Boy Racers 0 Road Safety 4

[Toaods]

http://news.uk.msn.com/uk/articles.aspx?cp-documentid=150868863

[calumhibee1]

so because they're young they must have been boy racers? fanny. i was in a car crash with a middle aged man due to the fact he decided it wasnt even worth his while checking his mirrors before pulling out right infront of me. guess that was my fault though seeing as i was 18 at the time eh?

[Phil D. Rolls]

so because they're young they must have been boy racers? fanny. i was in a car crash with a middle aged man due to the fact he decided it wasnt even worth his while checking his mirrors before pulling out right infront of me. guess that was my fault though seeing as i was 18 at the time eh?

I think the people who know better than anyone which groups are more likely to crash are the insurers. Whichever age group has the highest premium is the one that has had most accidents.

I'm sure the lads were on their way to work at the back of three in the morning, when this accident occurred (well other than the 15 year old). Unless of course, the tree forgot to check its mirrors.

Would you like salt and vinegar with that chip on your shoulder?

[Judas Iscariot]

Thread title is a bit harsh, no?

[Beefster]

http://news.uk.msn.com/uk/articles.aspx?cp-documentid=150868863

I'll confidently predict that you would never have used that title in a million years if they had been from Edinburgh.

[MSK]

I think the people who know better than anyone which groups are more likely to crash are the insurers. Whichever age group has the highest premium is the one that has had most accidents.

I'm sure the lads were on their way to work at the back of three in the morning, when this accident occurred (well other than the 15 year old). Unless of course, the tree forgot to check its mirrors.

Would you like salt and vinegar with that chip on your shoulder?The insurers didnt write the newspaper article did they ..?...i cant see anywhere in that article that suggests it was "boy racers" therefore i think the OP & yourself have jumped to conclusions..rather unusual for hibs.net of course..:rolleyes:

Whatever the circumstances ..very tragic that young lives have been lost ..

[Phil D. Rolls]

The insurers didnt write the newspaper article did they ..?...i cant see anywhere in that article that suggests it was "boy racers" therefore i think the OP & yourself have jumped to conclusions..rather unusual for hibs.net of course..:rolleyes:

Whatever the circumstances ..very tragic that young lives have been lost ..

Where would we be without people jumping to conclusions. That's right FRANCE!

It is a well established fact that the group that has the highest accident rate is young men. To suggest otherwise is just wrong.

That, of course, doesn't mean that the lad was doing anything wrong in this case, police investigations will have to be done etc. Personally, I think - on no scientific basis whatsoever - there is a good chance that the driver was a young lad trying to impress his mates.

That said, my heart goes out to the laddies' loved ones. Boys will be boys, and unfortunately tragedies happen.

[--------]

I think the people who know better than anyone which groups are more likely to crash are the insurers. Whichever age group has the highest premium is the one that has had most accidents.

I'm sure the lads were on their way to work at the back of three in the morning, when this accident occurred (well other than the 15 year old). Unless of course, the tree forgot to check its mirrors.

Would you like salt and vinegar with that chip on your shoulder?


Another link - Beeb's report.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_midlands/8360183.stm

Note: the police felt it necessary to mention that the car wasn't "believed to be" stolen.

Just one thought - just what speed was the car travelling? I've known a number of serious accidents on the A9 over the years, including a few where the driver drove straight into a wall, but I can't recall one where ALL the occupants of the car were killed. There were always survivors.

One might ask also whether seat-belts were being worn?

[Toaods]

I think the people who know better than anyone which groups are more likely to crash are the insurers. Whichever age group has the highest premium is the one that has had most accidents.

I'm sure the lads were on their way to work at the back of three in the morning, when this accident occurred (well other than the 15 year old). Unless of course, the tree forgot to check its mirrors.

Would you like salt and vinegar with that chip on your shoulder?


:agree:


Thread title is a bit harsh, no?

yes, it was meant to be.


I'll confidently predict that you would never have used that title in a million years if they had been from Edinburgh.

I confidently predict the world will end in 2012. :wink:

---------- Post added at 01:37 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:36 PM ----------


fanny.


:rolleyes:

[LiverpoolHibs]

Am I missing something or is this one of the most distasteful threads there has ever been on here?

[MSK]

Am I missing something or is this one of the most distasteful threads there has ever been on here?No ..there has been a lot worse ..

[Toaods]

4 lads with the oldest being 17 in a Rover and 'signifcant impact' with a wall at 03.45.

it's not really rocket science to work it out is it?

[Future17]

Boy Racers 0 Road Safety 4

Heartless, tactless, classless. :bitchy:

What scoreline would you put on the story below or is it not worthy of a poor attempt at comedy as it appears to involve an older victim?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/derbyshire/8361083.stm

[Toaods]

Heartless, tactless, classless. :bitchy:

What scoreline would you put on the story below or is it not worthy of a poor attempt at comedy as it appears to involve an older victim?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/derbyshire/8361083.stm


There is no comparison required, entirely different set of cirumstances.

poor effort to make a valid contribution on your part though IMHO.

[Future17]

There is no comparison required, entirely different set of cirumstances.

That's exactly the point. Would you have used such a disrespectful and deliberately inflammatory title to a thread about the story I posted the link to?

If not, why do you think it's acceptable to do it for the one you linked to?

[Toaods]

That's exactly the point. Would you have used such a disrespectful and deliberately inflammatory title to a thread about the story I posted the link to?

If not, why do you think it's acceptable to do it for the one you linked to?

I'm afraid if you can't work out the answer to your own question from what's already been posted then we've reached the point of impasse.

[ArabHibee]

I'm going to assume that as the oldest lad was 17, he was the driver. So this would mean that he would have had no more than 9 months experience of driving since he passed his test. Sorry, I'll rephrase that, 9 months of legal experience of driving.

On another note, I would have had my erse tanned for being out at that time at that age. Changed days I suppose.

[LiverpoolHibs]

4 lads with the oldest being 17 in a Rover and 'signifcant impact' with a wall at 03.45.

it's not really rocket science to work it out is it?

Even accepting your incredibly unpleasant supposition that they were drunk and/or driving incredibly dangerously, I'm still failing to see how this is something to be celebrated in the manner (well, in any manner) you have in the title of the thread.

[Toaods]

Even accepting your incredibly unpleasant supposition that they were drunk and/or driving incredibly dangerously, I'm still failing to see how this is something to be celebrated in the manner (well, in any manner) you have in the title of the thread.



supposition they were drunk.

Celebrated ???


Wow...where did you read that?

You are confusing your slant on it with what was posted.

[Toaods]

:hmmm:

£10 bet for Dnipro Kids says I'm right here.:on toast!

[ArabHibee]

:hmmm:

£10 bet for Dnipro Kids says I'm right here.:on toast!

I'm not sure what you're betting on.

The end of the world in 2012? :confused:

Or something else? :confused:

Maybe a post to confirm would be best. :greengrin

[Toaods]

I'm not sure what you're betting on.

The end of the world in 2012? :confused:

Or something else? :confused:

Maybe a post to confirm would be best. :greengrin

:top marksto show I'm not a smart-ass I'll have a fiver on both. :greengrin

[Future17]

I'm afraid if you can't work out the answer to your own question from what's already been posted then we've reached the point of impasse.

