The Borisbikes have identity numbers on both sides, but not on the rear
where CCTV cameras might pick them up. I wonder if this is a deliberate
plan to encourage people to think that they are as above the law on a
Borisbike as they would be on their own bike.

On 31 July, 05:03, Basil Jet wrote:
The Borisbikes have identity numbers on both sides, but not on the rear
where CCTV cameras might pick them up. I wonder if this is a deliberate
plan to encourage people to think that they are as above the law on a
Borisbike as they would be on their own bike.

Not very thorough. Shouldn't you have said "... a deliberate plan by
Bob Crow to encourage benefit scroungers to think that they are as
above the law ..."?

On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 05:03:42 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:

The Borisbikes have identity numbers on both sides, but not on the rear
where CCTV cameras might pick them up. I wonder if this is a deliberate
plan to encourage people to think that they are as above the law on a
Borisbike as they would be on their own bike.


Of course it is. The idea that cyclists should be subject to the laws
of the land is complete anathema to them.

All cycles should carry clear identification plates so all miscreant
riders can be reported to the police.

On 31 July, 11:19, Bruce wrote:
On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 05:03:42 +0100, Basil Jet

wrote:

The Borisbikes have identity numbers on both sides, but not on the rear
where CCTV cameras might pick them up. I wonder if this is a deliberate
plan to encourage people to think that they are as above the law on a
Borisbike as they would be on their own bike.

Of course it is. *The idea that cyclists should be subject to the laws
of the land is complete anathema to them.

All cycles should carry clear identification plates so all miscreant
riders can be reported to the police.

Er, did you actually read what you said "of course it is" to, before
launching into a familiar rant about something else?

On 2010\07\31 11:05, MIG wrote:
On 31 July, 05:03, Basil wrote:
The Borisbikes have identity numbers on both sides, but not on the rear
where CCTV cameras might pick them up. I wonder if this is a deliberate
plan to encourage people to think that they are as above the law on a
Borisbike as they would be on their own bike.

Not very thorough. Shouldn't you have said "... a deliberate plan by
Bob Crow to encourage benefit scroungers to think that they are as
above the law ..."?

Er, did you actually read what you said "not very thorough" to, before
launching into a familiar rant about something else?

On 31 July, 15:22, Basil Jet wrote:
On 2010\07\31 11:05, MIG wrote:

On 31 July, 05:03, Basil *wrote:
The Borisbikes have identity numbers on both sides, but not on the rear
where CCTV cameras might pick them up. I wonder if this is a deliberate
plan to encourage people to think that they are as above the law on a
Borisbike as they would be on their own bike.

Not very thorough. *Shouldn't you have said "... a deliberate plan by
Bob Crow to encourage benefit scroungers to think that they are as
above the law ..."?

Er, did you actually read what you said "not very thorough" to, before
launching into a familiar rant about something else?

Yes. I saw it to be gratuitous abuse of those not connected with the
observation you had made about issues not connected with the
observation you had made, and felt that you could have widened it to
cover more familiar issues and targets of such gratuitous abuse.

I mean, why not? It would have made as much sense in the context of
where the owner of a fleet of vehicles sticks the fleet numbers for
the purpose of identifying members of their fleet.

On 2010\07\31 16:58, MIG wrote:
On 31 July, 15:22, Basil wrote:
On 2010\07\31 11:05, MIG wrote:

On 31 July, 05:03, Basil wrote:
The Borisbikes have identity numbers on both sides, but not on the rear
where CCTV cameras might pick them up. I wonder if this is a deliberate
plan to encourage people to think that they are as above the law on a
Borisbike as they would be on their own bike.

Not very thorough. Shouldn't you have said "... a deliberate plan by
Bob Crow to encourage benefit scroungers to think that they are as
above the law ..."?

Er, did you actually read what you said "not very thorough" to, before
launching into a familiar rant about something else?

Yes. I saw it to be gratuitous abuse of those not connected with the
observation you had made about issues not connected with the
observation you had made, and felt that you could have widened it to
cover more familiar issues and targets of such gratuitous abuse.

I mean, why not? It would have made as much sense in the context of
where the owner of a fleet of vehicles sticks the fleet numbers for
the purpose of identifying members of their fleet.

I don't think I've complained about illegal behaviour by cycles more
than once in my entire usenet career - apart from pedicabs, which are a
royal PITA.

On 31 July, 19:56, Basil Jet wrote:
On 2010\07\31 16:58, MIG wrote:





On 31 July, 15:22, Basil *wrote:
On 2010\07\31 11:05, MIG wrote:

On 31 July, 05:03, Basil * *wrote:
The Borisbikes have identity numbers on both sides, but not on the rear
where CCTV cameras might pick them up. I wonder if this is a deliberate
plan to encourage people to think that they are as above the law on a
Borisbike as they would be on their own bike.

Not very thorough. *Shouldn't you have said "... a deliberate plan by
Bob Crow to encourage benefit scroungers to think that they are as
above the law ..."?

Er, did you actually read what you said "not very thorough" to, before
launching into a familiar rant about something else?

Yes. I saw it to be gratuitous abuse of those not connected with the
observation you had made about issues not connected with the
observation you had made, and felt that you could have widened it to
cover more familiar issues and targets of such gratuitous abuse.

I mean, why not? *It would have made as much sense in the context of
where the owner of a fleet of vehicles sticks the fleet numbers for
the purpose of identifying members of their fleet.

I don't think I've complained about illegal behaviour by cycles more
than once in my entire usenet career - apart from pedicabs, which are a
royal PITA.

Fair enough, but it is common, and you picked a strange way to start.

In message , Basil Jet
writes
The Borisbikes have identity numbers on both sides, but not on the rear
where CCTV cameras might pick them up. I wonder if this is a deliberate
plan to encourage people to think that they are as above the law on a
Borisbike as they would be on their own bike.

Not sure but I note that one has already appeared by me (zone 3, east
London) in someone's front garden.
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

On 31/07/2010 11:19, Bruce wrote:
On Sat, 31 Jul 2010 05:03:42 +0100, Basil Jet
wrote:

The Borisbikes have identity numbers on both sides, but not on the rear
where CCTV cameras might pick them up. I wonder if this is a deliberate
plan to encourage people to think that they are as above the law on a
Borisbike as they would be on their own bike.


Of course it is. The idea that cyclists should be subject to the laws
of the land is complete anathema to them.

All cycles should carry clear identification plates so all miscreant
riders can be reported to the police.

Don't forgot pedestrians. What would be better - implants which can be
scanned, or simple tattoos with ID numbers?

And if there is an accident with a Borisbike, is it offensive to find
out the number, as it is with trains?
--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK