I'll ride wherever I feel is safest. Fuck the law, a fine is better than a brain haemorrhage.Bertster7 wrote:
That's a point, wtf are cyclists doing on the pavement? Surely that's illegal? Don't they have to ride in the road over there? The pavement is for pedestrians.Nappy wrote:
- fuck off cyclistsloubot wrote:
The bottom line is (I hope) did the girl finally learn when NOT to text. I hope she does not carry this bad habit into adulthood, especially when driving.
Last edited by loubot (2009-07-14 05:26:54)
It's these Dutch influences. Fucking Amsterdam with all those cyclists on the pavement in their little cycle lane, ringing their bells...ghettoperson wrote:
I'll ride wherever I feel is safest. Fuck the law, a fine is better than a brain haemorrhage.Bertster7 wrote:
That's a point, wtf are cyclists doing on the pavement? Surely that's illegal? Don't they have to ride in the road over there? The pavement is for pedestrians.Nappy wrote:
- fuck off cyclists
Cyclists should be in the road, not on the pavement (unless of course they have a cycle lane dedicated to them there). Cyclists are road users too, they need to follow the same rules as everyone else - that includes; not running traffic lights, proper lane discipline, not going down one way streets, using the correct side of the road (I nearly got knocked down by a courier going the wrong way down a road when I was crossing at a zebra crossing - fortunately I ended up pretty much just clotheslining him off his bike) and not riding on the pavement. It's barely any different to cars and motorbikes deciding to take to the pavement simply because it suits them and is a nuiscance and potential danger to pedestrians.
If you can't ride a bike properly, don't do it at all.
Nah, in Amsterdam I ride properly because we've got bike paths everywhere so I don't need to fear for my life.
In the UK, I ride on whatever is convenient. If I'm going to get killed on the road I'll ride on the pavement. If the pavement is busy I'll walk/ride slowly until I'm in such a position to either get back on the road, or ride at a normal pace on the pavement.
In the UK, I ride on whatever is convenient. If I'm going to get killed on the road I'll ride on the pavement. If the pavement is busy I'll walk/ride slowly until I'm in such a position to either get back on the road, or ride at a normal pace on the pavement.
Where I live, it's illegal to ride bikes anywhere but on the pavement.Bertster7 wrote:
It's these Dutch influences. Fucking Amsterdam with all those cyclists on the pavement in their little cycle lane, ringing their bells...ghettoperson wrote:
I'll ride wherever I feel is safest. Fuck the law, a fine is better than a brain haemorrhage.Bertster7 wrote:
That's a point, wtf are cyclists doing on the pavement? Surely that's illegal? Don't they have to ride in the road over there? The pavement is for pedestrians.
Cyclists should be in the road, not on the pavement (unless of course they have a cycle lane dedicated to them there). Cyclists are road users too, they need to follow the same rules as everyone else - that includes; not running traffic lights, proper lane discipline, not going down one way streets, using the correct side of the road (I nearly got knocked down by a courier going the wrong way down a road when I was crossing at a zebra crossing - fortunately I ended up pretty much just clotheslining him off his bike) and not riding on the pavement. It's barely any different to cars and motorbikes deciding to take to the pavement simply because it suits them and is a nuiscance and potential danger to pedestrians.
If you can't ride a bike properly, don't do it at all.
The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP
Although to be honest usually when there's an open manhole there's all those cones and shit around it or a sign or something. So they may have a legal case here. But still
Well at least that's what happens here (you get lots of people stealing covers etc), apparently they're made out of valuable metal these days on the black market. Generally due to big countries like China (and even India) and the whole economy boom thing
And what's funny is that it's made in India, used in the US. Then it's stolen in the U.S and sold as scrap metal to China. Which is why the manhole was probably open in the first place![TUF]Catbox wrote:
I saw a manhole cover here where i live and it said made in india also... Kinda weird that something that heavyKurazoo wrote:
Made in India? WTF
is made and then transported across the Ocean to the US? I guess it's cheaper to make it there?
