I have no time for drunk drivers

Nice. Sadly missed.

Reply to
deadmail
Loading thread data ...

His last interview was *rivetting*.

Reply to
pseudoplatypus

Yes. Smoking carriages are indeed sadly missed. After giving up 'cos my arteries were clogged, I used the smokers to get a passive fix. I suggest that people unable to smoke through age or infirmity should have been allowed in.

BTW, are there any smoking carriages left on British trains?

-- Roger.

Reply to
Old Fart at Play

Yes, SWT still have smoking /compartments/

Reply to
sweller

Last time I checked [1] GNER Geordie express had smoking carriages at each end, one for first and one for second class, they put them at each end so if there was a accident the smokers die first, as they had a lower life expectances they were loosing less and it mattered less, presumably this would be coupled with smaller damages awards to the victims families.

[1] 2 years ago
Reply to
Bob123

No - the compartment at the front is to make sure the smoke is distributed to other compartments by the air-con system.

Reply to
Dave Plowman

I think intercities still have them (did last time I travelled), but in the event of carriage shortages it was cattles class smoking that got chucked off, and you weren't allowed to trudge to the business class smoker and stand and light up there, or they wanted you to pay the suppliment.

On one train where they ahd dropped the commoners smoking carriage the guard/revenue collector actually said to me, go stand in the doorway by the window with it down when you want one. Such an amazing display of undertanding that on a 4 hour journey an addict to a legal substance may need a fix. First and only time it has happened though.

Reply to
MeatballTurbo

Terefore you considered his reply and calling you a troll worth replying to.

Seems you will reply to most things.

Reply to
MeatballTurbo

Don't forget war crimes.

Reply to
MeatballTurbo

What is "dogging" and will I be sorry I asked?

Reply to
Dan Buchan

Here is one definition

formatting link

Reply to
steve auvache

Some ISPs get really shitty about usenet posts.. And as he only ever seems to post off topic, crossposting, and usually quite offensive or inflamatory s**te, his might decide to get shot of him.

Demon stirred up a whole shedload of crap with that daft case... Might as well use it to an advantage once in a while though!

Besides, be nice to see if the prat can actually manage a structured reply to anything, so I thought I'd give him enough to work with. Beat the hell out of paint watching for a while :)

Reply to
Stuffed

ask sir.tony; it's his area of expertise.

Reply to
deadmail

Stuffed wrote

Bugger all to do with the ISPs it is to do with whether the posts are outlawed within the terms of the group(s) charter. If it is then the ISP don't have to get shitty they just have to do what is asked of them by the likes of me.

Following a response about his opinion of drunk drivers in a thread, albeit crossposted, to a very few uk groups with "rec" in them and all motor related, except perhaps audio?

Do grow up.

Best thing you can do with him then is either leave him alone or attack his sexuality. He gets very insecure about both.

Reply to
steve auvache

Drunk driving a common topic of conversation in those motor groups then? Actually, more than likely in the 4x4 one - I live in the countryside, it's not exactly unusual around here :(

And looking at alot of his other posts, he's certainly pushing the boundaries of staying on charter in general, let alone the standards of decency. If you want to be a vile narrow minded git there's thousands of groups where it's the norm.

If that's the best you can do...

All I want to do is see if he can ever string a coherent point together. I don't go for people's sexuality, it's their live's. I just wanted to try and find out what his problem is, see if there's any basis to his bollocks, or if it is just that.

Nice of other people to reply and all that, but a bit of a waste of bandwidth if the pillock himself doesn't say anything!

Think I might give up on this thread anyway.. Don't want to start a slagging match with all and sundry who might actually be constructive posters most of the time

Reply to
Stuffed

genuine> But why ?? It's not as if he's stolen a motorcycle, or genuine> anything ...

He wasn't even speeding!

--

+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |Andy Cunningham aka AndyC the WB | andy -at- cunningham.me.uk | +-------------------------------------------------------------------------+ |
formatting link
- Everything you wanted to know || about the P38A Range Rover but were afraid to ask. |+-------------------------------------------------------------------------+"And everything we want to get/We download from the InternetAll we hear is/Internet Ga-Ga/Cyberspace Goo-goo" -- from "Radio Ga Ga"/"We will rock you"
Reply to
AndyC the WB

I totally disagree with that comment.

I think hanging should only be an option, not compulsory. The convicted person should have plenty opportunity to appeal if new evidence come to light.

Don't be stupid every crime will be looked and discuss in the courts(that's what the courts are for)

What a ridiculous thing to say. We all know what dangerous driving is, you example is very week. That matter will be looked at in court and hanging will just be an option.

What complete rubbish. A drunk driver on the road is like a loose cannon. Every one is at risk when a drunk driver is on the road.

Something drastic has to be done about the alarmingly high number of road accidents coursed by drunk drivers. Read crime is just not seen as a serious crime by the eyes of the law at the moment. I think road crimes should be taken very seriously, by the courts. And an effective deterrent should be used to stop this mass murder on the road

This is all about freedom is speech. You either: [Agree or Disaree] that what its all about.

You complaints will just give the people at Telewest, some great joke to tell at the next office party ;-)

Reply to
Sir.Tony

Bollocks. I was completely shitfaced driving back from Wales this evening - sprog was falling about laughing at the way I couldn't stop running onto the rumble strip on the edge of the M48 - but I didn't hit anything, didn't kill anyone, didn't even break the speed limit. Victimless crime. Stop being such an old woman, you pathetic self-panicker.

Reply to
pseudoplatypus

Alcohol slows down your reactions and makes you more aggressive, not good for the road. I thing anyone who gets caught over the limit, should be banned for life(and put in the prison if they cause an accident).

The rate of accidents go up around Christmas time, those accidents would not have happened if these people didn't drink & drive.

Drunk driver are evil scum. Them MURDERS!!!

Reply to
Sir.Tony

But I'm like that anyway. No real difference. Anyway, the amount of drink that I had last night might have had me over the limit, but I'd have been comfortably under 10 years ago.

You keep banging on about this. If everyone who ever broke a law was caught and punished to the full extent of the law, *everyone* would be in jail.

Except, obviously, your good self.

You can think of no other reason for the rise in accident rates than drink-driving? Like late-night shopping, last-minute panic present-buying, everybody going out to parties whether they drink or not? If there's more traffic, there's more accidents, you div. Personally, I reckon I drive better if I've had a couple - more relaxed, see?

Funnily enough, in about 30 years of drunk driving, I haven't killed anyone, or crashed because of being drunk. This makes me a "murder" in what way? I've had a couple of accidents when I've nodded off at the wheel while completely sober.

Reply to
pseudoplatypus

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.