CZ
When I was 14 I bought a knackered old CZ (the bike with the coffin tank) for a tenner. It was fucked. Engine seized, wheel seized and rusted to fuck. Over the course of that summer I lovingly stripped down, repaired and rebuilt the thing with only an old manual for reference. Unbounded was my joy when the engine at last coughed into life.

So I took it for a quick spin in the back street. Then I let my brother take it for a spin. Then me again.

Then these two guys in a car pulled over, got out and shouted me over. So off I went.

"We're from the Durham Police and we want to know what you're doing riding that shed"

"Oh aye?" "I said "Pull the other bollock - it's got bells on." (I may have mentioned before my inbuilt mistrust of authority figures.)

"Show me your fucking warrant card then - copper!"

I was convinced that they were just two randoms trying it on. Then he pulled out his card. DC Jones. I was fucked.

To cut a long story short they threw the book at me.

No tax
No insurance
No MOT
No helmet
Riding under age
Riding on the pavement
No license
Possession of an offensive girlfriend - you name it, they charged me with it. And, to put the capper on it, they charged me with aiding and abetting *exactly* the same charges for my younger brother, effectively doubling what they'd already charged me with.

So now you know why I think all coppers are bastards.

Cheers
( Legless Mister Stabby - shanks for the memory, Fri 4 Jan 2008, 10:14, 49 replies)

All peelers are bastards
Lucky you were only 14, i'm sure the slate was wiped at some point.
( Colonel Dracula Two manky hookers and a racist dwarf, Fri 4 Jan 2008, 10:39, closed)

Ow McOuch!

I share your pain...well, not exactly me, but my brother as a very similar bastard attack happened to him on a little Honda Vespa thingy which he was razzing up and down our road when we were kids.
( Pooflake braces for an onslaught..., Fri 4 Jan 2008, 10:55, closed)

quick correction
what do you mean "You THINK all coppers are bastards"?
By this stage in your life you should fucking KNOW it
(bugboybeast, Fri 4 Jan 2008, 14:29, closed)

I'm going to defend the copper, I'm afraid.
If you were riding around, on the fucking pavement no less, like that in my area, I'd bloody well hope you got the book thrown at you before you ran down and killed a child.
(Musuko, Fri 4 Jan 2008, 18:17, closed)

It was a fair cop
You know, I was just stabbing someone in the park and this bloke came up to me and said "Freeze! You're under arrest." Obviously I thought it was someone messing around, but no. Out came the warrant card. Got me for murder and everything, it's a fucking joke.
(Skittlemcfluff ......................, Fri 4 Jan 2008, 23:39, closed)

This was the 1970s
So perhaps the above two posters should lighten up a tad?
( jim_bob can herd cats., Sat 5 Jan 2008, 5:03, closed)

Says it all, really
It's obvious that the two Rozzer-spporting Daily Mail readers above had sheltered childhoods. There's just something special about haring around on a junker bike when you're 14. How else are you supposed to get a love for mechanisms than by rebuilding an engine?

Boring bastards.
(DigitalRaven will have to make do with gin, Sat 5 Jan 2008, 18:23, closed)

In Reply
Musuko - you have absolutely no idea what life was like growing up in a pit village in the 60's and 70's. While I was building my bike, a fair number of the adults in the area would drop by and offer advice, lend me tools, show me how to set the gap on a spark-plug and, quite often to stand there shaking their heads and telling me:

"You'll never get this bugger to run"

If you'd read the story properly, you should have picked up that I'd *just* got this bike running. What did you expect me to do - ask an adult to take it for a spin for me?

Also, the death defying speed I got up to couldn't have exceeded 10 miles an hour - it was my first time on a bike.

In those days we made our own entertainment. Honestly. I used to collect and strip down almost any piece of equipment I could get my hands on to see:

A) - How it worked
and
B) See if I could fix it.

I stripped down and rebuilt TV's, radios, electric fires - in fact anything I could scavenge. That's why today I'm happy repairing almost anything I come across.

Different times back then.

The real reason the coppers nicked me wasn't because I was being dangerous, it wasn't because I'd broken the law - it was because I'd talked back to them. In our words "set my neck out".

And 'tother twat who obviously doesn't believe the story -

"Can you stretch your knob to touch your arse-hole? - Then go fuck yourself!"

Trust me - if I was going to make something up, I'd make it a bit more interesting

Cheers
( Legless Mister Stabby - shanks for the memory, Sun 6 Jan 2008, 1:03, closed)

Daily Mail?
Don't just assume what I do and do not know. I may be considerably younger than you, and those days are gone, but I live in Yorkshire, not some snobby suburb of London.

The fact is, Legless, that you were breaking a law...a law that was put into place for safety reasons; a motorcycle piloted by an underage kid, no matter how slow, on a pavement is dangerous.

Only 10mph? Shall we spin a motorcycle tyre up to the speed it'll be going on a bike at 10mph and then apply it to a four year old's face?

Face it. You were an idiot. You acted dangerously. You got pulled up on it. And instead of blaming yourself for doing something so truly obviously against common sense, you blame the people who stopped you doing it. It doesn't matter WHAT their motives, they did their job correctly. You WERE in the wrong.

