer
May 24, 2013, 10:06:42 AM5/24/13
to
On 24/05/2013 12:10, Scion wrote:
> mrc7--urcm put finger to keyboard:
> mrc7--urcm put finger to keyboard:
>> VED has about as much relationship to paying for the roads as NI
>> contributions have to paying for the national health service. Both of
>> them can have their origins traced back to a way of introducing
>> increased taxation with a politically soothing rhetoric, but both of
>> them are now changed up and down in values simply in order for the
>> Treasury to help balance its total tax income against its total
>> budgetary allocation. You don't pay NI in proportion to your health
>> needs and you don't pay VED in proportion to your road use. Indeed as
>> has been pointed out to you there are classes of vehicle where the
>> charge is £0 for issuing of an annual VED licence.
>
> I am well aware of all that; I've never said that road tax pays for roads.
>
>> Since the issuing of an annual VED disc is also tied up with checks on
>> vehicle safety (MOT) and also insurance you could also argue that at
>> least a proportion of the cost of the licence has to cover those costs
>> as well, which have nothing to do with the costs of maintaining the
>> roads. But even here you then have some classes of vehicles paying £0
>> for this process.
>
> Not sure what your point is here - could you elaborate?
The problem is that a great many motorists seem genuinely to believe
>> contributions have to paying for the national health service. Both of
>> them can have their origins traced back to a way of introducing
>> increased taxation with a politically soothing rhetoric, but both of
>> them are now changed up and down in values simply in order for the
>> Treasury to help balance its total tax income against its total
>> budgetary allocation. You don't pay NI in proportion to your health
>> needs and you don't pay VED in proportion to your road use. Indeed as
>> has been pointed out to you there are classes of vehicle where the
>> charge is £0 for issuing of an annual VED licence.
>
> I am well aware of all that; I've never said that road tax pays for roads.
>
>> Since the issuing of an annual VED disc is also tied up with checks on
>> vehicle safety (MOT) and also insurance you could also argue that at
>> least a proportion of the cost of the licence has to cover those costs
>> as well, which have nothing to do with the costs of maintaining the
>> roads. But even here you then have some classes of vehicles paying £0
>> for this process.
>
> Not sure what your point is here - could you elaborate?
that "road tax" pays for the roads. It's called road tax (although
actually it isn't), so it must pay for the roads. Stands to reason, dunnit?
Then they think that their paying for the roads gives them a greater
moral right to use those roads than anyone else. Which then, in their
minds, justifies aggression towards other road users who they see as
getting in their way.
I don't for a moment think that you're one of those idiots, and I doubt
that anyone else who's followed your past posting history does either,
but that perception is why many of us think it important to challenge
the use of the term "road tax" and is why the point is being belaboured
here.
> I wouldn't want to think that you are being deliberately obtuse so I must
> assume you have misread or misunderstood what I have written in this
> thread - all of the points you raised in your last post seem to be
> addressing issues I haven't raised.
Danny Colyer
"I'm riding a unicycle with my pants down. This should be every boy's
dream." - Bartholomew J Simpson
Scion
May 24, 2013, 10:07:17 AM5/24/13
to
Adam Funk put finger to keyboard:
(It's "pelicon" by the way. You don't want to be singled out as a "pelican
crossing idiot", do you.)
Scion
May 24, 2013, 10:07:42 AM5/24/13
to
Simon Mason put finger to keyboard:
The cyclist also claimed not to have been knocked off his bike, AIUI,
although that doesn't tie in with other things he said.
although that doesn't tie in with other things he said.
Scion
May 24, 2013, 10:08:10 AM5/24/13
to
Peter Clinch put finger to keyboard:
RTIs are a minority of motorists, though. (Going by personal experience,
so no shouts of "Cite!" please!)
so no shouts of "Cite!" please!)
Scion
May 24, 2013, 10:08:27 AM5/24/13
to
Alan Braggins put finger to keyboard:
No, it's much more likely they are genuinely stupid.
