"ARWadworth" wrote in message
m...

"dennis@home" wrote in message
...


"ARWadworth" wrote in message
om...

"The Medway Handyman" wrote in
message om...
Andy Hall wrote:
On 2008-08-02 23:06:38 +0100, Andy Burns
said:

On 02/08/2008 22:47, Andy Hall wrote:

Only because a dog was involved.

If it had been a toddler? If the dog had pulled its owner over? All
sounds a bit too close for comfort to me.

So what is the solution?

- More ambulances so that they can statistically be closer to
locations where there is an emergency?

They don't return to base after a call, they go to RVP's to await
another call. Thats why you see them on bridges etc.

I wish they would not wait on motorway bridges. When you are doing over
a ton you think it is a speed camera as you approach the bridge.

They do that on purpose.
It catches the short sighted drivers out a lot.

Ever been for an eye test?

I do not need one.

How do you know?

I have I had one speeding ticket in the last 300 thousand miles I have
driven. I was found not guilty on that charge.

Lets see how many have I had.... hmmm... none, how many parking
tickets...hmmm.. none, eye tests.... hmmm.... thirty or so.


I can spot a mobile unit in a 30 zone miles away. Not that it matters as I
am not speeding.

It is a little harder to spot mobile cameras on a quiet motorway or dual
carriageway where there are no pedestrians. I admit I speed then.

ITYM where there aren't normally pedestrians.
There has been a spate of kids running across the M6 by me.
That's the difference between speeding and not killing the idiots.



Adam