I really get the feeling you're the type to say "Don't you have real criminals to catch, Guv?" when pulled over for speeding.
(Musuko, Mon 7 Jan 2008, 15:42, closed)

Dear Fucking God
I'm being lectured by Jermey Kyle:

"FOR GODS SAKE - THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN!!"

You're 22 going on sixty. You probably haven't broken a law or taken a risk in your life. You're the twat who'll sit at 50 on the dual-carriageway "because it's the speed limit" and ignore the queue of traffic behind you.

I'll guess that you have few friends. There's a reason for that - you'll be incredibly boring to be around sitting in the pub, sipping on your half-pint of shandy. "Mustn't get drunk - that's against the law. A right and proper law that has been put there for our safety"

I can see you now, sitting at your window, binoculours in one hand, telephone in the other with your thumb over the speed-dial to the local nick. Watching, hoping for someone to drop some litter, park in a disabled spot.

You come across as a self-righteous prig. Sitting at your computer, using your fully-licensed software (Piracy is a crime!) lecturing me with with your wisdom gained over 22 years.

It's a good thing that homosexuality is legal now or you'd be off down the local nick to hand yourself in. After all, the law was there for reason wasn't it?

Jeremy. Get a life. Take some risks. Even break the law once in a while. It'll do you good. You could start small. Perhaps put some rubbish (the stuff you write about) into the non-recyclable bin and then scurry back to your flat heart pounding at your daring.

Love


P.S THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN!!!!!
( Legless Mister Stabby - shanks for the memory, Mon 7 Jan 2008, 23:50, closed)

It's no less daft...
...than buying a munting big sportsbike and then riding it about like a nutter through summer, winter, snow, rain, shine...

Oh hang on, that's what I'm doing... Oops.

T
(WittyUsernameHere, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 0:02, closed)

I hate children
Run them all over is what I say
( vix0r was not Matthew on, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 0:26, closed)

Legless' view of Musuko's character
Read Musoko's post in response to the 'picky eaters' QOTW and form your own opinion...
(theweapon never ever bloody anything ever, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 0:32, closed)

Musuko's World Vs My World.
School 1960 vs. School 2007

Scenario: Johnny and Mark get into a fistfight after school.

1960 - Crowd gathers. Mark wins. Johnny and Mark shake hands and end up mates.

2007 - Police are called, SWAT team arrives and arrests Johnny and Mark. Mobiles with video of fight confiscated as evidence. They are charged with assault, ASBO's are taken out and both are suspended even though Johnny started it. Diversionary conferences and parent meetings conducted. Video shown on 6 internet sites.


Scenario: Jeffrey won't sit still in class,disrupts other students.

1960 - Jeffrey is sent to the headmster's office and given a good caning. Returns to class, sits still and does not disrupt class again.

2007 - Jeffrey is given huge doses of Ritalin. Counselled to death. Becomes a zombie. Tested for ADD. School gets extra funding because Jeffrey has a disability. Drops out of school.


Scenario: Billy breaks a window in his neighbour's car and his Dad gives him a whipping with his belt.

1960 - Billy is more careful next time, grows up normal, goes to college, and becomes a successful businessman.

2007 - Billy's dad is arrested for child abuse. Billy is removed to foster care and joins a gang. Psychologist tells Billy's sister that she remembers being abused herself and their dad goes to prison. Billy's mum has an affair with the psychologist. Psychologist gets a promotion.

Scenario: Mark brings cigarettes to school.

1960 - The headmaster makes Mark smoke an entire packet, Mark gets violently ill, never touches the things again.


2007 - Police are called and Mark is expelled from School for drug possession. His car is searched for drugs and weapons.


Scenario: Vinh fails high school English.

1960 - Vinh goes to Remedial English, passes and goes to college.

2007 - Vinh's cause is taken up by local human rights group. Newspaper articles appear nationally explaining that making English a requirement for graduation is racist. Civil Liberties Association files class action lawsuit against state school system and his English teacher. English is banned from core curriculum. Vinh is given his Y10 anyway but ends up mowing lawns for a living because he cannot speak English.


Scenario: Johnny takes apart leftover firecrackers, puts them in a model plane paint bottle and blows up an anthill.

1960 - Ants die.

2007 - Police and anti-terrorist squad are called and Johnny is charged with domestic terrorism. Teams investigate parents, siblings are removed from the home, computers are confiscated, and Johnny's dad goes on a terror watch list and is never allowed to fly again.


Scenario: Musuko falls during recess and scrapes his knee. His teacher, Mary, finds him crying, and gives him a hug to comfort him.

1960 - Musuko soon feels better and goes back to playing.

2007 - Mary is accused of being a sexual predator and loses her job. She faces three years in prison. Musuko undergoes five years of therapy. Becomes gay.

Cheers
( Legless Mister Stabby - shanks for the memory, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 0:34, closed)

Musuko....
You're certainly one to spout all this politically correct bollocks, with your pedestal raised as high as you seem to be capable of, talking of the 'dangers' to children. First and foremost, any child who cannot see a 'speeding' motorcycle coming towards them at the gargantuan pace of 10mph is clearly both blind and deaf. I'm vaguely familiar with the type of bike Legless is referring to, they make loads of noise, and quite frankly, aren't well disguised. Child risk? Bare bloody minimum, thanks.

