Brunstrom is a twat

Perhaps, but the next sentence is rather vital to the definition of
dangerous driving.

Your view is that it is vital to punish people who do something
which is not dangerous, because it is dangerous. We know.

 

Why do you ask? Do you have a habit of hitting over-cautious, hesitant
cunts from behind?

 

No, but I've come close on occasion. Usually when a gap appears at a
roundabout that's big enough for several cars to pull into and the dozy
**** in front comes off the brakes, then changes their mind.

 

You claim the equation he provided a link for is not valid for rotating
bodies, and that you read the whole thing.

Yet this is (one of) the equations on the site:

| KE = 1/2 M v^2 + 1/2 I w^2
|
| NOTE: this assumes a single rotational axis and forward motion of the
| bullet. For multiple rotations and non-symmetric bodies, things get
| a little more complicated. For most bullets, the contribution of
| the rotational kinetic energy is on the order of a few foot pounds
| and is neglected, leaving the following equation for
| energy of the bullet:
|
| KE = 1/2 M v^2

The above (1/2 I w^2) is, IIRC, the correct termr rotational kinetic
energy. I am somewhat confused by the use of "foot pounds" for units
of energy, since that would be a torque. Unless it's pounds-mass
rather than pounds-force, and the energy is being described in terms of
the number of feet you'd need to raise a 1 pound mass in order for it
to gain the correct amount of potential energy.

 

The line "Ace wrote:", as is clearly shown by the attributions.

 

No. If _everyone_ was travelling at the same speed there would have
been no need to overtake.

Some people travel slower than the limit. Some vehicles have different
limits. Your argument is baseless.

 

And like JNugent, nothing of mine was included in the quote. Sloppy.

--
_______
..'_/_|_\_'. Ace (brucedotrogers a.t rochedotcom)
\`\ | /`/ GSX-R1000K3 (slightly broken, currently missing)
`\\ | //' BOTAFOT#3, SbS#2, UKRMMA#13, DFV#8, SKA#2, IBB#10
`\|/`
`

 

SteveH () gurgled happily, sounding much like they
were saying :

<waves>
Done that.

 

SteveH says...

One of these cunts caused my ex to drop her new Daytona on Saturday. Big
gap to the right, he goes, she starts to move and looks right to make
sure it's clear, he stops for no reason and she dropped the bike because
she grabbed a handful of front brake, then car driver pisses off.

Cunts, I'd chop their fucking hands off to stop them driving. It's
usually old pension-bludgers who do it. Fuckers can't see past their
bonnet and have the reactions of a supertanker on full steam ahead.

My dad's one of them - 76 years old and has a shoulder problem caused by
a firearms wound that renders his right arm absolutely useless. It was
ok for years, but in his retirement years has got so bad that to get his
hand onto the steering wheel requires use of his left hand to lift it.
Everything is done with his left[1], but he has no special controls and
fails to see the problem. He just will not accept that his driving is
shite now his reactions are slowed, he has use of only one arm and his
eyesight is failing.

There are times when I honestly feel like grassing him to the police
when I know he's in the car - his licence should have been suspended
about 5 years ago. My sisters and I have all said we will not allow our
kids in the car with him driving again.

[1] He drives a '97 Corrola with a manual box[2], indicator switch on
the left stalk... not that he ever uses the fucking things anyway.
[2] He won't even consider getting an auto "they're for spastics".

--
Lozzo
Triumph Daytona 955i SE (Black with added black bits)
Suzuki GSX-R750L trackbike (Shite with added shite bits)
Yamaha SR250 Cheasy-Rider (undergoing a transformation)
I ride way too fast to worry about cholestorol.

 

My children have *never* been in a car driven by my father.

 

You've never looked up '****' in a dictionary have you. Language
evolves - deal with it.

From Chambers:

**** taboo slang (sometimes f**k, f***, etc) verb (fucked, fucking) tr
& intr to have penetrative sex (with someone). noun 1 an act of sexual
intercourse. 2 a sexual partner. exclamation an expression of anger,
frustration, etc **** him! **** all nothing He knows **** all about
sailing. not give a **** not to care at all. the **** used for emphasis
What the **** are you doing? See also the f-word.

--
Krusty
www.MuddyStuff.co.uk
Off-Road Classifieds

'02 MV Senna '03 Tigtona 955i '96 Tiger '79 Fantic Hiro 250

 

Is it being irrational?

 

They were not intended to reduce 'gun crime' - they were intended to reduce
the likelihood of further mass shootings. To that extent they have been
entirely successful.

Uno-Hoo!

 

Sorry Kev, that's a preposterous statement. The only thing one can say for
certain is that there have been no mass shooting since the laws were enacted
and thousands of perfectly decent honest people have had to forgo their
pastime because officialdom fouled up. Given the increase in illegally held
weapons since then it's now just a matter of time until another
disillusioned loner takes it into his head to go on a killing spree and an
modern machine pistol chucks out a lot more lead than anything Hamilton was
using.

As said elsewhere, according to press reports, if the senior police officers
had listened to the local copper, who recommended somewhile beforehand that
Thomas Hamilton's firearms licence be revoked and his weapons confiscated,
the incident would never have happened.

 

Right on.

 

Ah, I see the concept of statistical outliers is as foreign to you as
to most gun banners.

 

Whilst it is certainly true that there are risks in every aspect of life -
it is also true that by increasing the number of risks you take, the greater
the likelihood of something going wrong.

Uno-Hoo!

 

Very true - and the faster you are travelling when that idiot pulls out in
front of you - the more serious the results are likely to be.

Uno-Hoo!

 

I don't see the corelation between someone pulling out and the bikes
speed contributing to disaster, many times it's the speed that lets one
avoid the hazard the assumption that one automatically leads to the
other is flawed.

 

Uno-Hoo! (Uno-Hoo@NOSPAMbigfootdotcom) gurgled happily, sounding much
like they were saying :

Indeed - but for two factors.

Firstly, the faster you're travelling, the more likely you are to be
spotted, as basic human physiology means that moving objects get seen
easier than static ones.

Also, the slower you're travelling, the more likely he may well be to pull
out, on the basis that he doesn't want to get stuck behind you. Don't scoff
- it happens regularly to those of us who drive vehicles which are
perceived as being slow.