The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
[URL]http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/men/news/s/172/172859_soccer_club_fined_90000_over_death.html[/URL]
What isn't mentioned is that the boy was 14 years old. What the hell was a 14 year old doing riding a 125cc motorbike anywhere?, let alone a private car park while being watched by his parents. Open and shut case in my opinion - he was riding illegally on a bike too big for him and was riding it recklessly.
Oh but the chain was difficult to see, ah, then he's clearly blameless, and his parents shouldn't be strung up for allowing their boy to endanger himself and others in a public place.
It makes me sick. Then I see illiterate teenage mothers on the telly harping on about how it's a 'des-grays' that they don't get free hand outs, just because they can't keep their pikey legs closed for more than five minutes.
Also in the paper earlier this week - woman sues a funeral directors for suffering 'trauma' from dealing with dead bodies for 20 years. I'll run that by you again - twenty (20) years. Wouldn't you think that after say, ooooooh, 6 months, you might think "hmmmm, don't think this is for me" ... ? Nope, she obviously thought "This is horrible, I just don't think I can carry on. I'll carry on for another 19 years or so though, just to make sure."
Such claims should be a crime. A punishable, fine-able crime. Mister and Missus Tax Payer happily pay into the system, completely oblivious to the fact that (and this is also 100% true), a man who had a sex change has sued the health service because he had faulty advice. He claims that doctors should have talked him out of it.
That's fair enough though isn't it? The poor fella/woman/parasite, bless ...
Ah, the sweet sensation of boiling blood ...
What isn't mentioned is that the boy was 14 years old. What the hell was a 14 year old doing riding a 125cc motorbike anywhere?, let alone a private car park while being watched by his parents. Open and shut case in my opinion - he was riding illegally on a bike too big for him and was riding it recklessly.
Oh but the chain was difficult to see, ah, then he's clearly blameless, and his parents shouldn't be strung up for allowing their boy to endanger himself and others in a public place.
It makes me sick. Then I see illiterate teenage mothers on the telly harping on about how it's a 'des-grays' that they don't get free hand outs, just because they can't keep their pikey legs closed for more than five minutes.
Also in the paper earlier this week - woman sues a funeral directors for suffering 'trauma' from dealing with dead bodies for 20 years. I'll run that by you again - twenty (20) years. Wouldn't you think that after say, ooooooh, 6 months, you might think "hmmmm, don't think this is for me" ... ? Nope, she obviously thought "This is horrible, I just don't think I can carry on. I'll carry on for another 19 years or so though, just to make sure."
Such claims should be a crime. A punishable, fine-able crime. Mister and Missus Tax Payer happily pay into the system, completely oblivious to the fact that (and this is also 100% true), a man who had a sex change has sued the health service because he had faulty advice. He claims that doctors should have talked him out of it.
That's fair enough though isn't it? The poor fella/woman/parasite, bless ...
Ah, the sweet sensation of boiling blood ...
Page:
[URL]http://www.manchesteronline.co.uk/men/news/s/172/172859_soccer_club_fined_90000_over_death.html[/URL]
What isn't mentioned is that the boy was 14 years old. What the hell was a 14 year old doing riding a 125cc motorbike anywhere?, let alone a private car park while being watched by his parents. Open and shut case in my opinion - he was riding illegally on a bike too big for him and was riding it recklessly.
Oh but the chain was difficult to see, ah, then he's clearly blameless, and his parents shouldn't be strung up for allowing their boy to endanger himself and others in a public place.
It makes me sick. Then I see illiterate teenage mothers on the telly harping on about how it's a 'des-grays' that they don't get free hand outs, just because they can't keep their pikey legs closed for more than five minutes.
Also in the paper earlier this week - woman sues a funeral directors for suffering 'trauma' from dealing with dead bodies for 20 years. I'll run that by you again - twenty (20) years. Wouldn't you think that after say, ooooooh, 6 months, you might think "hmmmm, don't think this is for me" ... ? Nope, she obviously thought "This is horrible, I just don't think I can carry on. I'll carry on for another 19 years or so though, just to make sure."
Such claims should be a crime. A punishable, fine-able crime. Mister and Missus Tax Payer happily pay into the system, completely oblivious to the fact that (and this is also 100% true), a man who had a sex change has sued the health service because he had faulty advice. He claims that doctors should have talked him out of it.
That's fair enough though isn't it? The poor fella/woman/parasite, bless ...
Ah, the sweet sensation of boiling blood ...
What isn't mentioned is that the boy was 14 years old. What the hell was a 14 year old doing riding a 125cc motorbike anywhere?, let alone a private car park while being watched by his parents. Open and shut case in my opinion - he was riding illegally on a bike too big for him and was riding it recklessly.
Oh but the chain was difficult to see, ah, then he's clearly blameless, and his parents shouldn't be strung up for allowing their boy to endanger himself and others in a public place.