Now, my original point after my slight detraction. Let's review your own posts in a former QOTW, 'Political Correctness Gone Mad'. I'm sure most people are capable enough to click of their own accord, so they can read for themselves, but this is basically a flipover of your standing.

Gay nursery worker can't go tend to another child because of a Muslim employee alone inside. Fair enough, it's politically correct bollocks. Not like you're going to jump her and do the nasty, in any regard, gay or straight.

Baa baa pink sheep. 'Nuff said, methinks. Nail's rather easy to hit on the head there.

A youth rides a 'motorbike' on a pavement at 10mph, it's somehow a criminal offence and punishable with everything. Bugger off, I'm sorry, but I do faster speeds pulling my car into the driveway. Was he terrorising people? Going out of his way to cause a danger? Quite unlikely, I'd wager, not because it's Legless, and people on QOTW quite like his amusing anecdotes, but because most sensible people know how not to be an absolute arse, endangering people. This is a back-road, behind houses, where traffic (both vehicular and pedestrian) is minimal, not a main road. The police were quite entitled to stop him, but what would they really accomplish? Getting a dangerous driver off the road?

Ahem, I'm going to stop here. I'm starting to ramble.

I imagine you as the sort of jobsworthy fellow who reports people on yellow lines when they jump out for two minutes, and that's a sad, sad position to be in.

Unwind yourself, re-pin that social hand grenade you have, and as you so eloquently put, consider 'real' criminals. You know, the sort who actually go out and hurt someone, things to that nature.

Danke.
(HomeWithTheDownies A towering inferno of penisy pleasure, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 1:14, closed)

HomeWithTheDownies
.
Next time I get in trouble, will you represent me in court?

Please?


Cheers
( Legless Mister Stabby - shanks for the memory, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 1:25, closed)

To be fair
If I was a copper and some jumped up little shit spoke to me like that I'd throw the book at him as well. Surely you can understand that? If a lad in trackies and a tn hat said that to you today you'd make your instant judgements and do the same. Human nature.

I think Misuko made a bit much of the situation as 10mph on a bike you'd been fixing for ages is understandable given how exciting it must have been however your response legless including lines such as "why don't you try breaking a law for once" just make you look like an arsehole.

Yeah yeah it's 'coooooooool' to break laws.
(Glomp Fuck, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 1:56, closed)

Ahh.
That was the point of the story. It wasn't because I'd broken the law that they nicked me, it was because some jumped up little shit spoke to them the way I did. They were in plain clothes and I honestly thought they were two blokes trying it on.

And as for your last comment,
"why don't you try breaking a law for once" just make you look like an arsehole.

Yeah yeah it's 'coooooooool' to break laws.

Here we go again. Another regimented, spineless sheep. Got to do what the big man tells you as you're too useless to take responsibility for your own life. Not enough gumption to pick and choose what laws you'll keep and what laws you'll ignore.

Well I break the law in numerous ways, on a regular basis. I get drunk. I occasionally take drugs that the nanny state doesn't approve of. If someone threatens me or attacks me, then I beat the living shit out of them - my response is *always* way out of proportion to the the threat, another crime. (It's not a good idea to threaten me or mine..)

Yup I break the law. And, if caught, I take the punishment. I might not agree with it but I take my medicine. But that won't stop me doing exactly the same thing again if I see fit.

You see, I don't agree with the raft of rules and regulations that the nanny state foists on me. I decide what I'll do. It's called self-determination.

Cheers

wanker


( Legless Mister Stabby - shanks for the memory, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 2:15, closed)

jees...
Legless keep up the entertaining stories- this is after all a place for humourous anecdotes et al, not jeremy kyle debates!

As for running over small children... that'll learn em!
( the dalai farmer always likes tea, but especially on, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 8:45, closed)

You naughty naughty boy
Clash of mindset time (I feel old again):

Having grown up in the 70s/80s I would also have thought nothing of giving a lovingly restored shed a quick razz in the back street to see if it worked.

If I fell off and knackered myself, it would have been my fault.

If I'd been gripped for being a teenaged fool by Herr Plod I probably would have got a good slapping before being dragged home rather than charged (Embra Polis were errr...'robust' in those days).

Chances of random toddler being mown down? Bugger all at 10mph on a bike that emitted more decibels that Concorde on takeoff and IIRC left a fetching trail of blue smoke, oil and assorted spare parts behind it as it coughed along (and this was when they were new).

These days? Some knobber on a mini moto thing bought by Daddy belting along at 30. Bit different in terms of lethality, but if the rider gets pulled the chances of any meaningful punishment are about bugger all.

Different times, folks.


(Aye, we made our own entertainment in those days. Used to live in a cardboard box on central reservation of t'motorway.)
(osok Rebel without a clue, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 10:19, closed)

Legless
Has caused more controversy than a kids party at the Neverland Ranch.

Well done Sir!
(JasperSinister is offering two tickets to the gun show, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 10:20, closed)

I agreed with you Legless
right up to your 'examples' which were, quite frankly, complete and utter bollocks.

Corporal Punishment and beating your kids is in no way a good thing and I'm glad that shit is now highly frowned upon.
I'm no fan of the way things have swung so far the other way but you only have to look at the stories of the Sisters of Mercy in Ireland to see what fucking reprehensable crap was carried out in the name of 'correction'.