Scion
May 24, 2013, 10:08:49 AM5/24/13
to
Rob Morley put finger to keyboard:
> On Fri, 24 May 2013 12:12:03 +0100 Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Rob Morley put finger to keyboard:
>>
>> > On Thu, 23 May 2013 15:28:03 +0100 Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> >
>> >> a derogatory term for any motorist
>> >
>> > Unlikely, I'd have thought, as I think the large majority of adult
>> > cyclists also drive.
>>
>> cf the bikers' term "Cagers".
>>
>> Some people are decidedly anti-motorist, anyway.
>
> When they park where they shouldn't, use their vehicles to bully more
> vulnerable road users, don't think that other people's safety deserves
> their attention, then they get a derogatory tag - hardly unfair, is it?
It's as stupid to be anti-motorist because of such behaviour if the
> On Fri, 24 May 2013 12:12:03 +0100 Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Rob Morley put finger to keyboard:
>>
>> > On Thu, 23 May 2013 15:28:03 +0100 Scion <a...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>> >
>> >> a derogatory term for any motorist
>> >
>> > Unlikely, I'd have thought, as I think the large majority of adult
>> > cyclists also drive.
>>
>> cf the bikers' term "Cagers".
>>
>> Some people are decidedly anti-motorist, anyway.
>
> When they park where they shouldn't, use their vehicles to bully more
> vulnerable road users, don't think that other people's safety deserves
> their attention, then they get a derogatory tag - hardly unfair, is it?
majority don't behave like that, than it is to be anti-cyclist because
some cyclists jump red lights and ride on the pavement.
> Not that I ever use the term, nor can I think of anyone I know IRL who
> uses it.
Adam Funk
May 24, 2013, 10:09:03 AM5/24/13
to
harmful to others (pollution), & people should feel guilty about doing
it unnecessarily; cycling is only harmful to others if done badly.
Scion
May 24, 2013, 11:04:13 AM5/24/13
to
Danny Colyer put finger to keyboard:
The last VED reminder I remember examining (2 or 3 years ago) called it
"road tax". So the colloquialism, if incorrect, is well established.
And in one way it is more meaningful than "Vehicle Excise Duty". You don't
need a VED disk to buy, own or drive a vehicle. You need it to drive or
keep said vehicle on a public road.
Perhaps "Public Road Use Levy" would be a better term.
Vote me in!
>
> Then they think that their paying for the roads gives them a greater
> moral right to use those roads than anyone else. Which then, in their
> minds, justifies aggression towards other road users who they see as
> getting in their way.
But not, as others have pointed out, zero-rated motor vehicles. Strange.
I'm of the mind that *even if* the tax paid for the roads exclusively, I'd
be happy to see more cyclists use them. Fewer cars to hinder my progress,
you see.
>
> I don't for a moment think that you're one of those idiots, and I doubt
> that anyone else who's followed your past posting history does either,
> but that perception is why many of us think it important to challenge
> the use of the term "road tax" and is why the point is being belaboured
> here.
This is the room for the full half-hour argument, for sure :-)
"road tax". So the colloquialism, if incorrect, is well established.
And in one way it is more meaningful than "Vehicle Excise Duty". You don't
need a VED disk to buy, own or drive a vehicle. You need it to drive or
keep said vehicle on a public road.
Perhaps "Public Road Use Levy" would be a better term.
Vote me in!
>
> Then they think that their paying for the roads gives them a greater
> moral right to use those roads than anyone else. Which then, in their
> minds, justifies aggression towards other road users who they see as
> getting in their way.
I'm of the mind that *even if* the tax paid for the roads exclusively, I'd
be happy to see more cyclists use them. Fewer cars to hinder my progress,
you see.
>
> I don't for a moment think that you're one of those idiots, and I doubt
> that anyone else who's followed your past posting history does either,
> but that perception is why many of us think it important to challenge
> the use of the term "road tax" and is why the point is being belaboured
> here.