I guess so. I was just trying to work out why, by the content and tone of your posts, you seemed to be taking some sort of morbid satisfaction from the deaths of 4 young men.

No matter the circumstance, four lives have been lost needlessly (including three whose hands weren't on the wheel) and four families are in mourning today.

I can only assume that you have a personal take on this type of event or subject matter beyond what you've chosen to share on here and have chosen to post in poor taste without regard for people who may have have different experiences of this type of accident.

[Toaods]

I guess so. I was just trying to work out why, by the content and tone of your posts, you seemed to be taking some sort of morbid satisfaction from the deaths of 4 young men.

No matter the circumstance, four lives have been lost needlessly (including three whose hands weren't on the wheel) and four families are in mourning today.

I can only assume that you have a personal take on this type of event or subject matter beyond what you've chosen to share on here and have chosen to post in poor taste without regard for people who may have have different experiences of this type of accident.


'seems' you do too much assuming.


make that 3 families...:wink:

[danhibees1875]

I'm going to assume that as the oldest lad was 17, he was the driver. So this would mean that he would have had no more than 9 months experience of driving since he passed his test. Sorry, I'll rephrase that, 9 months of legal experience of driving.

On another note, I would have had my erse tanned for being out at that time at that age. Changed days I suppose.

A trivial point in the grand scheme of things but they only give ages for 3 of the 4 people involved. The use of the phrase '4 people, including 3 teenagers' would lead me to believe the fourth was 20+. :dunno:

[Toaods]

A trivial point in the grand scheme of things but they only give ages for 3 of the 4 people involved. The use of the phrase '4 people, including 3 teenagers' would lead me to believe the fourth was 20+. :dunno:


they cannot release such details until all have been formally identified, although they have been now:


http://www.west-midlands.police.uk/latest-news/appeal.asp?id=3321

[ArabHibee]

A trivial point in the grand scheme of things but they only give ages for 3 of the 4 people involved. The use of the phrase '4 people, including 3 teenagers' would lead me to believe the fourth was 20+. :dunno:

Guess you were led to believe wrong then. Oldest person was 17. And it's not a trivial point to make. I personally believe that there should be restrictions on young drivers in the form of size of car they can drive, how many people they can have in the car, time they can drive etc.

[danhibees1875]

Guess you were led to believe wrong then. Oldest person was 17. And it's not a trivial point to make. I personally believe that there should be restrictions on young drivers in the form of size of car they can drive, how many people they can have in the car, time they can drive etc.

Indeed I was. :agree:

To an extent there are restrictions on the size of car young drivers can drive. Someone my age would struggle to get insurance for a car above 1.9L and even then it would be very expensive.

The problem with the rest of the restrictions is knowing where to draw the line. :dunno:

[Phil D. Rolls]

Guess you were led to believe wrong then. Oldest person was 17. And it's not a trivial point to make. I personally believe that there should be restrictions on young drivers in the form of size of car they can drive, how many people they can have in the car, time they can drive etc.

I agree, you need to do different motorcycle tests as you go up the sizes. The driving test is totally unsuitable, given that someone can drive a Ferrari the day they pass their test.

[ArabHibee]

I agree, you need to do different motorcycle tests as you go up the sizes. The driving test is totally unsuitable, given that someone can drive a Ferrari the day they pass their test.

You my Dad? That's exactly what he says! :cool2:


Indeed I was. :agree:

To an extent there are restrictions on the size of car young drivers can drive. Someone my age would struggle to get insurance for a car above 1.9L and even then it would be very expensive.

The problem with the rest of the restrictions is knowing where to draw the line. :dunno:

But if Mummy and Daddy have lots and lots of money, it will never be a problem regarding the insurance. So there is then a divide against classes.
It should be a limit to the size of engine. 1 litre for the first 2 years after passing your test, then gradually going up for the next 3 years.

IMO of course.

[Phil D. Rolls]

You my Dad? That's exactly what he says! :cool2:



But if Mummy and Daddy have lots and lots of money, it will never be a problem regarding the insurance. So there is then a divide against classes.
It should be a limit to the size of engine. 1 litre for the first 2 years after passing your test, then gradually going up for the next 3 years.

IMO of course.

I was just waiting for the right moment hen.

[The Green Goblin]

Sorry, but this thread`s in really poor taste, imho. Whatever the reasons for the crash - that`s a reminder that we don`t yet know, by the way, in spite of peoples` enthusiasm for making up their own ideas - it`s an unpleasant and distasteful way to treat the deaths of 4 young people, with what seems to be undisguised glee, plus the thread title and use of winkey smileys etc. The "3 families" POST above was as poor as I have ever seen on here.

GG

[Danny_Hibee]

But if Mummy and Daddy have lots and lots of money, it will never be a problem regarding the insurance. So there is then a divide against classes.
It should be a limit to the size of engine. 1 litre for the first 2 years after passing your test, then gradually going up for the next 3 years.

IMO of course.

Dont think this kind of restriction would work, I passed my test about 8months ago and cant afford a car of my own so I use my mums car at the moment. If there was a restriction on engine size then i would have passed my test and not be able to drive then in 2 years time I would then be able to jump in a car and drive on my own having not driven for 2 years.

No doubting that there are a lot of idiots on the road and that youngsters are often the worst culprits but its also surely only natural that people who have been driving less time are more likely to be involved in accidents due to lack of experience etc and its not purely down to the fact that teenage drivers are ********s.

[oconnors_strip]

:hmmm:

£10 bet for Dnipro Kids says I'm right here.:on toast!


betting on a subject that involved 4 people loosing their lifes:bitchy:

[FranckSuzy]

I'm sorry to say this but over the last few days I've read enough on this forum to come to the conclusion that there's some really sick people who post on here. I won't be dropping in again (not that I think I'll be missed, I hasten to add). I just hope that all of you who sit in your ivory towers are never touch by tragedy or untimely death, by whatever means.

[Makaveli]

Those making light of this should be ashamed of themselves.

[Removed]

Those making light of this should be ashamed of themselves.

Who is making light of it :confused:

It's a tragedy. How do we stop young men killing themselves?

[sleeping giant]

Guess you were led to believe wrong then. Oldest person was 17. And it's not a trivial point to make. I personally believe that there should be restrictions on young drivers in the form of size of car they can drive, how many people they can have in the car, time they can drive etc.

I agree with that :agree:

Heartbreaking news.

---------- Post added at 10:23 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:23 PM ----------


Those making light of this should be ashamed of themselves.

I can't really see anyone making light of it mate !

[Jonnyboy]

'seems' you do too much assuming.


make that 3 families...:wink:

Dave, if at some future date (God forbid) wee Toaods whilst aged around 15/16/17 is a passenger in a car that suffers a similar fate will you feel inclined to post a similar thread?

BTW, dinnae say she'd not be allowed because like it or not kids of that age dont always do what they're told :wink:

[Hibbyradge]

Sorry, but this thread`s in really poor taste, imho. Whatever the reasons for the crash - that`s a reminder that we don`t yet know, by the way, in spite of peoples` enthusiasm for making up their own ideas - it`s an unpleasant and distasteful way to treat the deaths of 4 young people, with what seems to be undisguised glee, plus the thread title and use of winkey smileys etc. The "3 families" POST above was as poor as I have ever seen on here.

