Re: Things that you rate!
Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 2:50 am
pafc1870 wrote:Attractive female, short skirt, gust of wind
The only reason I leave the house...
pafc1870 wrote:Attractive female, short skirt, gust of wind
Failed Creation wrote:pafc1870 wrote:Attractive female, short skirt, gust of wind
The only reason I leave the house...
Johno6 wrote:Failed Creation wrote:pafc1870 wrote:Attractive female, short skirt, gust of wind
The only reason I leave the house...
so people can see up your skirt?
Magpiespower wrote:Cop that!
Perth police officer puts smart-arse cyclist in his place...
http://www.perthnow.com.au/news/western-australia/police-officer-investigated-after-being-filmed-swearing-at-man/story-fnhocxo3-1226764475334
HH3 wrote:The same dickheads that yell stupid things out to cops crying over the cop saying something back. Expect to be treated the same as you treat other people.
Scumbags annoy me.
valleys07 wrote:HH3 wrote:The same dickheads that yell stupid things out to cops crying over the cop saying something back. Expect to be treated the same as you treat other people.
Scumbags annoy me.
I can't help but see the irony in that story- reporting a cop that you swore at for swearing at you.
Ok maybe we live in a world where the "customer" (using that term very loosely in this case) is always right- but what gives any customer the right to use expletives to people trying to do their jobs, regardless of their competence levels, and get sensitive when the occasional person gives it back?
If the officer went on a power trip over this guy and hurled abuse- I can see merit in the complaint.
Ok- perhaps the officer went overboard with some of the things he said, but he is only doing what 99% of us WANT to do when a "customer" gives you the sh!ts....
Pretty simple in this case really- wear a ******* helmet and no dramas- rule is there, follow it (petty or not!)- simple.
Squids wrote:The cyclist has a point, why don't the police go catch some actual criminals. The law requiring cyclists to wear a helmet is total ridiculous. The only person that is going to be worse off if the cyclist doesn't wear a helmet is the cyclist in the case of an accident. Its their own fault if they crash. If people want to take the risk and not wear a helmet it should be their choice not to.
Failed Creation wrote:Squids wrote:The cyclist has a point, why don't the police go catch some actual criminals. The law requiring cyclists to wear a helmet is total ridiculous. The only person that is going to be worse off if the cyclist doesn't wear a helmet is the cyclist in the case of an accident. Its their own fault if they crash. If people want to take the risk and not wear a helmet it should be their choice not to.
Like it or not though, the law is the law, and we all have to abide by them.
But seriously, how ******* hard is it to wear a helmet?
Squids wrote:Failed Creation wrote:Squids wrote:The cyclist has a point, why don't the police go catch some actual criminals. The law requiring cyclists to wear a helmet is total ridiculous. The only person that is going to be worse off if the cyclist doesn't wear a helmet is the cyclist in the case of an accident. Its their own fault if they crash. If people want to take the risk and not wear a helmet it should be their choice not to.
Like it or not though, the law is the law, and we all have to abide by them.
But seriously, how ******* hard is it to wear a helmet?
Just like wearing a seltbelt, pretty simple yet people still refuse to do it. Some people will always want to be rebels.