Alan Braggins
May 24, 2013, 11:05:02 AM5/24/13
to
>> Coin-operated pelican crossings, anyone?
[...]
The "pelican" name was derived from the "pelicon" acronym.
https://www.gov.uk/using-the-road-159-to-203/pedestrian-crossings-191-to-199
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelican_crossing
> You don't want to be singled out as a "pelican
>crossing idiot", do you.)
No comment.
[...]
>(It's "pelicon" by the way.
The Highway Code and common usage both disagree with you.
The "pelican" name was derived from the "pelicon" acronym.
https://www.gov.uk/using-the-road-159-to-203/pedestrian-crossings-191-to-199
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pelican_crossing
> You don't want to be singled out as a "pelican
>crossing idiot", do you.)
Alan Braggins
May 24, 2013, 11:05:29 AM5/24/13
to
In article <knnl49$fnv$7...@dont-email.me>, Scion wrote:
>> Thing is, there was an independent witness in the cyclist's riding
>> partner so his evidence will be crucial as she now claims that she did
>> not knock him off after all, despite her previous boast.
>
>The cyclist also claimed not to have been knocked off his bike, AIUI,
>although that doesn't tie in with other things he said.
In the sense that his bike was still with him after bouncing off the
>> Thing is, there was an independent witness in the cyclist's riding
>> partner so his evidence will be crucial as she now claims that she did
>> not knock him off after all, despite her previous boast.
>
>The cyclist also claimed not to have been knocked off his bike, AIUI,
>although that doesn't tie in with other things he said.
car into a hedge, perhaps:
http://road.cc/content/news/84284-nofolk-bloodycyclists-twitter-story-hits-local-national-headlines-cyclists
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2013/05/21/cyclist-twitter-emma-way-knock-down_n_3311809.html
Peter Clinch
May 24, 2013, 11:05:57 AM5/24/13
to
On 24/05/2013 15:08, Scion wrote:
<snip>
> RTIs are a minority of motorists, though. (Going by personal experience,
> so no shouts of "Cite!" please!)
I don't think anyone here has suggested otherwise. But it's a vocal and
bigoted minority of sufficient size to be a bother, as demonstrated by
the UKIP chap standing in Cambridge recently in his answers to CCC's
questions that he thought would help get him elected.
Someone in possession of a bike thinking they can try and run people off
the road may well be offensively stupid, but it's unlikely to get his or
her victims dead. The same is not true of motor vehicles, however. The
fewer excuses people have for road-rage the better, and if dismissing
the absurd notion that a tax disc on your windscreen gives you free rein
to endanger people helps with that then it's something that should be done.
<snip>
> RTIs are a minority of motorists, though. (Going by personal experience,
> so no shouts of "Cite!" please!)
bigoted minority of sufficient size to be a bother, as demonstrated by
the UKIP chap standing in Cambridge recently in his answers to CCC's
questions that he thought would help get him elected.
Someone in possession of a bike thinking they can try and run people off
the road may well be offensively stupid, but it's unlikely to get his or
her victims dead. The same is not true of motor vehicles, however. The
fewer excuses people have for road-rage the better, and if dismissing
the absurd notion that a tax disc on your windscreen gives you free rein
to endanger people helps with that then it's something that should be done.
Scion
May 24, 2013, 11:50:10 AM5/24/13
to
Alan Braggins put finger to keyboard:
> In article <knnn0u$fnv$8...@dont-email.me>, Scion wrote:
>>Adam Funk put finger to keyboard:
>>>
>>> Coin-operated pelican crossings, anyone?
> [...]
>>(It's "pelicon" by the way.
>
> The Highway Code and common usage both disagree with you.
Just like the DVLA and common usage disagree with anyone who says there's
>>Adam Funk put finger to keyboard:
>>>
>>> Coin-operated pelican crossings, anyone?
> [...]
>>(It's "pelicon" by the way.
>
> The Highway Code and common usage both disagree with you.
no such thing as road tax?
Scion
May 24, 2013, 11:50:10 AM5/24/13
to
Alan Braggins put finger to keyboard:
"Oh hi! That was me you hit and FYI, you didn't knock me off, I'm too hard
to be hurt by a pissy micra or whatever it was you were driving."
Sounds like he got knocked sideways a bit into a hedge.
Hope she gets prosecuted for failing to stop.
Danny Colyer
May 24, 2013, 11:50:17 AM5/24/13
to
is quoted in the Huffington Post article):
"Oh hi! That was me you hit and FYI, you didn't knock me off, I'm too
hard to be hurt my a pissy micra or whatever it was you were driving."
https://www.facebook.com/toby.hockley.1
Peter Clinch
May 24, 2013, 11:50:18 AM5/24/13
to
On 24/05/2013 16:04, Scion wrote:
> Danny Colyer put finger to keyboard:
> Danny Colyer put finger to keyboard:
>> Then they think that their paying for the roads gives them a greater
>> moral right to use those roads than anyone else. Which then, in their
>> minds, justifies aggression towards other road users who they see as
>> getting in their way.
>
> But not, as others have pointed out, zero-rated motor vehicles. Strange.
Strange /if/ you're using dull stuff like logic backed up by a
>> moral right to use those roads than anyone else. Which then, in their
>> minds, justifies aggression towards other road users who they see as
>> getting in their way.
>
> But not, as others have pointed out, zero-rated motor vehicles. Strange.
consistent viewpoint. Not necessarily strange if you're a bampot
rationalising an outburst against a cyclist though.
> I'm of the mind that *even if* the tax paid for the roads exclusively, I'd
> be happy to see more cyclists use them. Fewer cars to hinder my progress,
> you see.
though, I suspect including many of those shouting out of their car
windows that they pay road tax.
Scion
May 24, 2013, 11:50:32 AM5/24/13
to
Peter Clinch put finger to keyboard:
> On 24/05/2013 15:08, Scion wrote:
> <snip>
>
>> RTIs are a minority of motorists, though. (Going by personal
>> experience,
>> so no shouts of "Cite!" please!)
>
> I don't think anyone here has suggested otherwise. But it's a vocal and
> bigoted minority of sufficient size to be a bother, as demonstrated by
> the UKIP chap standing in Cambridge recently in his answers to CCC's
> questions that he thought would help get him elected.
>
> Someone in possession of a bike thinking they can try and run people off
> the road may well be offensively stupid, but it's unlikely to get his or
> her victims dead. The same is not true of motor vehicles, however. The
> fewer excuses people have for road-rage the better, and if dismissing
> the absurd notion that a tax disc on your windscreen gives you free rein
> to endanger people helps with that then it's something that should be
> done.
I agree with all that.
> <snip>
>
>> RTIs are a minority of motorists, though. (Going by personal
>> experience,
>> so no shouts of "Cite!" please!)
>
> I don't think anyone here has suggested otherwise. But it's a vocal and
> bigoted minority of sufficient size to be a bother, as demonstrated by
> the UKIP chap standing in Cambridge recently in his answers to CCC's
> questions that he thought would help get him elected.
>
> Someone in possession of a bike thinking they can try and run people off
> the road may well be offensively stupid, but it's unlikely to get his or
> her victims dead. The same is not true of motor vehicles, however. The
> fewer excuses people have for road-rage the better, and if dismissing
> the absurd notion that a tax disc on your windscreen gives you free rein
> to endanger people helps with that then it's something that should be
> done.
I don't believe that reprimanding people for using the phrase road tax
"because it is not road tax, it's VED, you idiot" (I'm paraphrasing) is a
particularly clever way of correcting people's notions though.
nm...@cam.ac.uk
May 24, 2013, 11:50:42 AM5/24/13
to
In article <b09b6v...@mid.individual.net>,
don't make such a fuss" from my local psychling campainers. They
took no notice of my pointing out that 0.1% is a large proportion
if you interact with 100 motorists a day, even 10% of incidents
get you knocked off, and this is on a hard-surfaced road with lots
of street furniture and traffic. Those were my (measured) estimates,
incidentally.