GG


Dave, if at some future date (God forbid) wee Toaods whilst aged around 15/16/17 is a passenger in a car that suffers a similar fate will you feel inclined to post a similar thread?

BTW, dinnae say she'd not be allowed because like it or not kids of that age dont always do what they're told :wink:

Very good points.

I'm also extremely uncomfortable with the tone of this thread.

I remember what I was like when I was a new driver. I had a pretty serious accident a few months after passing my test and I would have been pretty angry if someone had flippantly put my injuries down as a football scoreline.

I know a bit about road safety from a professional stand point..

More than one in five drivers have an accident within six months of passing their test, and 90% of traffic accidents involving death or serious injury involve at least one recently passed driver.

However, to suggest that someone won 4 - 0 in these circumstances is cruel and unnecessary.

[Toaods]

More than one in five drivers have an accident within six months of passing their test, and 90% of traffic accidents involving death or serious injury involve at least one recently passed driver.

respect where due Mr Radge but you are quoting a broad ranging statistic, which I would surmise is taken from all reported accidents accross the board........this was not an ordinary accident.

This is also a football punters website where many things are cross-referenced to football and this board in particular is for non-Hibs related points of discussion, controversial or not. I'm not aware of any rules being breached.

---------- Post added at 12:23 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:21 AM ----------


Dave, if at some future date (God forbid) wee Toaods whilst aged around 15/16/17 is a passenger in a car that suffers a similar fate will you feel inclined to post a similar thread?

BTW, dinnae say she'd not be allowed because like it or not kids of that age dont always do what they're told :wink:

JC, see my response above to Mr Radge's post
.

[Hibbyradge]

respect where due Mr Radge but you are quoting a broad ranging statistic, which I would surmise is taken from all reported accidents accross the board........this was not an ordinary accident.


.

It was a fatal accident involving youg driver.

It's replicated all over the country at regular intervals. I don't understand your point.



This is also a football punters website where many things are cross-referenced to football and this board in particular is for non-Hibs related points of discussion, controversial or not. I'm not aware of any rules being breached.

.

I didn't post as an admin, but you certainly haven't broken any rules.

You've simply been cruel and your post and title comes across as almost gloating about the fact that 4 young men died.

Your OP and your continuing defence of it doesn't show you in a very good light, imo, but you've not broken any rules if that's all that matters to you.

[Toaods]

It was a fatal accident involving youg driver.

It's replicated all over the country at regular intervals. I don't understand your point.


you mentioned a few stats but I would doubt this accident has the same circumstances.




I didn't post as an admin, but you certainly haven't broken any rules.

You've simply been cruel and your post and title comes across as almost gloating about he fact that 4 young men died.

Your OP and your continuing defence of it doesn't show you in a very good light, imo, but you've not broken any rules if that's all that matters to you.


who mentioned Admin?

Not me and I don't recall asking if I had broken any rules either....:confused:

The world in general is cruel, me personally I'm only cruel to wasps and other such insects.

[Calvin]

The issue I have with this thread is the trivialisation of the tragic death of 4 young guys. Last year when me and most of my friends had just passed their tests or were in the process of learning, a young guy that a lot of us knew and some of my best friends were really friendly with sadly died due to his own driving in a car accident. I think he has passed his test less than a month. It affected everyone just going for their tests and certainly made me think more about my driving. I would have really been annoyed at the time to hear of disrespect towards him - whether it was his fault he was driving like a maniac or whatever is really irrelevant, the point is that he died.

I think everyone knows fine well that newly qualified young male drivers are more likely to be idiots on the road and that's a problem that we have to tackle. However, that is no excuse at all for the massive disrespect shown to four young guys losing their lives by jokingly saying that they lost some kind of metaphorical battle against road safety.

I'm sure you'll head back the original post in a few days and think that the matter could have been dealt with a bit better. Something like: 'Was sorry to read of these four guys dying on the road. When will young drivers learn to be more sensible on the roads? It's about time the government put more focus on trying to prevent this kind of tragedy.' would have been a lot more appropriate IMO.

[Hibbyradge]

you mentioned a few stats but I would doubt this accident has the same circumstances.



You're not making any sense. The same circumstances as what?

Here's what I posted: "More than one in five drivers have an accident within six months of passing their test, and 90% of traffic accidents involving death or serious injury involve at least one recently passed driver."

I'm not sure what you think that tells you other than new drivers, like those in your example, are more likely to have accidents than more experienced ones.

Some more information, in case you're interested.

New drivers with a car full of peer passengers increases the risk of a fatal crash by 4 times compared to driving alone.

All newly qualified drivers have a higher risk of a crash when carrying male peers as compared to female passengers.

However, new male drivers with a car full of male peers have by far the highest risk of an accident as exactly happened in your example.

Of all road deaths and serious injuries in Britain, more than a third happen between 7.00pm and 8.00am. Twice as many occurr on Friday and Saturday nights than other on days of the week. Exactly the circumstances in your example.

I don't understand why you seem to be resisting this information.



Not me and I don't recall asking if I had broken any rules either....:confused:


You did, however, say this;


I'm not aware of any rules being breached

Which is why I rushed to agree that, despite your post being in my view distasteful, cruel and unnecessary, you hadn't broken any rules.

[lapsedhibee]

I am struggling to see any essential difference between the gist of the OP and the Darwin Awards. Do all the posters who are morally outraged by the OP think the Darwin Awards are similarly disgusting, shocking, sick, cruel, unnecessary, shameful, unpleasant, distasteful, uncomfortable, etc? :confused:

[Hibbyradge]

I am struggling to see any essential difference between the gist of the OP and the Darwin Awards. Do all the posters who are morally outraged by the OP think the Darwin Awards are similarly disgusting, shocking, sick, cruel, unnecessary, shameful, unpleasant, distasteful, uncomfortable, etc? :confused:

I understand your point, but there is an essential difference.

The Darwin Awards say "The candidate's foolishness must be unique and sensational, perhaps because the award is intended to be funny. A number of foolish but common activities, such as smoking in bed, are excluded from consideration."

4 teenagers dying in a car crash at 3.30am on a Saturday morning isn't funny, sensational or unfortunately, unique.

And I certainly don't think it should be celebrated as some sort of football victory.

[lapsedhibee]

I understand your point, but there is an essential difference.

The Darwin Awards say "The candidate's foolishness must be unique and sensational, perhaps because the award is intended to be funny. A number of foolish but common activities, such as smoking in bed, are excluded from consideration."

4 teenagers dying in a car crash at 3.30am on a Saturday morning isn't funny, sensational or unfortunately, unique.

And I certainly don't think it should be celebrated as some sort of football victory.

Agree that there is that difference, but Darwin Awards are nevertheless making light of sudden accidental death, and no doubt the relatives of Darwin Award winners grieve just as painfully as other bereaved people do. It seems slightly contradictory to me to be comfortable with the one and not the other.

[Scouse Hibee]

How unfortunate that my reply to this was deleted.

[hibsbollah]

How unfortunate that my reply to this was deleted.