If you think the current generation of kids is somehow worse than the previous ones you've been reading too many red-top 'news'papers.

If you think regular child beatings create normal adults you're probably a bit troubled yourself - your own somehow proud admission of disproportionate violence is fairly strong evidence for that.

I'm not arguing with your original post - looks like you did nothing much wrong except give lip to a copper - something I thoroughly approve of.

Maybe your examples post was just further goading of the silly young man and wasn't meant to be taken seriously, either way, it contained more bollocks than the mouth of a Soho rent boy.
( chenobble rocking his explorer beard on, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 10:30, closed)

Oh and you forgot about how Vinh passed English in 1960
but found that no-one was willing to employ a 'f**kin p*ki'.

Nostalgia just isn't what it used to be.
( chenobble rocking his explorer beard on, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 10:33, closed)

Oh Please..
.
I'm not of the ilk that say's "spare the rod and spoil the child"

However I am of the ilk that say's "A good clip round the ear'ole is all they need"

What happens now is that some oily little kid leaves school, college, whatever and thinks that his "rights" protects him from physical abuse. Then he meets his Nemesis. To para-phrase Snatch,

"A righteous infliction of retribution manifested by an appropriate agent. Personified in this case by an 'orrible cunt... me"

So yes, I agree in a lot of 1960's values.

Actions have consequences. Better to learn them young when the most damage you'll get is a stinging sensation than to grow up thinking you can say what the fuck you like, to whoever you like, and expect to walk away. Or, indeed, to walk.

Still - each to their own - but my kids will grow up to:

"know when to hold em, know when to fold em,
Know when to walk away and know when to run."

Cheers
( Legless Mister Stabby - shanks for the memory, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 13:17, closed)

...
"You see, I don't agree with the raft of rules and regulations that the nanny state foists on me. I decide what I'll do. It's called self-determination."

Well me either but I don't act like a cocky cunt because of it. "I'LL BREAK WHATEVER LAWS I WANT", well you deserve a stretch in side just for thinking you can pick and choose what you do regardless of the effects on others.

I could shit in someone's house and probably get away with it but I choose not to do it because I'm not a complete knob.
(Glomp Fuck, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 13:24, closed)

Legless must be spying on me, because he seems to think he knows everything about me.
Funny that the person who thinks it a good idea to cane a disruptive child thinks it's unfair for a lippy teenager to get punished for breaking the law and, crucially, acting exeedingly dangerously. It was a stupid, pointless, chavish thing to do. And you're PROUD of it. Why?

Keeping idiot teenagers off of machines they're not mature enough to handle sensibly (as you so clearly demonstrated with your ride) is not the action of a nanny state. It's bloody common sense.

And don't bring homosexuality into this. Safety laws deserve to be respected. Laws based on bigotry do not. There's a clear difference, and you know full well on which side of the fence your actions were.

Your 1960 vs 2007 examples made me chuckle. Unless you're a teacher, wouldn't you suggest that I, not long out of school (compared to you), am better able to describe current school life than you are?

Shock horror...perhaps you're complaining about how you THINK it is, rather than what it's actually like?

And lastly, just to snub my nose at you Legless, in my life I've probably been caned many more times than you have...but likely not under the same circumstances. ;)
(Musuko, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 14:05, closed)

Whine whine whine
I'd just like to point out to all the shiny-arsed Malvolios ranting on about the irresponsibility of this that if a child hasn't got the sense to get out of the way of a knackered motorbike coming towards them at a brisk walking pace then frankly they're a Darwin Award waiting to happen.
(gordonjcp, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 15:28, closed)

"if a child hasn't got the sense to get out of the way of a knackered motorbike coming towards them at a brisk walking pace then frankly they're a Darwin Award waiting to happen."
Of course! Obviously they're going to see it coming, because there's no such thing as blind corners caused by buildings, or distractions, or untrained, unlicenced, overconfident teenage riders thinking they're so fantastically skilled and careful they will never, ever make a mistake.

If a child has the stupidity to not to be constantly on the look out for tossers on motorcycles riding on the pavement, then it's their fault, right? No fault to the rider.

I mean, the silly people in the twin towers...they should have been looking out for planes.
(Musuko, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 15:52, closed)

I'm really really glad...
That I grew up in the eighties and not the boring 'noughties' goddd...

Moloko, or whatever your name is, I'm so sad your generation aren't allowed the freedom we took for granted to be a bit wild and learn independance!

Legless, when I was 13 my mum used to drop me and her sister off at her friends to play with her sons (on a dangerous farm oo-er) I got my lust for speed from spending hours rallying in a car their dad had given them (they were 9 and 14) which had no floor in it - fucking brilliant! I remember hysterically laughing as we flew round the field (look, I was 13, we were probably doing about 15mph, but it felt fast!) dodging straw stacks and stuff...

glad to be old!! :)

ps, all coppers *are* bastards - they would only have stopped you because you were an easy target - the hours I've spent cringing of embarrasment when (in a previous life!) on duty with a twat on a power crazy mission insisted on chasing teenagers in cars 'in case they had a bald tyre' or following pissed up peeps (in the riot van, I am not joking) to yell at them through the loudspeaker if they started to look like they were going to stop for a slash - jeez!!!!
( curvylittlegoth heard the voices in your head on, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 16:10, closed)

Curvy,
I have no beef with you mucking around on a farm. There, the only person you're going to hurt is yourself, and that's your responsibility. Incidentally, even in this nanny state that you all seem to think we live in, it's not illegal for you to drive a vehicle around on private land, whatever your age, licence or not. I know of a 12 year old who owns and rides his own tractor (one that he built himself and all), up on the farm where we get eggs.