>Someone in possession of a bike thinking they can try and run people off
>the road may well be offensively stupid, but it's unlikely to get his or
>her victims dead. ...
Much less likely, but it's not as unlikely as all that. Seriously
vulnerable cyclists or pedestrians are one category, and ones likely
to be knocked under the wheels of motor vehicles is another.
Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
Peter Clinch <p.j.c...@dundee.ac.uk> wrote:
>On 24/05/2013 15:08, Scion wrote:
>
>> RTIs are a minority of motorists, though. (Going by personal experience,
>> so no shouts of "Cite!" please!)
>
>I don't think anyone here has suggested otherwise. But it's a vocal and
>bigoted minority of sufficient size to be a bother, as demonstrated by
>the UKIP chap standing in Cambridge recently in his answers to CCC's
>questions that he thought would help get him elected.
I had the response "But it's only a tiny minority of motorists;
>On 24/05/2013 15:08, Scion wrote:
>
>> RTIs are a minority of motorists, though. (Going by personal experience,
>> so no shouts of "Cite!" please!)
>
>I don't think anyone here has suggested otherwise. But it's a vocal and
>bigoted minority of sufficient size to be a bother, as demonstrated by
>the UKIP chap standing in Cambridge recently in his answers to CCC's
>questions that he thought would help get him elected.
don't make such a fuss" from my local psychling campainers. They
took no notice of my pointing out that 0.1% is a large proportion
if you interact with 100 motorists a day, even 10% of incidents
get you knocked off, and this is on a hard-surfaced road with lots
of street furniture and traffic. Those were my (measured) estimates,
incidentally.
>Someone in possession of a bike thinking they can try and run people off
>the road may well be offensively stupid, but it's unlikely to get his or
Much less likely, but it's not as unlikely as all that. Seriously
vulnerable cyclists or pedestrians are one category, and ones likely
to be knocked under the wheels of motor vehicles is another.
Regards,
Nick Maclaren.
Scion
May 24, 2013, 2:24:02 PM5/24/13
to
Peter Clinch put finger to keyboard:
> On 24/05/2013 16:04, Scion wrote:
>> Danny Colyer put finger to keyboard:
>
>>> Then they think that their paying for the roads gives them a greater
>>> moral right to use those roads than anyone else. Which then, in their
>>> minds, justifies aggression towards other road users who they see as
>>> getting in their way.
>>
>> But not, as others have pointed out, zero-rated motor vehicles.
>> Strange.
>
> Strange /if/ you're using dull stuff like logic backed up by a
> consistent viewpoint. Not necessarily strange if you're a bampot
> rationalising an outburst against a cyclist though.
Quite.
>> Danny Colyer put finger to keyboard:
>
>>> Then they think that their paying for the roads gives them a greater
>>> moral right to use those roads than anyone else. Which then, in their
>>> minds, justifies aggression towards other road users who they see as
>>> getting in their way.
>>
>> But not, as others have pointed out, zero-rated motor vehicles.
>> Strange.
>
> Strange /if/ you're using dull stuff like logic backed up by a
> consistent viewpoint. Not necessarily strange if you're a bampot
> rationalising an outburst against a cyclist though.
>> I'm of the mind that *even if* the tax paid for the roads exclusively,
>> I'd be happy to see more cyclists use them. Fewer cars to hinder my
>> progress, you see.
>
> You're doing that logic stuff again.
Adam Funk
May 24, 2013, 4:00:17 PM5/24/13
to
"knocked off" whereas he managed to hang onto the bike.
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Message has been deleted
Adam Funk
May 24, 2013, 9:56:34 PM5/24/13
to
road tax" should be disqualified from driving as morally defective.