I'm guessing its about post count. Once you achieve 19,000+ posts you'll seemingly be able to get away with anything, no matter how distasteful:agree:

[lapsedhibee]

How unfortunate that my reply to this was deleted.Unfortunate for whom? :confused: What did it say likes? :dunno:

[calumhibee1]

I think the people who know better than anyone which groups are more likely to crash are the insurers. Whichever age group has the highest premium is the one that has had most accidents.

I'm sure the lads were on their way to work at the back of three in the morning, when this accident occurred (well other than the 15 year old). Unless of course, the tree forgot to check its mirrors.

Would you like salt and vinegar with that chip on your shoulder?

I never said anywhere in my post that young drivers weren't the most likely to be involved in car crashes. However not all young drivers are boy racers, and in this article it says nowhere that they were speeding or doing anything else stupid. Which is why I think the thread title is in very poor taste and makes Toads came across as a bellend. As someone else has said, if Toads happens to have kids, and (touch wood they don't) they were to be involved in a fatal car accident then i'm sure he wouldnt want people on a message board reading a news article about it and deciding that due to them being 17 years old that they must have been a boy racer. 4 boys have lost there life far too young and the thread title is pretty much taking the piss out of this fact.

[Scouse Hibee]

I'm guessing its about post count. Once you achieve 19,000+ posts you'll seemingly be able to get away with anything, no matter how distasteful:agree:

Yes you're probably right and as this thread hit a particular nerve with me I felt my response was justified however it was deleted. A more positive response would be for this thread to be locked and consigned to the bin before it offends/upsets more people who may have experienced something similar in their lives. Something the OP may have considered before starting this thread. He has posted many sensible threads but this one beggars belief.

[Phil D. Rolls]

I'm sorry to say this but over the last few days I've read enough on this forum to come to the conclusion that there's some really sick people who post on here. I won't be dropping in again (not that I think I'll be missed, I hasten to add). I just hope that all of you who sit in your ivory towers are never touch by tragedy or untimely death, by whatever means.

See you then. Missing you already. Whoever you are.:bye:

I wonder what it's like to lose someone, or watch someone die. Must get out of this ivory tower more.


I never said anywhere in my post that young drivers weren't the most likely to be involved in car crashes. However not all young drivers are boy racers, and in this article it says nowhere that they were speeding or doing anything else stupid. Which is why I think the thread title is in very poor taste and makes Toads came across as a bellend. As someone else has said, if Toads happens to have kids, and (touch wood they don't) they were to be involved in a fatal car accident then i'm sure he wouldnt want people on a message board reading a news article about it and deciding that due to them being 17 years old that they must have been a boy racer. 4 boys have lost there life far too young and the thread title is pretty much taking the piss out of this fact.

You took the hump because he criticised young drivers. I thought some objectivity was required.

I think it is tragic the boys died. I think there is a strong chance they were boy racers. Im not shedding any tears over them, I amn't laughing about it either.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Yes you're probably right and as this thread hit a particular nerve with me I felt my response was justified however it was deleted. A more positive response would be for this thread to be locked and consigned to the bin before it offends/upsets more people who may have experienced something similar in their lives. Something the OP may have considered before starting this thread. He has posted many sensible threads but this one beggars belief.

Who decides what is sensible? I am not saying I would have posted what he did, but we all have the right to our thoughts.

[Scouse Hibee]

Who decides what is sensible? I am not saying I would have posted what he did, but we all have the right to our thoughts.

Indeed we do, but some of us including you apparently are more sensitive to the impact they may have on others.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Indeed we do, but some of us including you apparently are more sensitive to the impact they may have on others.

I think, sometimes people have to sail close to the wind to generate discussion. Sometimes it is good to challenge our innermost beliefs.

I'm not speaking on anyone's behalf here. I think there is a lot less harm talking about an accident in the Midlands,than if the boys had been local. I also think the thread might give people who have good reason to hate boy racers a chance to air their views.

[Scouse Hibee]

I think, sometimes people have to sail close to the wind to generate discussion. Sometimes it is good to challenge our innermost beliefs.

I'm not speaking on anyone's behalf here. I think there is a lot less harm talking about an accident in the Midlands,than if the boys had been local. I also think the thread might give people who have good reason to hate boy racers a chance to air their views.

Nonsense,so if I was to post Iraqui's 5 British Army 0 the next time troops are killed who happen to come from the Midlands and give my reason as hating the British army and wanting to air my views will that be okay as long as they're not from Edinburgh.

No and rightly so, people on this board who know of or have lost loved ones in the same conflict would be outraged just as I am regarding the OP.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Those making light of this should be ashamed of themselves.

How many people have made light of it.


Nonsense,so if I was to post Iraqui's 5 British Army 0 the next time troops are killed who happen to come from the Midlands and give my reason as hating the British army and wanting to air my views will that be okay as long as they're not from Edinburgh.

No and rightly so, people on this board who know of or have lost loved ones in the same conflict would be outraged just as I am regarding the OP.

I think the closer to home a tragedy is the more likely it is to touch emotions. I have posted a lot of stuff on the subject of the army and soldiers. In the case of someone I know though, all that logic goes out of the window and my heart rules my head.

You have every right to be hurt, outraged or anything else. I don't think we have the right to gag people. We also don't have the right to judge their motivation, or morality - at least not until they have told us what it is.

[calumhibee1]

See you then. Missing you already. Whoever you are.:bye:

I wonder what it's like to lose someone, or watch someone die. Must get out of this ivory tower more.



You took the hump because he criticised young drivers. I thought some objectivity was required.

I think it is tragic the boys died. I think there is a strong chance they were boy racers. Im not shedding any tears over them, I amn't laughing about it either.

I never took the hump at all, all I was saying is tarring everybody with the same brush is rediculous. And making light of the fact 4 young boys have died like the title of this thread has is disgusting. There's alot of young people on the road will try and show off when they've just passed there test, but this article doesn't say anything about them speeding, pulling handbreak turns or any of that *****, but still the OP has jumped to the conclusion that because they're 17 and under that its "Boy Racers 0-4 Road Safety". Even if the article did say they were doing 100odd mph it's still a horrible thread title and a tragedy that 4 boys so young have lost there lives and still wouldn't have merited the pisstake title this thread was given.

---------- Post added at 11:08 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:06 AM ----------


Nonsense,so if I was to post Iraqui's 5 British Army 0 the next time troops are killed who happen to come from the Midlands and give my reason as hating the British army and wanting to air my views will that be okay as long as they're not from Edinburgh.

No and rightly so, people on this board who know of or have lost loved ones in the same conflict would be outraged just as I am regarding the OP.

:agree:

[Phil D. Rolls]

[QUOTE=calumhibee1;2243075]I never took the hump at all, all I was saying is tarring everybody with the same brush is rediculous. And making light of the fact 4 young boys have died like the title of this thread has is disgusting. There's alot of young people on the road will try and show off when they've just passed there test, but this article doesn't say anything about them speeding, pulling handbreak turns or any of that *****, but still the OP has jumped to the conclusion that because they're 17 and under that its "Boy Racers 0-4 Road Safety". Even if the article did say they were doing 100odd mph it's still a horrible thread title and a tragedy that 4 boys so young have lost there lives and still wouldn't have merited the pisstake title this thread was given.

---------- Post added at 11:08 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:06 AM ----------



Sorry, I thought I had detected a hint of sarcasm in your original post, I'm happy to stand corrected.

From what I can make out you have two complaints about the post: firstly, jumping to conclusions as to what caused the accident;secondly, the poor taste of making light of their deaths.

I think it would be poor taste to speculate further, but if I was a betting man I know what my money would be on.

I agree it's not very nice to make light of an accident. Can you tell me why you emphasised the loss of "young lives". Does their age make it any more tragic?

This is becoming PC gone mad.

[calumhibee1]

[QUOTE=calumhibee1;2243075]I never took the hump at all, all I was saying is tarring everybody with the same brush is rediculous. And making light of the fact 4 young boys have died like the title of this thread has is disgusting. There's alot of young people on the road will try and show off when they've just passed there test, but this article doesn't say anything about them speeding, pulling handbreak turns or any of that *****, but still the OP has jumped to the conclusion that because they're 17 and under that its "Boy Racers 0-4 Road Safety". Even if the article did say they were doing 100odd mph it's still a horrible thread title and a tragedy that 4 boys so young have lost there lives and still wouldn't have merited the pisstake title this thread was given.

---------- Post added at 11:08 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:06 AM ----------



Sorry, I thought I had detected a hint of sarcasm in your original post, I'm happy to stand corrected.

From what I can make out you have two complaints about the post: firstly, jumping to conclusions as to what caused the accident;secondly, the poor taste of making light of their deaths.

I think it would be poor taste to speculate further, but if I was a betting man I know what my money would be on.

I agree it's not very nice to make light of an accident. Can you tell me why you emphasised the loss of "young lives". Does their age make it any more tragic?

This is becoming PC gone mad.

No sarcasm in my OP and no apology needed. I emphasised that it was the loss of 4 "young lives" as it's awful that they've lost there lives before they've even begun. But no, it doesn't make it any more tragic.

[Phil D. Rolls]

[QUOTE=Filled Rolls;2243083]

No sarcasm in my OP and no apology needed. I emphasised that it was the loss of 4 "young lives" as it's awful that they've lost there lives before they've even begun. But no, it doesn't make it any more tragic.

That's fair comment. From my own point of view, I'll get a lot more upset by the loss of a young life than someone who has had their shot.

[Toaods]

I'm guessing its about post count. Once you achieve 19,000+ posts you'll seemingly be able to get away with anything, no matter how distasteful:agree:

rubbish - I've had plenty ticking offs and threads moved/deleted. Always said the post count is irrelevant too.



I think there is a lot less harm talking about an accident in the Midlands,than if the boys had been local. I also think the thread might give people who have good reason to hate boy racers a chance to air their views.


:agree:...or a chance for such types to reconsider trying to be Lewis Hamilton at 03.45AM

[QUOTE=Filled Rolls;2243101]

[Jack]

I never said anywhere in my post that young drivers weren't the most likely to be involved in car crashes. However not all young drivers are boy racers, and in this article it says nowhere that they were speeding or doing anything else stupid. Which is why I think the thread title is in very poor taste and makes Toads came across as a bellend. As someone else has said, if Toads happens to have kids, and (touch wood they don't) they were to be involved in a fatal car accident then i'm sure he wouldnt want people on a message board reading a news article about it and deciding that due to them being 17 years old that they must have been a boy racer. 4 boys have lost there life far too young and the thread title is pretty much taking the piss out of this fact.


I never took the hump at all, all I was saying is tarring everybody with the same brush is rediculous. And making light of the fact 4 young boys have died like the title of this thread has is disgusting. There's alot of young people on the road will try and show off when they've just passed there test, but this article doesn't say anything about them speeding, pulling handbreak turns or any of that *****, but still the OP has jumped to the conclusion that because they're 17 and under that its "Boy Racers 0-4 Road Safety". Even if the article did say they were doing 100odd mph it's still a horrible thread title and a tragedy that 4 boys so young have lost there lives and still wouldn't have merited the pisstake title this thread was given.



Old git with over 35 years driving experience here (and I watch too many police reality TV programmes).

While the articles don’t state if speed was or wasn’t a factor IMO its unrealistic to think that a car being driven at 30mph would have had a accident, where no other cars were involved (i.e. no head on) that would cause a big enough impact, against what looked a fairly standard garden wall, to kill all its occupants.

Poor driving conditions may have contributed to the accident but excess speed was undoubtedly the major factor here. There is the possibility that a stuck accelerator was the culprit but I think we all know the likelihood of that.

Danny_Hibee, I don’t really think what you’ve said gives a reasonable argument as to why restrictions shouldn’t be put in place. If that was the law then your family would need to buy a smaller car if they wanted you to drive, or like 1,000s of other kids you bide your time until the cost of insurance / the money you have available means you can afford to drive.

I started driving at 17, my 17 year old son passed his test a few months ago and he has bought a car. I can only assume my parents went through what I go through at the thought of him driving.

I cant think of anyone I know who hasn’t been touched by at least knowing someone who knows someone killed in a road traffic accident when they were a teenager. Some young drivers learn from that others unfortunately don’t. That will always be the case until young drivers aren’t allowed to drive.

For those who don’t know the difference in insurance. My son drives the crappiest wee car you have ever come across and for the minimum insurance he needs the cost is £1,200+ a year. I on the other hand have a high performance BMW with the absolute maximum [reasonableish] insurance for what I need and it costs me £214 a year.

[Jonnyboy]

respect where due Mr Radge but you are quoting a broad ranging statistic, which I would surmise is taken from all reported accidents accross the board........this was not an ordinary accident.

This is also a football punters website where many things are cross-referenced to football and this board in particular is for non-Hibs related points of discussion, controversial or not. I'm not aware of any rules being breached.

---------- Post added at 12:23 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:21 AM ----------



JC, see my response above to Mr Radge's post .

Have to be honest Dave and say I'm not sure you've answered my point when addressing the ones made by Radge :confused:

[flash]

I caused a pretty bad crash not long after passing my test though, thankfully and through sheer luck, there were no serious injuries.

Wish there had been now- might have earned my first thread on here. :rolleyes:

[lapsedhibee]

I caused a pretty bad crash not long after passing my test though, thankfully and through sheer luck, there were no serious injuries.

Wish there had been now- might have earned my first thread on here. :rolleyes:

Serious question here: how badly injured would a hun have to be after being savaged by a wolflike creature for it to be unacceptable to use that image as an avatar? :dunno:

I'm thinking that on the whole board there would be a very wide range of views, varying all the way from 'Even if he'd died it would be acceptable' to 'I'm morally outraged that anyone would want to make light of a dug biting a dumb animal whether or not there was any damage done'.

[Phil D. Rolls]

What saddens me on this board quite a lot is how often people are taken aback when they find out someone has a different opinion from theirs. It seems like they live in a world where there is an accepted order and anything that goes against what they believe is wrong. Therein lies madness (IMO).

Re. boy racers. I've always wondered why they are always scrawny, hatchet faced, insignificant looking young men, and what attraction driving too fast holds for them. Surely they don't see it as a way of redressing their physical inadequacies?

[flash]

Serious question here: how badly injured would a hun have to be after being savaged by a wolflike creature for it to be unacceptable to use that image as an avatar? :dunno:

I'm thinking that on the whole board there would be a very wide range of views, varying all the way from 'Even if he'd died it would be acceptable' to 'I'm morally outraged that anyone would want to make light of a dug biting a dumb animal whether or not there was any damage done'.

