rodneybewes

When the thieves couldn't get through the lock of mine they stripped it of parts and kicked the forks in so the frame was doen, the fuckers. I'd keep it inside if possible.

Not proper jet packs that you can quickly don and nip down the shops to get a pint of milk with. Like the Jetsons.

edcam Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > To be honest, ED is quite far out for this. I'd > rather they spent more money on the existing > (inadequate) transport systems and kept the bikes > to Zone 1. The existing transport systems aren't fixable without spending vast amounts of cash. They want less cars, not more, to avoid the massive fines on the horizon for the enormous pollution in London. They can't afford to buy back the real estate to knock down property to build new railway or tram infrastructure. Jet packs haven't been invented. It's 35 minutes into town on a bike from East Dulwich, less with proper segregation, and far less than that to the nearest tube. I'm pinning my hopes on more cycle lanes and double-decker trains, like they have in the Netherlands...

actuarygi Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > that is because all the indentation was gone when > it was posted. Ah, that would explain it. I actually thought it was a poem when I first saw it.

Your summary is more confusing than the lengthy debate.

Horsebox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > If a dog bothers you or your child and there's a > hint of savagery about the beast, a swift but firm > boot/stick to the jaw should send it packing. At > the very least it should shock the irresponsible > owner to keep their pet under control. > > I am in no way advocating cruelty to animals (I > was once vegetarian, for a time); > Self-preservation is the aim. Pretty much this. If it runs up to your kids uninvited give it a leathering.

I'm happy with you not agreeing that 20mph will be a benefit, that's all up for debate. I don't understand your issue with Southwark carrying out their election promise. Seems to me we should be applauding that.

richard tudor Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > People who read and voted for Clegg on fees got > shafted and call me Dave on inheritance tax got > shafted. > > What they put in apart from the headline grabbing > political policy is what they push through which > is what was always intended > > Hence people cannot be asked now days. > > 30 mph on busy roads, 20 on residential roads and > pedestrians on the pavement. > > Common sense And hopefully no-one votes for them again. I still don't see your point. This lot said they would do it and they are. Surely you should be approving? I agree with the 20mph policy which is being implemented across nearly every Borough.

Well, more fool those who vote without knowing, or don't vote at all. That's possibly the worst excuse of the lot. They promised to do it and they're pushing it through. You don't hold a referendum on every decision especially any that are in your manifesto.

This isn't just Southwark by the way, aren't they all doing it/have done it already apart from Westminster?

first mate Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I have to say that my experience is the exact > opposite where the behaviour of other drivers is > concerned. I would say more people are overtaking > in a reckless manner. This applies to the section > nearing the Horniman, up Sydenham Hill and > onwards. Many drivers getting frustrated, tooting > and overtaking at speed. Note that few commercial > vehicles, including buses, are adhering to 20mph. It started like that in the City. Lots of beeping etc. Then people calmed down a bit. It's a lot better than it was although you've still got some of the same jackasses racing down narrow streets packed on either side with pedestrians at 30mph, totally inappropriately. More speed cameras would do the trick surely?

maxxi Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > numbers Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > what company was it that implanted chips in > their > > employees to allow them access to the building? > > > Harry Ramsden plc. Good work!

By the way, I agree with the op's first couple of paragraphs. Advertising splashed all over everything we see is a blight on London. What advertiser wants to be associated with a speed restriction anyway?

Yes, but it's not saying you'll be taxed if you drive. It's a matter of being taxed if you break the speed limit when you drive. If you're saying it's just done to raise revenue then that revenue surely offsets the cost. If no-one breaks the speed limit and there are no fines I bet they'll remove the cameras soon enough. It isn't as if they didn't have this as a policy when they were voted in.

mako Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Its politically driven and will be used to raise > cash through enforcement cameras that is a fact. Well, hopefully. What's the point in setting a speed limit if you're not going to enforce it? It's not like a tax where you've got no choice but to pay it. Don't go over the speed limit.

Get them vaccinated. Don't think twice about it. Even if you don't believe all the science behind it (you should believe it but there you go) you will never ever forgive yourself if they get a bad case of any of those hideous diseases.

+1 for Meson Don Felipe. Or, a little further, just across Blackfriars Road, Mar I Terre.

+1 for the Royal Oak, I think it's the only Harveys pub in London. Last time I was there a coach-load of staff from the brewery turned up with their MD, all of them leathered. The MD bought beers for all and everyone was having a whale of a time. Lovely pint of best.

Jacqui5254 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Hi Zebedee Tring, I did understand that it was > aimed at male drivers and was responding as one of > the very sort of women drivers you point out are > on the receiving end. But, as a female who has > had nasty unpleasant hand gestures from male > drivers over what they perceived as criticism , I > would not want to end up trading nasty sexual > insults as a form of acceptable communication. I > wouldn't dream of challenging someone's manhood as > a way of tell him his driving is shit. Nor do I > think it would lead to them improving their > driving skills! > > On a practical note, I think it's time drivers > had to sit regular driving test refreshers. Too > many drivers have lost sight of what proper, good > driving is expected, eg, what uncleglen said about > drivers forgetting who'se right of way it is on a > roundabout. > A lot of people get in their cars and drive > forward. All the stuff about checking mirrors, > leaving enough space for cars to open their doors, > making sure the zebra crossing is clear before > driving over it, who's right of way it is etc etc > etc is lost over 10/20/50 years of driving. > However, I do appreciate your support for the > nastiness dished out to female drivers from time > to time. > > The sooner we all recognise that our driving > leaves much to be desired, the better. I don't think it's a question of ability, it's a question of attitude and I don't think test refreshers help with that. People know how to behave when they are under scrutiny. Then it's back to normal. The key is to up the punishments - higher levels of fine, more points on the licence and more bans for bad driving, more speed and bus lane/junction cameras. Unfortunately doing any of this now falls under the banner of "the war on motorists" so bugger all will be done.

DaveR Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I like the Rake, but currently drinking more > frequently in the Old Red Cow in Smithfield, which > has a great selection of cask and keg, and is the > closest pub to work that's not a City hell-hole. > I still have a psychological block about paying > more than a fiver a pint (or at least much more > than a fiver), and most of the really expensive > stuff is way over strength IPA which I don't like > anyway. Not a bad boozer that, with a good range of beers, but it's a bit antiseptic. The Hand & Shears around the corner has better ambience but not as big a selection.

The new lights with timers in central London are much better in that respect. Pedestrians know exactly how much time they have left.

Jeremy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > rodneybewes Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > @jeremy The Rake can catch you out if you are > not careful! > > Afterwards had a couple of pints of cask ale... an > Oakham and a Thornbridge I think... for a very > reasonable price, so it balanced out. But.... I > just prefer keg beer. Don't know why it seems to > be so much more expensive. Agreed. That's the joy of The Rake. You can admire the super-beers from around the world but you always have a reasonably priced session ale to fall back on.

@jeremy The Rake can catch you out if you are not careful! These days they tend to tell you if it's going to make your eyes water before they start pouring. I bought my most expensive beer ever at the weekend, the Horizon Tokyo Black. ?16 for a 25cl bottle. Best imperial russian stout I've ever had though, possibly the best beer. That works out at ?48 for a wine bottle size!

hopskip Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This is a good clear piece from Bristol City > Council on consultations and sets a clear > statement of intent. We should look to Southwark > for their equivalent. > _____________ > Whenever we make a decision about improving or > changing services, we need to be confident the > decision is properly informed by public opinion. > > For nearly ten years, the council has maintained a > corporate consultation strategy setting out the > principles that should underpin consultation and > engagement with the people of Bristol. Those > principles remain true today and this new code of > good practice seeks to reaffirm and refine them - > and strengthen their consistent application. > > http://www.bristol.gov.uk/page/council-and-democra > cy/code-good-practice-public-consultation > > Our seven consultation principles > 1.Time consultations well and allow sufficient > time to respond. > 2.Clearly present relevant information and > encourage informed opinion. > 3.Be well targeted and reach out to seldom heard > groups. > 4.Offer genuine options and ask objective > questions. > 5.Be well planned, managed and co-ordinated. > 6.Be listed on Consultation Finder and be well > communicated. > 7.Provide fair, accessible feedback. > > We will use these principles whenever we run > public consultations. These look really useful Hopskip. Do we know if Bristol adhere to these? Certainly seem like the right way to head.

BrandNewGuy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I merely pointed out that the Council will have no > intention of enforcing the new speed limit. I think you'll start to see speed cameras on some of the longer, faster stretches. I don't really understand why they wouldn't or why there shouldn't be? Of course the point is that if the limit is 30mph then a lot of people will drive closer to 40. If you make the limit 20 then people will edge towards 30. The idiots will drive like idiots no matter what limit you set.