What I object to, and what Legless seems perfectly happy with, is doing that same stuff on a public road, where you could very well hurt someone else, someone not involved in your day's fun. That's not fair on them.

And breaking the law just to spite power-hungry cops does nothing to hurt them, you know. It just gives them something else to bother you for. Smart.
(Musuko, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 16:17, closed)

Somehow, I don't think you're going to get a consensus here
Sense of perspective?

An anecdote about a 14 year old having a quick blat on a knackered bike in a back street in days of yore - and in them thar days back streets were just that with not that many cars or people around, especially in villages where the flat 'at was the must-have accessory and whippet wrestling was obligatory.

Said gobby teenager mouths off to the plod and gets his comeuppance, and as a result gets a bit of a huff on re coppers and re-tells this three bloody decades later on a website...

And all of a sudden the B3ta Moral High Ground Stasi leaps into action.

He did something 'naughty'. Decide for yourselves the degree of naughtiness - I would put it somewhere between deserving a slap on the legs and meriting burning at the stake.
He got punished.
No-one got hurt.
The world will not end.
It's the bloody internet.



(Oh go on then... BURN HIM!!!)
(osok Rebel without a clue, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 17:23, closed)

.
"He did something 'naughty'

He did something dangerous.

"He got punished."

Well, he got caught. He hasn't told us what punishment he got.

"No-one got hurt."

Thankfully. Might not have been the case.

"The world will not end."

Nor will it if you empty your bank account into mine. Can we get that arranged?

"It's the bloody internet."

The perfect place for this. :D
(Musuko, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 17:59, closed)

I will leave with this one...
Okay, you define the action as inherently and irrevocably 'dangerous'. I don't. The reasoning behind this comes from the relative definitions of 'hazard' and 'risk'.

The action of standing in front of a speeding train is not in itself dangerous, as long as you move before you get splatted. Stupid maybe, but that's not the issue.

Riding a knackered bike without a helmet at 10 mph is in itself inherently dangerous to one person only, and that is the rider. There is only a risk of injury to another party if they are there in the path of the bike.

If he had belted it through a crowded playground, I'd be gathering the metaphorical internet kindling already. If he was in the back street without anyone around (and you'd have to be a numpty not to try this without finding somewhere quiet so YOU DIDN'T GET CAUGHT) then there was no risk to anyone but himself.

When I first read the tale, I got the image of a couple of lads in a deserted street, away from prying eyes giving a bike a quick blat (and without a helmet, at 14, 10mph would have felt scaaaary) and as such the needle on my moral-outrage-ometer didn't even quiver. Your mental image must have been of the high speed messenger of death weaving in and out of the massed playgroup, possibly waving a battleaxe as well.

However, in the last few years, the yoof seem to be of the opinion that they CAN ride bikes/quads/karts/motos any where the fuck they like (rather than finding a quiet spot and hence avoiding a clip round the ear) and will treat any attempt to stop them as an assault on their personal freedoms and dignity even when they are doing something that is genuinely dangerous to others. Maybe that's the image you got. Who knows? If it really grips you that much, you can always click the ignore button.

However, he got caught and royally bollocked at the very least. Doesn't that satisfy the fight for internet justice? Do we really need the flaming torches? Or should everyone go and have a nice drinkie-poo and calm the fuck down? There's considerably worse stuff on this board and no-one seems to give a chuff, so....

(Anyway they should have nicked him for being a Geordie. Bound to be guilty of something.)
(osok Rebel without a clue, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 18:20, closed)

osok,
Though riding around at 10mph on a pavement might not be dangerous for everyone to do, I suspect a 14 year old with an attitude problem, no licence, no helmet, nothing, may not be safe doing so. That's why we have licences and rules; to find out who is safe to drive and who isn't.

14 year old Legless himself is not the person to be making that decision. Please note that the "yoof" bombing about anywhere they please right now probably think that what THEY are doing is perfectly safe, and will say so on the hyper-net twenty years from now, criticising anyone who says otherwise. "It wuz a difrent era. Wuz 2007, innit? U wudnt understand."

PS: my mental image of 10mph consists of the nasty bruises, cuts and burns I got at speeds rather less than that whilst learning to ride myself. 10mph is fast enough to mess you up, especially with no helmet. And the front of a motorcycle is not going to be a nice object for someone else to impact with...lots of rigid metal, sharp edges, and spinning rubber.
(Musuko, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 18:24, closed)

Good grief
I too got told off by the coppers, 2 years back. Got a 1960 Mobylette ped running, took it to a lorry park up the road. Middle of the Derbyshire countryside, no-one about, giving it a low speed blast for fun, and to learn to handle it. Copper bollocked me, now it sits in the shed rusting. While chavs over the hill ride trials bikes on the road, in town.

Both me, and Legless, weren't much more likely to kill than I am now, CBT'd on a 125. Do calm down.
( Greenbat, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 20:38, closed)

*sigh*
This is a) boring, and b) stupid, and 3) boring. Nobody is coming round to anyone elses point of view. Can we stop?
(Sammyhaswoefullyneglectedyou, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 21:34, closed)

No..
We can't stop now - it's just getting started.

Let's deal with the "Law and Order Brigade" first. You're liars and hypocrites if you don't subscribe to the view that *everyone* picks and chooses what laws they obey and what laws they break. If you've ever had a fight (assault), if you've ever read a newspaper that was abandononed on a train (theft through finding) if you've ever downloaded music, shared a CD you've burnt, talked on your mobile while driving, got drunk, had sex before you were 16 and a myriad of other things, then you've just proven my point. So you can fuck off. Let them who are without sin cast the fisrt stone:

"Oy! Jesus - Mary! Put those bricks down...."

And getting back to Mr High And Mighty Musuko, the kid who's trying to take the moral high ground - I find some of your self-confessed actions a bit strange. You allude to that fact that you like being caned. Well guess what, fuckhead, that's yet another offence, another way you break the law. It's still assault whether you enjoy it or not. And while we're on the moral high ground, I've got to admit that anyone who mixes sex and violence makes me feel queasy. There's something fucked in your head, kiddo, if you associate making love with pain or force. That goes for the people who like the idea of "play-rape". Sorry folks, but there's a couple of screws loose somewhere.

And as for corporal punishment for kids (picks up my Daily Mail), I'm in favour of it. Sometimes a sharp slap is the quickest and kindest way to correct behaviour that, if not corrected, will eventually land them in big trouble somewhere down the line. And that doesn't mean I favour lashing a kid with belts or canes until they bruise or bleed. That's child abuse. There's a difference.

So, getting back to the point, the bike stunt was in a wide back lane with nobody around except me and my brother. There was never the slightest bit of danger to anyone except the two participants. End of story.

Cheers
( Legless Mister Stabby - shanks for the memory, Tue 8 Jan 2008, 22:38, closed)

A few things to address:
Firstly, Legless, I'm hoping (genuinely) that there wasn't a typical drooling of sarcasm with your remark to me. In any regard, hell, I just got irked by Musukos tunnel-vision'esque (a new word, if you don't like it, ride it) manner of thinking. I suppose it matters little I actually am starting a law degree, for all its delights and rewards. Yay.

Now....

@Glomp - If it had been some little 'lad in trackies' as you put it, yeah, human nature makes you automatically wary. In OUR day and age. The tracksuit chav wasn't nearly as prevalent in the 80's as he is today, so effectively it's a moot point. You raise a valid issue, but if that's the case, why are there prats boosting around in council schemes on mopeds and the like without so much as a blink? You can't victimise one person for the issues of a majority, otherwise we'd not allow anyone from the Middle East on a fucking plane. And no, it's NOT coooooooool to break laws. It's mildly amusing to piss against a pub wall from time to time, but not 'coooooooool'.

@Chenobble - It's a bleak thing to recognise, but kids in our current generation ARE far worse off than we (and who are we? The ancient sages?) ever were. Politically correct bollocks and red tape make the most simple of things now a knives-edge issue, like teachers consoling a lad who cuts his knee open or giving your female workmate a kiss on the cheek at a New Years party. All it takes is one flippin' jobsworth and you can expect being rattled up in court.

No, beatings as a whole don't do kids any good, but if a child does wrong, and gets his backside tanned by his father for it (note, not a beating, a spanking, which is what I'm assuming Legless intended to portray), he's going to associate that thing with being punished, and (usually) not be daft enough to repeat it. No, it's not nice, and some kids have some crap memories of a spanking from their parents, but I'm going to guess that a fair few b3tans got a smack as kids, and are relatively well-adjusted folk who don't torture animals and collect skulls. I know I did, and I can proudly admit to being a typically dull bloke with few oddities aside from a loathing of Marmite.

@Musuko - Oh, don't think I forgot about you. Firstly, I fail to see where homosexuality was being brought into this, aside from my own remark which held no debate against 'safety' laws. What safety? I fail to see where a gay man is more likely to pounce on a woman than a straight man is, unless the topic of shoes and progressive theatre comes into play, so don't talk crap. Be gay if you like, it's everyone to their own, I couldn't give a shite to be honest. Far as those safety laws come into play, yeah, they're there for a reason, but common sense should always be a primary method of judgement. The law says people under eighteen shouldn't drink. Fair enough, but by that reckoning a seventeen year old, mature and sensible in his own right, is forbidden from drinking at a party? Sorry, nah. We're back onto the jobsworth argument again. I'd rather see the aforementioned seventeen year old drinking than a twenty-something girl who'll simply get off her face, pick a fight and pass out in a pool of her own vomit. Did I break the law? Perhaps, but I saved the police a boatload of hassle.

Stop looking at every argument from your own conjured perspective, as it's already been made clear Legless was giving a whirl with this bike in an ALLEY, not a blind corner. Without bleating the same remark, how would someone NOT have seen him had he somehow exceeded the blistering pace of ten whole miles an hour? Being untrained, unlicenced and overconfident? Pick any number of provisional licence holders. Yes, they're 'allowed' to drive, with someone there to watch over them, but it doesn't detract from the fact you've got a novice in control of a massive chunk of steel, most likely moving at a fuckload more than ten miles an hour. Shall we remove all learner drivers from public thoroughfare then?

No, I doubted so.

Since I'll already have to apologise for length (or will that be misconstrued as a potentially homosexual connotative?), I'll make one last remark. Musuko, I'm content to believe you do get caned more than most, but it only serves to show that even your 'intimate partner' (since I can't say gay boyfriend or anything to that effect) gets some pleasure out of causing you pain, but not likely for the same reasons you might think. ;)


HWTD, Bringing internet arguments since 2005.

Apologies for reply length, and for being completely hammered this reply around. Sense being made is optional, though the point should be there.
(HomeWithTheDownies A towering inferno of penisy pleasure, Wed 9 Jan 2008, 2:28, closed)

AtHomeWithTheDownies
No, for once I wasn't being sarcastic - I would like you to represent me next time I get in trouble.

And, back to the bike again, would I have taken out on the main streets where there was traffic (vehicular and human)? - No. Even at 14 I gad more sense than that.

But my bike riding activities were only the tip of the iceberg as far as dangerous stuff I got up to as a kid. But, surprisingly, only one kid out of my extended gang got seriously injured as I was growing up. He was killed, on a main road, by a (licensed) car driver.

Some of the things we did as kids make me shudder to think of now. Sliding down a steep shale hill on bits of cardboard and rolling clear to grab the roots of a gorse bush just before a 100 foot drop into a quarry. Or collecting birds eggs (a practise I loathe now) and the hideously dangerous climbs we made to get them.

Playing in abandoned houses and factories (where I managed to get a shattered cheekbone and a fractured skull during one game that went wrong), stealing lead of the roof of the local bank where a slip would have meant splatter. And lots and lots more. So riding a bike in a back street with no traffic didn't even figure on my danger-ometer.

But, the point of the story, wasn't about the bike. It was about what happens when you assume the wrong things. I assumed the guys that stopped me weren't coppers and paid for it. If I hadn't been lippy to them they would have, almost certainly, just made me put the bike back in the garage and perhaps, had a quick word with my parents.


Oh - and the fine I got was £35 payable at £1 a week. But that had consequences waaay down the line when I joined the Army.

The coppers reaction in nicking me was completely disproportionate to the offence (in not only my eyes but the eyes of my society in general - including the magistrate who bollocked the copper for the excessive list of offences. He actually asked the copper if he was on piece-work - that's where you get paid according to the amount of work you do).


Still, I'm not going to change my mind about the affair. I was there and you weren't Musuko. But you still sound like the sort of person who is hell-bent on getting to middle age as fast as possible. I can just see you now (on a helldesk - snigger) telling people that he leaves the server problems "To the younger folk as my nerves can't take the strain anymore...."

Cheers
( Legless Mister Stabby - shanks for the memory, Wed 9 Jan 2008, 3:57, closed)

"It's a good thing that homosexuality is legal now or you'd be off down the local nick to hand yourself in. After all, the law was there for reason wasn't it?"
That's where homosexuality came into it. A comment by Legless.

Yes, everyone picks and chooses their laws. I'm not stupid. I know that happens.

But most people have the sense not to flout the sensible laws...like the ones that say to stay out of electrical substations or don't set off fireworks in a classroom.

What Legless did and how he acted makes him the 1960s version of our current chavs. Why does everyone seem to be happy with people doing stuff "in the good old days", but slap the people trying to do the exact same thing now?

I'm not going to defend my character, because there's not much point in it (I know who I am, and I like him), but I will defend my opinion, and my opinion is that what Legless did was foolish and potentially dangerous, and no amount of "it was a different time" bollocks is going to change that.

Legless, you should be grateful when the cops turn a blind eye, not pissed off when they don't. They don't have to let you off with a slapped wrist.
(Musuko, Wed 9 Jan 2008, 10:13, closed)

And
He just keeps on digging doesn't he?

www.ted.com/index.php/talks/view/id/202/?src=rss

Try that. You might learn something.

You're the useless type of mental spastic that would have all kids wrapped in cotton wool, ban them learning and playing with things that might, just *might, cause them harm and ends up producing a generation that can't hunt, cook, grow things, repair things. The generation that regard science as witchcraft.

BUT THINK ABOUT THE CHILDREN!!!!

In case you didn't notice, fuckwit, I was a child when all this took place. But your middle-class response is to scream:

"Ch - ch - ch CHAV!!!!"

So what if I was a chav? I wasn't responsible for my birth, what socio-economic group I was born into. It wasn't my fault that I grew up in severely impoverished circumstances (at least by today's standards) But am I ashamed of it? Fuck no! Everything I have, everything I am was made by me and hard work. I was the first of my extended family to get a degree (and in a fucking science not a poxy arts degree). I was the first of my family to own their own business. In short laddy, I made it myself and wasn't handed anything on a plate.

You, by labelling me and mine Chavs would have been perfectly happy to chuck me in prison. You and your PC brigade would have been much happier keeping "scum" like me down in the muck where we were born.

Well fuck you pervert - and fuck off.

Cheers

And the pervert crack isn't because you're gay, it's because you like violence in the bedroom
( Legless Mister Stabby - shanks for the memory, Wed 9 Jan 2008, 10:32, closed)

Can I just point out
That Legless' original story really had very little to do with cheap tat, and surely friday is a bit early to be going off topic.

Regarding the increasingly Kyle-esque (on both sides) debate, Musoko needs to just stop digging as he isn't doing himself any favours, but also Legless needs to just calm down. For someone with a wealth of very funny stories (whether there all true or not), you seem unable to take any sort of comments without lashing out with a stream of vitriolic bile. The original offense of driving a motorbike certainly didnt warrent the arsey comments at the top of the board, but everything you've been posting makes you come across as a violent misanthropic homophobe. And before you come back, i'm not saying you are a homophobe, you did clarify that later, but by your own admission you are violent, which doesnt really improve your platform.

If it upsets you that much that some jumped up little numpty like Musoko had the audacity to question your actions of 30 years ago, then just don't tell the stories, or the least, don't rise to it.

This "debate" really should just stop as pretty much all that can be said has been, and no-one's changing their minds.
(Bazongaloid, Wed 9 Jan 2008, 10:50, closed)

"but by your own admission you are violent, which doesnt really improve your platform."
This is what I took issue with, this whole "If someone threatens me or attacks me, then I beat the living shit out of them" or "I pick and choose what laws I follow". Your point gets clouded by stuff like this Legless and it's primarily why I chose to disagree with you, attitude.
(Glomp Fuck, Wed 9 Jan 2008, 11:08, closed)

Misanthropic?
Now violent I'll admit to but I draw the line at misanthropic.

The only reason Musuko doesn't like me is because , like the coppers, he doesn't like black men.

And growing up as a black man in Newcastle in the 60's was hard.

I suppose the real reason that I got so angry is because, deep down, I know that what I did back then was a little dangerous. What I neglected to mention is that I'm also blind.

But it wasn't as bad as it sounds - my brother was running alongside me shouting out directions...

But Musuko hates me 'cos I is black and that hurts....

Cheers
( Legless Mister Stabby - shanks for the memory, Wed 9 Jan 2008, 11:13, closed)

tut tut
You's a bad man, mess'r Legless sir ;)
(small-non-bearded-gentleman-of-indistinguishable-origin, Wed 9 Jan 2008, 11:24, closed)

Well I was Bored..
"I'm going to defend the copper, I'm afraid."

I mean a man who starts off with apologising for his opinion - I couldn't let that slide so I thought I'd take him for a little spin.

Kept me amused for a couple of days and, on the bright side, at least we now know that he likes being whipped :)

Cheers
( Legless Mister Stabby - shanks for the memory, Wed 9 Jan 2008, 11:32, closed)

To Musuko
I cycled faster on my pushbike than 10mph as a kid. And I was a fairly heavy kid. With the reflexes of a corpse.

But, because the engine I used was myself (powered by all the goodness that a 1980s MacDonalds would give) rather than a bike engine mine was legal.

I crashed (repeatedly) into my little brother due to lack of attention (and bad brakes). Legless crashed into no-one.

Who's the danger to society now?

Also, he was lippy to people who he thought were just people trying it on. And the 1960s- 2007 comparisons were a little extreme, but nonetheless a good show of what isn't entirely unlikely!
( uberdeity Wondered why Owen Lars knew of the term "hell" on, Wed 9 Jan 2008, 11:57, closed)

Thank you Legless, may I have another?
Legless, you're a chav by virtue of what you do, not who you are. And riding on the pavement on a clapped out motorcycle, no helmet, no licence, no clue, assuming that at age 14 you knew better and could judge danger better than everyone else, and giving lip to strangers (you never thought to be automatically polite to everyone, did you?), then blaming everyone else but yourself when caught doing wrong, are the actions of a chaaaaaaav.

And going by the venom with which you've responded to the accusation, I think you know you were.
(Musuko, Wed 9 Jan 2008, 12:27, closed)

Im not going to take a side..
since in my opinion bother of you are right In ways.

Legless- I see Musuko's point of view, in your original post you didn't exactly specify that you were on a quiet road. I see it wasn't dangerous after you clarified, but what if something had happened later on? What if you did carry on using that bike and did eventually hit someone? Now I have no idea how dangerous it would be, nor how much harm could be done, but even if it was jsut a little scrape on a kid that you bumped into, its hardly fair to that kid is it?
And you're lashing out and getting angry is pointless, we're all faceless dicks on the internet so why get so bothered about another's posts (don't point out any irony in this, I am just offering my own opinion on the story).

Musuko- I see you're point on legless being a possible danger, but you act like he would have hurt someone, yes it is a possibility that he would hurt someone, but not for definate, but I still doubt the cops needed to do that much of a punishment to him.

I am not a kid of the '60s, and I respect it was a different time, but driving a small bike around that could go pretty fast, and does have a chance to hurt someone (even yourself, Legless) is enough for a policeman to atleast have a talk with you about it.
(River of Squid has a variety of lemons in his pocket, Wed 9 Jan 2008, 18:11, closed)