Re: Drugged drivers.


Fod wrote:
> Adrian wrote:
> > iiiiDougiiii (doug@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) gurgled happily, sounding much like
> > they were saying :
> >
> > >> >> You really call "I was run over" a description?
> > > I see you have now dishonestly resorted to selectively deleting
> > > relevant text.
> > Just the irrelevant stuff I'm not replying to. It's called "snipping" -
> > you want to try it some time, like the vast majority of well-mannered
> > UseNet posters do. Oh, sorry - I forgot - it's rather difficult with
> > Google's crap posting client.

> Actually its not that hard... Sure its a piss poor tool but it is just
> about usable...

Its not so bad when you get used to it. Compared with off-line readers
I like the immediacy of it.

> > Why *do* you insist on using Google Groups? It's a searchable archive,
> > not an NNTP news client/server. You really would find UseNet much easier
> > to use if you used it properly, you know. There's plenty of free clients
> > and free servers out there. Just look at the headers of my posts if you
> > want a starting point - I find this server and client work very well,
> > and are both free.

> Personally I got fed up having to move between the free servers as ones
> i'd been using were unreliable a lot of the time. Google isn't very
> good but it does the trick ( just).
>
>
> > > How is it not a description?
> > Simply, it doesn't describe what happened.

> It does and it doesn't. We know what happened ( Doug got run over) but
> we do not know how it happened. Doug either doesn't know anything
> about the event ( due to lack of memory and no one talking to him about
> it) or is unwilling to share the details of how the accident occurred.
>
> Are you willing to provide a description of how the accident happened
> Doug? I'd be happy with third party accounts as you are unable to give
> a first person due to memory loss which is perfectly reasonable. If
> you do not know anything about the How of the accident then it seems a
> bit of a bad idea to solely blame the driver.

OK here goes. You lot are always trying to wheedle personal information
out of me while giving none of yourselves. I was told, and I don't know
how reliable this is, I stepped into the road to retrieve a dead bird
and was immediately run over. My head was trapped between the wheel and
the wing. I had a fracture at the base of the skull and one ear was
hanging off. It was touch and go in intensive care. One can only
speculate about blame. Was the driver going too fast? Did I look to see
what was coming? Despite this experience, I obtained a driving licence
at the age of seventeen and behaved just like the motorists on this NG,
for which I am now duly ashamed.

I have had two other near death experiences which are not relevant to
transport.

> > > I have already given a rough outline on this newsgroup and it was
> > > accepted by another poster that such a traumatic event is bound to
> > > involve some loss of memory, particularly in a child, something you
> > > obviously do not have the slightest sympathy with.

> you've stated you were knocked down and can't remember anything which
> is fine. But you've never given any mroe detail than that. There is
> no how the accident happened. If you don't want to say thats fine,
> these kind of life changing events are often personal and not everyone
> wants to share. But if so please stop trying to bring it up.

I brought it up in response to someone else mentioning they had
suffered a road injury. He has still not responded.

> > Which would imply that you've convinced yourself that you were
> > blameless, purely because you were the pedestrian and pedestrians are
> > *always* blameless. Which is, frankly, sheer unmitigated bollocks.

> Doug has stated this point of view before. I disagree with it totally,
> all road users have a degree of responsablity. Doug feels that only
> drivers should have this.

Responsibility should be proportional to the degree of risk posed. In
my case it was a child on the one hand and an adult in charge of a fast
moving heavy machine in a public place on the other. As a driver
yourself, you appear to want to blame the injured child victim rather
than the unharmed driver. I wonder though if this would apply in the
case of child passengers in cars?

--
UK Radical Campaigns
www.zing.icom43.net
The only opposition is on the streets.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Toddler killed as her father reverses car down the family drive - the second child to die th
    ... Doug gurgled happily, ... a drunken driver or an unlicensed driver or a hit and run driver? ... ITYF that you've even quoted me saying that the driver certainly is ... responsible for not making sure that a child - which he would certainly ...
    (uk.transport)
  • Re: Plainly the drivers fault...
    ... Doug wrote: ... He (the child) won't do that again in a hurry if he's gained any sense... ... The driver went through on green. ... Amber came somewhere near the rear of the bus passing the light. ...
    (uk.transport)
  • Re: Device Driver that uploads its own code?
    ... respond/interact with hardware with microsecond precision. ... Because of the high-speed timing response required, ... this has to happen right within the driver itself, ... and completely bypass the need for expensive Real-Time ...
    (microsoft.public.win32.programmer.kernel)
  • Re: KERNEL 2.6.3 and MAXTOR 160 GB
    ... ACPI: No IRQ known for interrupt pin A of device 0000:00:04.0 - using IRQ ... no response, ... Advanced Linux Sound Architecture Driver Version 1.0.2c (Thu Feb 05 ... ohci_hcd 0000:00:02.0: new USB bus registered, ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: global data via module howto
    ... : M. Warner Losh wrote: ... In common case we have a driver for "bus": ... : If child could work on several buses it declares itself several times: one for each ...
    (freebsd-hackers)