Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
This is an obvious non seqitur, but do go ahead and explain the nonsense logic that leads you to say this. Just for entertainment value.
Rectums
Last edited:
This is an obvious non seqitur, but do go ahead and explain the nonsense logic that leads you to say this. Just for entertainment value.
She’s right though.The first thing I ask myself when considering transport issues is always “what would Emily Maitlis think about this?”
She’s right though.
Tough shit reallyNot for me she isn’t, motoring is far more expensive these days than when I was pootling around in a 12 year old 950cc Fiesta…
Fat-shaming. Nice. At least I don't need a fucking motor to go up a hill twat.
Yes, the side with poor manoeuvrability sitting on tanks of highly-flammable fuel would obviously lose.A war between motorists and cyclist/peds would be quite amusing, though I fear rather short-lived and one-sided...
Fat-shaming. Nice. At least I don't need a fucking motor to go up a hill twat.
The only thing I'm offended by is the poor quality of your abuse. Ha ha ha fat fella. Maybe you could get a job writing for Jim DavidsonFat shaming
Touchy twat
If I was in charge of a war on motorists it wouldn't be a metaphorical one.
Crikey, endless jokes about killing and mutilating cyclists raise barely a whimper of complaint from the morality police of Urban75 but a bored moment's careless hyperbole directed at the luckless drivers of the world and they're all crawling out of the woodwork.I thought your war was against private motorists? As a non-car owner I would not like to be caught in the crossfire.
There has been great confusion in this forum about whether the car abolitionists want to ban all cars, or only those that are privately owned. Why, only the other day there was a mini wankfest over the fact that an episode of Corrie had highlighted the issue of cars in our cities by a poor child coughing due to pollution, and having to dodge a van, or something terrible to that effect, and yet again used as an argument against private car ownership.I thought your war was against private motorists? As a non-car owner I would not like to be caught in the crossfire.
TesticlesCrikey, endless jokes about killing and mutilating cyclists raise barely a whimper of complaint from the morality police of Urban75 but a bored moment's careless hyperbole directed at the luckless drivers of the world and they're all crawling out of the woodwork.
Crikey, endless jokes about killing and mutilating cyclists raise barely a whimper of complaint from the morality police of Urban75 but a bored moment's careless hyperbole directed at the luckless drivers of the world and they're all crawling out of the woodwork.
Is this the prelude to another of your fantasies about cyclists private parts? You should get your own Wordpress for that stuff.Testicles
Is this the prelude to another of your fantasies about cyclists private parts? You should get your own Wordpress for that stuff.
I don’t think anyone wants to see any vehicles banned just very heavily restricted particularly in cities when most are managing perfectly fine without them.
I haven't, no, because making jaywalking illegal would still legally allow pedestrians cross any given street on the overwhelming proportion of its length. You on the other hand want to ban people from using cars, period. Unless you need to use a death machine on your Scottish travels, in which case an exception (or fifty) can be made, of course.Bet he still hasn't.
You know your post a bit further up this page, where you say that some people are very confused? You're not wrong there.You on the other hand want ban people from using cars, period.