Re: More anti-cyclist drivel in the Times
- From: "Alan Holmes" <alan.holmes@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 17:59:08 GMT
"Matt B" <matt.bourke@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:42mr54F1k7gguU2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Ambrose Nankivell wrote:
>> Richard wrote:
>>
>>> Matt B wrote:
>>>
>>>> The benefit of 3rd party to car drivers being what exactly?
>>>
>>> Turn your brain on.
>>
>> I'd rather he turned his computer off.
>
> Did you miss the point too?
>
>>> Admit it,
>> very unlikely. For one thing, it would mean talking about himself, which
>> would make him realise what a horrendous little tosspot he is.
>>
>>> you're just being argumentative to troll.
>>
>> Really? Whatever gave you that idea?
>
> Can /you/ explain why, as the victim of a cyclist, it is accepted by many
> here that it is reasonable that I am put in a worse financial position
> than I would have been if I had been the victim of a motorist.
Give us an example.
Alan
>
> --
> Matt B
.
- References:
- More anti-cyclist drivel in the Times
- From: wafflycat
- Re: More anti-cyclist drivel in the Times
- From: Trundler
- Re: More anti-cyclist drivel in the Times
- From: Trundler
- Re: More anti-cyclist drivel in the Times
- From: dkahn400
- Re: More anti-cyclist drivel in the Times
- From: Nigel Cliffe
- Re: More anti-cyclist drivel in the Times
- From: Matt B
- Re: More anti-cyclist drivel in the Times
- From: Richard
- Re: More anti-cyclist drivel in the Times
- From: Ambrose Nankivell
- Re: More anti-cyclist drivel in the Times
- From: Matt B
- More anti-cyclist drivel in the Times
- Prev by Date: Re: More anti-cyclist drivel in the Times
- Next by Date: Re: More anti-cyclist drivel in the Times
- Previous by thread: Re: More anti-cyclist drivel in the Times
- Next by thread: Re: More anti-cyclist drivel in the Times
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|