My only concern was the subsequent health of the dug.

---------- Post added at 02:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:37 PM ----------


What saddens me on this board quite a lot is how often people are taken aback when they find out someone has a different opinion from theirs. It seems like they live in a world where there is an accepted order and anything that goes against what they believe is wrong. Therein lies madness (IMO).

Re. boy racers. I've always wondered why they are always scrawny, hatchet faced, insignificant looking young men, and what attraction driving too fast holds for them. Surely they don't see it as a way of redressing their physical inadequacies?

Re your last paragraph. It's probably similar to social lepers who spend all their time trying to stir it on forums such as this.

[Phil D. Rolls]

My only concern was the subsequent health of the dug.

---------- Post added at 02:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:37 PM ----------



Re your last paragraph. It's probably similar to social lepers who spend all their time trying to stir it on forums such as this.

In what way?

[Scouse Hibee]

What saddens me on this board quite a lot is how often people are taken aback when they find out someone has a different opinion from theirs. It seems like they live in a world where there is an accepted order and anything that goes against what they believe is wrong. Therein lies madness (IMO).

Re. boy racers. I've always wondered why they are always scrawny, hatchet faced, insignificant looking young men, and what attraction driving too fast holds for them. Surely they don't see it as a way of redressing their physical inadequacies?

What saddens me is how a thread can be started mocking victims of an accident and people are defending it under so many different guises. FFS the outrage expressed by so many on this board covering everything from songs to posts on Keekback is worthless when we have a thread title mocking the death of four people.

[Phil D. Rolls]

What saddens me is how a thread can be started mocking victims of an accident and people are defending it under so many different guises. FFS the outrage expressed by so many on this board covering everything from songs to posts on Keekback is worthless when we have a thread title mocking the death of four people.

What is the point in newspapers publishing stories if we aren't allowed to discuss them? You are entitled to your opinion though.

For me, this makes a pleasant change from all those hollow RIP threads that appear in memory of people that nobody ever met. It seems to me that one form of poor taste - excessive, or meaningless sentimentality is OK, but another form isnt.

[flash]

In what way?

Well it seems to me that this branch of the forum in particular seems to be inundated with posts purely calculated to cause offence and presumably try to make the poster look clever.

Surely the actions of a social inadequate no?

[Hibbyradge]

Agree that there is that difference, but Darwin Awards are nevertheless making light of sudden accidental death, and no doubt the relatives of Darwin Award winners grieve just as painfully as other bereaved people do. It seems slightly contradictory to me to be comfortable with the one and not the other.

The Darwin Awards look, and laugh, at the circumstances of the death which in most cases are utterly unbelievable and often funny.

There is nothing remotely funny or sadly, unbelievable, at a young driver killing himself, his brother and 2 pals in an early Saturday morning road accident.

I haven't ever seen the Darwin Awards describe the death of a group of people as 4 - 0, as if it's something which should be celebrated, a kind of triumph.

[LiverpoolHibs]

What is the point in newspapers publishing stories if we aren't allowed to discuss them? You are entitled to your opinion though.

For me, this makes a pleasant change from all those hollow RIP threads that appear in memory of people that nobody ever met. It seems to me that one form of poor taste - excessive, or meaningless sentimentality is OK, but another form isnt.

But no-one has responded to this story with excessive sentimentality, mawkishness or insincere R.I.P.s.

Just alot of people who are slightly baffled, surprised or mildly disturbed that someone would hear of an event in which four teenage boys have died and immediately respond with a gloating thread title such as 'Boy Racers 0 - 4 Road Safety'. It borders on nihilism.

[Hibbyradge]

What is the point in newspapers publishing stories if we aren't allowed to discuss them? You are entitled to your opinion though.



I'm not sure there has been much discussion about the newspaper story, apart from speculation as to whether or not the deceased driver was speeding.


It seems to me that one form of poor taste - excessive, or meaningless sentimentality is OK, but another form isnt.

Yes, that is indeed the case. And so it should be.

Posting RIP and "My thoughts are with the family" when some celebrity dies is harmless. It might irritate a few intolerant individuals, but it doesn't hurt or offend anyone.

[hibsbollah]

For me, this makes a pleasant change from all those hollow RIP threads that appear in memory of people that nobody ever met. It seems to me that one form of poor taste - excessive, or meaningless sentimentality is OK, but another form isnt.

:confused:Theres nothing hypocritical in finding one thing in bad taste and another thing not in bad taste, as you seem to be implying.

[Beefster]

:agree:...or a chance for suchj types to reconsider trying to be Lewis Hamilton at 03.45AM

There are several of us on this thread who have had fairly serious crashes within a year of passing our test. All boy racer related? Here's a hint: nope.

The driver may have driven through a pool of water and lost control, swerved to avoid an animal or plenty of other scenarios. A lack of experience doesn't just manifest itself in driving too fast.

If I was you though, I'd phone the Midlands police as they're still looking for witnesses.

[lapsedhibee]

The Darwin Awards look, and laugh, at the circumstances of the death which in most cases are utterly unbelievable and often funny.


This is what I don't get though. Death can be "funny" in the Darwin Awards, and it's ok to laugh at that kind of death. But deaths which are not "funny" have to be treated with the utmost seriousness, even though in both cases the same amount of suffering for the deceased and their loved ones is involved, and no-one here knows any of the people involved.

Mibbe it's just moi.

[Hibbyradge]

This is what I don't get though. Death can be "funny" in the Darwin Awards, and it's ok to laugh at that kind of death. But deaths which are not "funny" have to be treated with the utmost seriousness, even though in both cases the same amount of suffering for the deceased and their loved ones is involved, and no-one here knows any of the people involved.

Mibbe it's just moi.

I disagree with that.

I think it's natural to make jokes about death.

But no-one made a joke.

The OP posted what looked like a triumphal thread.

That's what isn't right in my book.

How would Soham Paeds 2 Cambridgeshire Police 0 have been received as a thread title in 2001?

[Toaods]

If I was you though, I'd phone the Midlands police as they're still looking for witnesses.

doubt there'll be any(as usual), however on that street, I'm sure the CCTV along the way will give a few pointers.

[Toaods]

I disagree with that.

I think it's natural to make jokes about death.

But no-one made a joke.

The OP posted what looked like a triumphal thread.

That's what isn't right in my book.

How would Soham Paeds 2 Cambridgeshire Police 0 have been received as a thread title in 2001?


what utter codswallop, since when did the Soham Paeds become classified as being on the right side of the law? That ridiculous portrayal is simply an attempt to justify your viewpoint and vilify mine.

No doubt those leading the so-called 'PC' charge on this one have never / will never particpate in any reference to the death of Wallace Mercer as one example.

As a few on here have suggested, double standards glaring through when it suits........at least I'm consistent. :bye:

[Phil D. Rolls]

Well it seems to me that this branch of the forum in particular seems to be inundated with posts purely calculated to cause offence and presumably try to make the poster look clever.

Surely the actions of a social inadequate no?

I couldn't possibly say. I think that sometimes shock is a legitimate tactic to make people think about things and open up debate.


But no-one has responded to this story with excessive sentimentality, mawkishness or insincere R.I.P.s.

Just alot of people who are slightly baffled, surprised or mildly disturbed that someone would hear of an event in which four teenage boys have died and immediately respond with a gloating thread title such as 'Boy Racers 0 - 4 Road Safety'. It borders on nihilism.

I was talking in general terms, basically saying one person's idea of good manners might be something that others find offensive. I can't speak for the OP, I just want to defend people's right to challenge orthodoxy.


:confused:Theres nothing hypocritical in finding one thing in bad taste and another thing not in bad taste, as you seem to be implying.

Not really where I was going with my post. There is no "good taste" or "bad taste", just "personal taste". In the same way there are no good colours or bad colours. Therefore I think that all we can really do is state why we don't like a thing.

Let me stress, I find no pleasure in these youngsters' death. I can understand why someone could though.

[Jay]

I couldn't possibly say. I think that sometimes shock is a legitimate tactic to make people think about things and open up debate.
I was talking in general terms, basically saying one person's idea of good manners might be something that others find offensive. I can't speak for the OP, I just want to defend people's right to challenge orthodoxy.
Not really where I was going with my post. There is no "good taste" or "bad taste", just "personal taste". In the same way there are no good colours or bad colours. Therefore I think that all we can really do is state why we don't like a thing.

Let me stress, I find no pleasure in these youngsters' death. I can understand why someone could though.

What?

I promised myself that there was no way I would get involved in this thread or even visit the Holy Ground forum again but that is absolutely ludicrous!

You can understand why someone would find pleasure in these young boys deaths? Get a grip FFS.

I'm saying no more so dont bother trying to reel me in to another ridiculous spat.

This is beyond decency IMO. Soon we'll have Abu Hamza getting freedom of speech on here.

[Phil D. Rolls]

What?

I promised myself that there was no way I would get involved in this thread or even visit the Holy Ground forum again but that is absolutely ludicrous!

You can understand why someone would find pleasure in these young boys deaths? Get a grip FFS.

I'm saying no more so dont bother trying to reel me in to another ridiculous spat.

This is beyond decency IMO. Soon we'll have Abu Hamza getting freedom of speech on here.

It's one thing to understand someone, it's another to agree with them.

Anyway I've said my bit on free speech and thought. I'll leave it to Toaods to explain what he is thinking.

[Hibbyradge]

what utter codswallop, since when did the Soham Paeds become classified as being on the right side of the law? That ridiculous portrayal is simply an attempt to justify your viewpoint and vilify mine.


I see.

Your post was taking the moral high ground on the right side of the law by suggesting that "Road Safety" had somehow scored 4.


No doubt those leading the so-called 'PC' charge on this one have never / will never particpate in any reference to the detah of Wallace Mercer as one example.



So called, by whom?

Personally, I haven't ever sung the Mercer song, but your comparison is flawed.

Mercer tried to kill Hibs.

The 4 teenagers that died, had no connection to Hibs at all.




As a few on here have suggested, double standards glaring through when it suits........

You should point these glaring double standards out. :agree:




at least I'm consistent. :bye:

Very true.

However, in your case, consistency is not

[Toaods]

Let me stress, I find no pleasure in these youngsters' death. I can understand why someone could though.

let me just say too, that I don't derive any pleasure from their deaths, I merely posted a link and a title with what I would surrmise the resultant enquiry will reveal.

Those who seem to be foaming at the mouth infer I am out of order with my wrong conclusions as they could have been an outside influence, ie wet road, dodgy brake, etc.

Will be interesting to see which way the mood swings if they are wacked out of their heads on drugs or were drinking driving after spending the night in some Brummie night club, god forbid it might even have been the two together. Has it been ascertained they weren't at fault racing some other mob who have made themselves well scarce? Maybe they were doing something similar to the whatever it is to South Queensferry cashline run, timed by a bank balance enquiry slip.

Time will tell...

(eneter list of reasons why it's probably not the driver's fault)

[Hibbyradge]

I think that sometimes shock is a legitimate tactic to make people think about things and open up debate.


I agree, but where is the debate?

What debate could there possibly have been?

"Boy Racers are good for society."

"Naw theyre no."

I don't believe for a nano second that there was any legitimate tactic behind the OP.

Otherwise we'd know what is was by now.

Instead we get the usual dismissive PC brigade defence.

That's as bad as playing the race card, imo.

[Hibbyradge]

let me just say too, that I don't derive any pleasure from their deaths, I merely posted a link and a title with what I would surrmise the resultant enquiry will reveal.

Those who seem to be foaming at the mouth infer I am out of order with my wrong conclusions as they could have been an outside influence, ie wet road, dodgy brake, etc.

Will be interesting to see which way the mood swings if they are wacked out of their heads on drugs or were drinking driving after spending the night in some Brummie night club, god forbid it might even have been the two together. Has it been ascertained they weren't at fault racing some other mob who have made themselves well scarce? Maybe they were doing something similar to the whatever it is to South Queensferry cashline run, timed by a bank balance enquiry slip.

Time will tell...

(eneter list of reasons why it's probably not the driver's fault)

It was young guys, some still children.

I will be utterly surprised if they aren't found to have been speeding or drunk or on drugs.

But I don't find it a cause for celebration.

4 - 0 for Road Safety, my erse.

You should come to my work and voice that thought. Seriously.

[Toaods]

I see.

Your post was taking the moral high ground on the right side of the law by suggesting that "Road Safety" had somehow scored 4.


you are a man who seems to enjoy a stat or two, I simply gave you one (so to speak) to add to your collection.





Personally, I haven't ever sung the Mercer song, but your comparison is flawed.

Mercer tried to kill Hibs.

The 4 teenagers that died, had no connection to Hibs at all.

I'll have to take your word that you've never sung although I didn't say you personally had. I'd suggest there's few that haven't participated at some stage or in some shape or form.

Of course we all know Mercer tried to 'kill' Hibs as you put it, but whilst I wouldn't expect these lads to have any connection to Hibs, you never know, stranger things have happened.

[Toaods]

It was young guys, some still children.

I will be utterly surprised if they aren't found to have been speeding or drunk or on drugs.

But I don't find it a cause for celebration.

4 - 0 for Road Safety, my erse.

You should come to my work and voice that thought. Seriously.


Why do you continue this vein of 'celebration' on my part...:confused:


I have no interest in where you work or what you do, although I might have hazarded a guess at some Insurance type firm, perhaps now NHS. Don't bother responding though, no need.

[Phil D. Rolls]

I agree, but where is the debate?

What debate could there possibly have been?

"Boy Racers are good for society."

"Naw theyre no."

I don't believe for a nano second that there was any legitimate tactic behind the OP.

Otherwise we'd know what is was by now.

Instead we get the usual dismissive PC brigade defence.

That's as bad as playing the race card, imo.

Who knows where it could have gone? Maybe people who had suffered at the hands of boy racers might have felt that they had a relevant story to tell.

OK, try and stay on your seats, I see the whole thing in the same way that I regarded the Marcus Harvey portrait of Myra Hindley. Very harrowing that he used children's hand prints to build up the image. However by provoking our senses he made people think about what was so abhorrent about Hindley.

Maybe a bit pretentious, so how about the Sex Pistols signing their record deal with A&M outside Buckingham Palace?

Well maybe not. But it could have been, anyway I hear the sound of women in false beards in the distance. I'm offski Jehova!

[Hibbyradge]

you are a man who seems to enjoy a stat or two, I simply gave you one (so to speak) to add to your collection.


Amazing foresight you have there.

You knew I was going to post some statistics about road deaths so you posted one first. Clever stuff.

I could be wrong, but I think there was a hint of sherry on your lips and you posted a crass and insensitive thread.

Being the man you are, you can't admit that though.

But I could be wrong about speed, drink and or drugs being involved in the accident too.




I'll have to take your word that you've never sung although I didn't say you personally had. I'd suggest there's few that haven't participated at some stage or in some shape or form.[/COLOR]

Of course we all know Mercer tried to 'kill' Hibs as you put it, but whilst I wouldn't expect these lads to have any connection to Hibs, you never know, stranger things have happened.[/COLOR]

By the way, I can understand people celebrating when someone they hate dies.

It's different, not hypocritical.

I'm not in insurance or the NHS.

[hibsbollah]

There is no "good taste" or "bad taste", just "personal taste". In the same way there are no good colours or bad colours. Therefore I think that all we can really do is state why we don't like a thing.

Let me stress, I find no pleasure in these youngsters' death. I can understand why someone could though.

I'm glad you've said this plainly so its absolutely clear what you believe. Your 'moral relativism' basically rejects any notion of ethics and morals, as has been said already, its quite close to 'nihilism' or belief in nothing.

Its quite a useful philosophical position for messageboard debating, but it can be difficult to know what you actually believe in. It will also result in you offending lots of people who do believe in universal right and wrongs. Personally, I can't imagine life without a set of moral values.

[Dashing Bob S]

I'm going to assume that as the oldest lad was 17, he was the driver. So this would mean that he would have had no more than 9 months experience of driving since he passed his test. Sorry, I'll rephrase that, 9 months of legal experience of driving.

On another note, I would have had my erse tanned for being out at that time at that age. Changed days I suppose.

Did you frequent the Calton Hill?


(Only joking AH! My god, this thread needs a bit of levity.)

[Phil D. Rolls]

I'm glad you've said this plainly so its absolutely clear what you believe. Your 'moral relativism' basically rejects any notion of ethics and morals, as has been said already, its quite close to 'nihilism' or belief in nothing.

Its quite a useful philosophical position for messageboard debating, but it can be difficult to know what you actually believe in. It will also result in you offending lots of people who do believe in universal right and wrongs. Personally, I can't imagine life without a set of moral values.

Yes, I can see what you're saying. It's one thing to respect other people's right to have values, but you still have to have your own values. There also comes a point where you have to say whether or not you agree with the other person's stance.

I do find it hard to get too annoyed at other people's opinions. If I was describe my philosophy in any way I'd say it leans towards humanism. I think that we all have our own individual take on life, and that we should be true to that.

I said earlier, you can understand someone yet not agree with them. Another way of looking at that is that you can't disagree with someone if you don't understand them. How can we hope to understand people if we don't give them a chance to state their case.

I think I explained my personal views on the crash and the boys' deaths in several posts on this thread. I did not want to judge Toaods as I felt he hadn't fully explained his stance earlier.

What else can I say? I think they were probably up to mischief, but there is nothing to confirm this. I think they have died in tragic circumstances. I wish that people would stop driving at speeds they aren't able to deal with.

I spoke to a girl last week who had lost three members of her family due to joyriders. How harshly could I judge her if she thought this accident was some form of divine justice. Every story has different angles.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Did you frequent the Calton Hill?


(Only joking AH! My god, this thread needs a bit of levity.)

Well personally I think that there is a place for Jewish comedians and this isn't it. :agree: But I will fight to my dying breath to preserve the right of others to like, or dislike, Mr. Levity or indeed his sidekick with the non semitic name Calton Hill - sounds like a toff actually. (Have I got this right?)

[Toaods]

Amazing foresight you have there.

You knew I was going to post some statistics about road deaths so you posted one first. Clever stuff.

I could be wrong, but I think there was a hint of sherry on your lips and you posted a crass and insensitive thread.

Being the man you are, you can't admit that though.

But I could be wrong about speed, drink and or drugs being involved in the accident too.

I gave it collectively to any interested party, you were not the specific intended recipient or I may have PM'd you. I'll not take your opinion on my masculinity too seriously though but thanks all the same for your concern...:wink:




By the way, I can understand people celebrating when someone they hate dies.

It's different, not hypocritical.

I'm not in insurance or the NHS. oh well.

.

[Hibbyradge]

I thought you said you gave me one to add to my collection.

I really must stop believing what you say.

I'm not concerned about your masculinity. :wink:

[Toaods]

I thought you said you gave me one to add to my collection.

I really must stop believing what you say.

I'm not concerned about your masculinity. :wink:

You were part of the collective were you not? Its there for anyone that can be arsed reading it people can believe what they like.

[Jonnyboy]

let me just say too, that I don't derive any pleasure from their deaths, I merely posted a link and a title with what I would surrmise the resultant enquiry will reveal.

Those who seem to be foaming at the mouth infer I am out of order with my wrong conclusions as they could have been an outside influence, ie wet road, dodgy brake, etc.

Will be interesting to see which way the mood swings if they are wacked out of their heads on drugs or were drinking driving after spending the night in some Brummie night club, god forbid it might even have been the two together. Has it been ascertained they weren't at fault racing some other mob who have made themselves well scarce? Maybe they were doing something similar to the whatever it is to South Queensferry cashline run, timed by a bank balance enquiry slip.
Time will tell...

(eneter list of reasons why it's probably not the driver's fault)

Equally Dave it will be interesting to see which way your mood swings if you've got it totally wrong and that despite the hour these kids were simply involved in a very unfortunate accident.

Like you, I don't know the facts. All I do know is that four young people lost their lives and regardless of the circumstances that saddens me. I'm not being moralistic, fatalistic or any other kind of 'ic' by the way :wink:

[Toaods]

Equally Dave it will be interesting to see which way your mood swings if you've got it totally wrong and that despite the hour these kids were simply involved in a very unfortunate accident.

Like you, I don't know the facts. All I do know is that four young people lost their lives and regardless of the circumstances that saddens me. I'm not being moralistic, fatalistic or any other kind of 'ic' by the way :wink:


we shall see, although if I'm 'totally' wrong :wink: I won't have any problem saying so, not that it would make much difference one way or the other.

[Toaods]

"wanted to be a racer like Lewis Hamilton".......

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/2731170/Death-crash-lads-revealed-Hasni-Ali-16-Hadi-Suwef-17-his-brother-Kamal-15-and-Hamza-Siraj-16.html


"the car was described as 'smashed to smithereens'. "

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/UK-News/Birmingham-Crash-Kamal-and-Hadi-Suwef-And-Hasni-Ali-And-Hamza-Siraj-Of-Hall-Green-School-Killed/Article/200911315454411?lpos=UK_News_First_Home_Article_Te aser_Region_8&lid=ARTICLE_15454411_Birmingham_Crash%3A_Kamal_and _Hadi_Suwef_And_Hasni_Ali_And_Hamza_Siraj_Of_Hall_ Green_School_Killed


think we've got all we need then.