Well at least that's what happens here (you get lots of people stealing covers etc), apparently they're made out of valuable metal these days on the black market. Generally due to big countries like China (and even India) and the whole economy boom thing
What the law is, and what the law should be are 2 different things.Zombie_Affair wrote:
By law, they need to be. For those with a lack of sense.DrunkFace wrote:
No. Signs and barriers should not be necessary. Common sense should be.Ty wrote:
Were there signs or barriers around the open manhole? I hate to admit this but if there wasn't then the idiot girl and her idiot parents are probably in the right.
Unfortunately.liquidat0r wrote:
They probably should have put a barrier up before opening the cover.
That will be the argument in court, any how.
I have hard time believing that even Åland would be that stupid.Freezer7Pro wrote:
Where I live, it's illegal to ride bikes anywhere but on the pavement.Bertster7 wrote:
It's these Dutch influences. Fucking Amsterdam with all those cyclists on the pavement in their little cycle lane, ringing their bells...ghettoperson wrote:
I'll ride wherever I feel is safest. Fuck the law, a fine is better than a brain haemorrhage.
Cyclists should be in the road, not on the pavement (unless of course they have a cycle lane dedicated to them there). Cyclists are road users too, they need to follow the same rules as everyone else - that includes; not running traffic lights, proper lane discipline, not going down one way streets, using the correct side of the road (I nearly got knocked down by a courier going the wrong way down a road when I was crossing at a zebra crossing - fortunately I ended up pretty much just clotheslining him off his bike) and not riding on the pavement. It's barely any different to cars and motorbikes deciding to take to the pavement simply because it suits them and is a nuiscance and potential danger to pedestrians.
If you can't ride a bike properly, don't do it at all.
- Superior Mind
- (not macbeth)
- +1,755|7114
She was from Staten Island, so it's not so bad.
she didn't eitherlettuce wrote:
i don't see where Helen Keller comes into this..
or how about:
why did no one hear hellen keller fall off the cliff?
Spoiler (highlight to read):
she was wearing mittens!!
Did you hear about those people that stole a Church roof?Mekstizzle wrote:
And what's funny is that it's made in India, used in the US. Then it's stolen in the U.S and sold as scrap metal to China. Which is why the manhole was probably open in the first place!
Well at least that's what happens here (you get lots of people stealing covers etc), apparently they're made out of valuable metal these days on the black market. Generally due to big countries like China (and even India) and the whole economy boom thing
Me neither, I just need to correct Swan's sentence.lettuce wrote:
i don't see where Helen Keller comes into this..
The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.
Eh, you can't always be aware of your surroundings. I'm sure every one of us here has at one point in their lives walked into something because they weren't immediately aware of the layout of the environment. That's why the barriers are put up in the first place, because accidents do happen. It could just as easily have been someone who did it by honest accident, and then what? Would that person still have been an idiot to most of you, or would it have been one of those accidents that just happen every now and then? And why would you absolve the utility workers of their responsibility because of that?
The girl is clearly fatally oblivious, but it would've never happened if the utility workers had done their jobs right.
The girl is clearly fatally oblivious, but it would've never happened if the utility workers had done their jobs right.
Which hole? She must have been small....
Sober enough to know what I'm doing, drunk enough to really enjoy doing it
I'm suing STIHL because their Chainsaw killed my brother when he tried to lick it clean after cutting own a maple tree.
Fucking people are amazing.
Course, the parents are suing, which directly points out why their child fell into a HOLE IN THE FUCKING GROUND.
MAYBE this would be lawsuit worthy if the hole were DECEPTIVELY COVERED IN STICKS AND LEAVES.
Ovarian cancer for the mother and daughter please. STOP stupid from breeding.
Fucking people are amazing.
Course, the parents are suing, which directly points out why their child fell into a HOLE IN THE FUCKING GROUND.
MAYBE this would be lawsuit worthy if the hole were DECEPTIVELY COVERED IN STICKS AND LEAVES.
Ovarian cancer for the mother and daughter please. STOP stupid from breeding.