It makes me sick. Then I see illiterate teenage mothers on the telly harping on about how it's a 'des-grays' that they don't get free hand outs, just because they can't keep their pikey legs closed for more than five minutes.
Also in the paper earlier this week - woman sues a funeral directors for suffering 'trauma' from dealing with dead bodies for 20 years. I'll run that by you again - twenty (20) years. Wouldn't you think that after say, ooooooh, 6 months, you might think "hmmmm, don't think this is for me" ... ? Nope, she obviously thought "This is horrible, I just don't think I can carry on. I'll carry on for another 19 years or so though, just to make sure."
Such claims should be a crime. A punishable, fine-able crime. Mister and Missus Tax Payer happily pay into the system, completely oblivious to the fact that (and this is also 100% true), a man who had a sex change has sued the health service because he had faulty advice. He claims that doctors should have talked him out of it.
That's fair enough though isn't it? The poor fella/woman/parasite, bless ...
Ah, the sweet sensation of boiling blood ...
The kid looked like he deserved to die anyway. One less tool in the world, but I think £90,000 is unfair. They should make the parents provide a new chain instead, one that isn't covered in idiot blood.
And pay to have his lame carcass dragged from the car park and heaved into a waiting bin lorry.
That's the damn least they could do.
That's the damn least they could do.
Bah. It's a shame to see a kid die in such a stupid way, but on the other hand, It's really effing annoying to see a kid die in such a stupid way.
Although I think you guys are a bit quick to jump to demanding his pikey body be fed to the pikey dogs and his parents punched in the mouth.
Although I think you guys are a bit quick to jump to demanding his pikey body be fed to the pikey dogs and his parents punched in the mouth.
I didn't say anything about any pikey dogs, but I like your ideas about his parents being punched in the mouth.
"Well, mister and missus Deadkid, here's your £90k. But before I give it to you, could you follow me to the UFC training room please."
"What does UFC mean?"
[B][I]**snap**
"Well, mister and missus Deadkid, here's your £90k. But before I give it to you, could you follow me to the UFC training room please."
"What does UFC mean?"
[B][I]**snap**
The chain rode up his arm and removed the helmet...
What?
What?
Like you said, it was a "private car park"
You know you're allowed to drive a car/motorbike without a license at any age (even 4 years old if you know how) on private property - even if it's not YOUR private property.
This means that you can take a car into Tesco's local car park and drive it around all day if you don't have a license as it's private land.
He wasn't breaking any laws at all - and couldn't have damaged any cars, as the article states that it was an "empty" car park.
Maybe the parents could be faulted by allowing him to do so, but the article says he was an experienced rider (maybe he competed in dirtbike competitions or something from the age of 8, you know those kind of people I mean), so why would they have any reason not to let him if it's not against the law?
You know you're allowed to drive a car/motorbike without a license at any age (even 4 years old if you know how) on private property - even if it's not YOUR private property.
This means that you can take a car into Tesco's local car park and drive it around all day if you don't have a license as it's private land.
He wasn't breaking any laws at all - and couldn't have damaged any cars, as the article states that it was an "empty" car park.
Maybe the parents could be faulted by allowing him to do so, but the article says he was an experienced rider (maybe he competed in dirtbike competitions or something from the age of 8, you know those kind of people I mean), so why would they have any reason not to let him if it's not against the law?
Although I do agree with the other two cases - wtf?
Yes but it sounds like that chain was across the entrance to the carpark, hence he must've been riding his bike thro the streets to get there...
munn wrote:
> You know you're allowed to drive a car/motorbike without a license at
> any age (even 4 years old if you know how) on private property - even
> if it's not YOUR private property.
It's fully legal, but letting a 14 year old lad loose on a concrete playground with a pretty powerful bike (Scooters/Mopeds are only 50cc, remember) is bound to cause trouble.
His parents were irresponsible to put it blunt, if he was an experienced rider, maybe they should of let him ride his bike in a controlled environment.
I read an article in the paper the other week about a Dad who purchased his son a motorbike (8 years old), can't remember the engine size, possibly 25cc, and he ploughed straight into the wall of a cricket pavillion and died.
> You know you're allowed to drive a car/motorbike without a license at
> any age (even 4 years old if you know how) on private property - even
> if it's not YOUR private property.
It's fully legal, but letting a 14 year old lad loose on a concrete playground with a pretty powerful bike (Scooters/Mopeds are only 50cc, remember) is bound to cause trouble.
His parents were irresponsible to put it blunt, if he was an experienced rider, maybe they should of let him ride his bike in a controlled environment.
I read an article in the paper the other week about a Dad who purchased his son a motorbike (8 years old), can't remember the engine size, possibly 25cc, and he ploughed straight into the wall of a cricket pavillion and died.
Page: