Entirely unashamed anti car propaganda, and the more the better.

[platinumsage]

“She was wearing a short skirt”

Fuck off.

Yes that’s exactly the same, well done.

 

[Spymaster]

Explain it in a different way then.

 

[Spymaster]

This was the Instagram user's previous post:

A couple of cyclists trying to cause cars to crash here. Attempted murder for sure.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Yes that’s exactly the same, well done.

“If you spend your days cycling round in a gang taunting drivers this sort of thing happens”

 

[platinumsage]

“If you spend your days cycling round in a gang taunting drivers this sort of thing happens”

Because women wearing clothes is the same as a group of men intimidating people on the road how exactly?

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Yeah, I’m sure the gown man sat inside a two ton metal box was terrified of the child on a bicycle. Definitely the kids fault. He was asking for it really.

 

[teuchter]

It's like if some teenagers are being annoying, someone pulls a gun, aims it at one of them, and just misses - it's not attempted murder, they were asking for it.

You wouldn't ask if someone with that short a temper should be allowed to carry firearms, right?

Hope the driver gets done (they'll probably just get a couple of points and banned from driving for ten minutes).

 

[platinumsage]

Yeah, I’m sure the gown man sat inside a two ton metal box was terrified of the child on a bicycle. Definitely the kids fault. He was asking for it really.

Wasn’t it a terrified woman trapped in a metal box desperately trying to escape from an aggressive group of men?

Oh wait, we don’t know the details do we.

 

[Spymaster]

Yeah, I’m sure the gown man sat inside a two ton metal box was terrified of the child on a bicycle. Definitely the kids fault. He was asking for it really.

It's like if some teenagers are being annoying, someone pulls a gun, aims it at one of them, and just misses - it's not attempted murder, they were asking for it.

You wouldn't ask if someone with that short a temper should be allowed to carry firearms, right?

Hope the driver gets done (they'll probably just get a couple of points and banned from driving for ten minutes).

You two are gold!

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

You two are gold!

So, let’s go through this. Which of the following do you disagree with?

1 - the driver deliberately drove their vehicle at the kid on the ground

2 - the driver could not possibly have been able to see where the cyclist was, whether he’d be driving over his head etc

3 - no matter what behaviour/actions the cyclist had taken beforehand, the drivers actions were inexcusable

4 - the cyclist could have been severely injured or killed by the drivers actions

 

[Spymaster]

So, let’s go through this. Which of the following do you disagree with?

1 - the driver deliberately drove their vehicle at the kid on the ground

2 - the driver could not possibly have been able to see where the cyclist was, whether he’d be driving over his head etc

3 - no matter what behaviour/actions the cyclist had taken beforehand, the drivers actions were inexcusable

4 - the cyclist could have been severely injured or killed by the drivers actions

MURDER!

You remind me of my nephew when you post on this thread. He’s proper bonkers too but in an amusing way!

 

[Spymaster]

Because women wearing clothes is the same as a group of men intimidating people on the road how exactly?

Innit?

On this thread Bees will henceforth be known as Silly Simile

 

[teuchter]

Apologists out in force - proving the basic premise of the thread once again.

 

[teuchter]

 

[Spymaster]

I haven’t clicked on that but I’m sure it’s fabulous, so have a like anyway

 

[Saul Goodman]

Attempted murder.

The cyclist obviously attacked the terrified driver prior to this, which is why we only see a few seconds of video. Cyclist probably had a gun, too.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

The cyclist obviously attacked the terrified driver prior to this, which is why we only see a few seconds of video. Cyclist probably had a gun, too.

I’d love to know how a kid in a bike could attack someone inside a car. Can you enlighten me?

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

MURDER!

You remind me of my nephew when you post on this thread. He’s proper bonkers too but in an amusing way!

So, not one point addressed. Says a lot.

 

[Saul Goodman]

I’d love to know how a kid in a bike could attack someone inside a car. Can you enlighten me?

Most cars don't have bulletproof glass.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Apologists out in force - proving the basic premise of the thread once again.

Quite. Any other situation where an adult had attempted to harm - potentially fatally - a child, everyone would rightly condemn them. But because a car is involved, well, must be something else going on, they were provoked, the kid was asking for it etc. Depressing.

 

[teuchter]

Most cars don't have bulletproof glass.

Most kids don't have carproof heads.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Most cars don't have bulletproof glass.

Riiiiiight.

 

[T & P]

So, let’s go through this. Which of the following do you disagree with?

1 - the driver deliberately drove their vehicle at the kid on the ground

2 - the driver could not possibly have been able to see where the cyclist was, whether he’d be driving over his head etc

3 - no matter what behaviour/actions the cyclist had taken beforehand, the drivers actions were inexcusable

4 - the cyclist could have been severely injured or killed by the drivers actions

Banter aside, I very much doubt anyone here would disagree with points 1, 3, and 4. I certainly don’t.

I simply cannot tell for sure about point 2- and frankly nor can anyone else here. Anyone who states ‘the driver couldn’t possibly see the cyclist in front’ from that footage is talking as much speculative bollocks as anyone who says the driver definitely did.

So there, that’s my answer to your perfectly reasonable questions. And furthermore, even if the driver could see perfectly well and only intended to teach the cyclist a lesson rather than trying to kill him, he’s a fucking cunt for doing so and deserves to have the book thrown at him.

I’m clearly still a petrolhead though.

 

[Saul Goodman]

Riiiiiight.

The only thing we can be absolutely sure of is that the video was cut short because it was self-incriminating.

 

[Saul Goodman]

Most kids don't have carproof heads.

Then it would make sense not to fuck with cars.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

The only thing we can be absolutely sure of is that the video was cut short because it was self-incriminating.

Considering it’s been submitted to the police, with a view to prosecuting the driver, I doubt it.

 

[Saul Goodman]

Considering it’s been submitted to the police, with a view to prosecuting the driver, I doubt it.

The whole video has, or just those few carefully selected seconds?

 

[Spymaster]

So, not one point addressed. Says a lot.

This addresses all of your ponts perfectly.

 

[Spymaster]

.

 

[Spymaster]

.