Simon Mason
May 25, 2013, 2:06:38 AM5/25/13
to
On May 25, 2:55�am, Phil W Lee <p...@lee-family.me.uk> wrote:
> Simon Mason <swldx...@gmail.com> considered Fri, 24 May 2013 12:24:22
> +0100 the perfect time to write:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On May 24, 10:28!m, bugbear <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim>
> claiming to have looked behind her and seen that he was still upright
> and on the bike before leaving.
>
> That is going to make it obvious she is a very untrustworthy witness.
>
> I wonder if the expression "stop digging" means anything to her?
She also said in her interview that she *did* stop and yet in the same
breath said that there was no need to stop as he was still upright
despite her, in her words, "definitely" knocking him off.
That hole must be huge by now.
--
Simon Mason
> Simon Mason <swldx...@gmail.com> considered Fri, 24 May 2013 12:24:22
> +0100 the perfect time to write:
>
>
>
>
>
> >On May 24, 10:28!m, bugbear <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim>
> >wrote:
> >> Look East interview
>
> >>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-22639720
>
> >> �BugBear
>
> >Poor thing seems to be playing the victim card now and seemingly can't
> >remember what she originally wrote which was:
>
> >QUOTE:
> >"Definitely knocked a cyclist off his bike earlier. I have right of
> >way - he doesn't even pay road tax!"
> >The comment included the hashtag #Bloodycyclists
>
> >Thing is, there was an independent witness in the cyclist's riding
> >partner so his evidence will be crucial as she now claims that she did
> >not knock him off after all, despite her previous boast.
>
> SHe's also now exposed as a liar whatever the outcome, as she's now
> >> Look East interview
>
> >>http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-22639720
>
> >> �BugBear
>
> >Poor thing seems to be playing the victim card now and seemingly can't
> >remember what she originally wrote which was:
>
> >QUOTE:
> >"Definitely knocked a cyclist off his bike earlier. I have right of
> >way - he doesn't even pay road tax!"
> >The comment included the hashtag #Bloodycyclists
>
> >Thing is, there was an independent witness in the cyclist's riding
> >partner so his evidence will be crucial as she now claims that she did
> >not knock him off after all, despite her previous boast.
>
> claiming to have looked behind her and seen that he was still upright
> and on the bike before leaving.
>
> That is going to make it obvious she is a very untrustworthy witness.
>
> I wonder if the expression "stop digging" means anything to her?
She also said in her interview that she *did* stop and yet in the same
breath said that there was no need to stop as he was still upright
despite her, in her words, "definitely" knocking him off.
That hole must be huge by now.
--
Simon Mason
Tosspot
May 25, 2013, 3:25:21 AM5/25/13
to
On 24/05/13 13:30, Adam Funk wrote:
> On 2013-05-23, mrc7-...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
>
>> If you're so taken up with the idea of the need to visibly issue a tax
>> on somebody giving them a licence for the "use" of a road why hasn't it
>> struck you that pedestrians don't pay a licence fee for their use of the
>> roads and pavements?
>
> Coin-operated pelican crossings, anyone?
In the fullness of time you will regret that seemingly innocent jest...
> On 2013-05-23, mrc7-...@cam.ac.uk wrote:
>
>> If you're so taken up with the idea of the need to visibly issue a tax
>> on somebody giving them a licence for the "use" of a road why hasn't it
>> struck you that pedestrians don't pay a licence fee for their use of the
>> roads and pavements?
>
> Coin-operated pelican crossings, anyone?
Tom Gardner
May 25, 2013, 6:31:26 AM5/25/13
to
Simon Mason wrote:
> That hole must be huge by now.
I suspect that many people believe she isn't in a hole.
> That hole must be huge by now.
If questioned, they _might_ notice that if she/they
looked up she is surrounded by nearby "embankments".
Me a cynic? Shurely shome misthake.
Adam Funk
May 25, 2013, 6:33:21 AM5/25/13
to
that they never shout "you don't pay road tax!" at pedestrians.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages