🚀 go-pugleaf

DiscoDuck <fornewsgroups@shaw.ca> wrote:
> LOL.  Interesting that when someone thinks I'm right-correction-KNOWS I
> am correct, You assume it's me.
> You make me laugh.  I guess you want to try and erode my credibilty by
> suggesting this.  Good luck with that.

IP address of posts in this thread made by DiscoDuck:  24.84.215.140
IP address of posts in this thread made by nickarama:  24.84.215.140

This isn't the first time this little "coincidence" has happened.

Two posts were made in this group on March 4th 2006.  One by DiscoDuck, 
one by nickarama.  The IP addresses again are the same; 24.84.192.47.  

There is more evidence; But the real, obvious kicker is that you posted 
from your nickarama account, and signed it DD.  Just look at the 
headers and the body.  

Here it is again, in case you missed it:

---begin quoted post with message headers---

|From: nickarama2005@yahoo.com
|Newsgroups: bc.cycling
|Subject: Re: Who pays more?
|Date: 7 Jun 2006 17:25:41 -0700
|Organization: http://groups.google.com
|Lines: 43
|Message-ID: <1149726341.251179.288020@j55g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
|
|[snip]
|
|NNTP-Posting-Host: 24.84.215.140
|
|[snip]
|
|Thanks Nick.
|I find it unbelievable that some people are bent on saying the two are
|same.
|The two are no more the same as skateboarders and rollerbladers.
|DD

---end quoted post---

If that's not proof that nickarama and DiscoDuck are the same person, 
then I don't know what is.

> Just come out and admit (at the very least) you were mistaken.  That
> indeed the two have different rights and obligations AND there are
> other differences.

The MVA says they are the same.  DiscoDuck says they aren't.  The MVA 
prevails.  It's right there in black and white.  You can argue and 
disagree all you want but it doesn't change the law.

> That the law you quoted pertained to highways only. You were wrong.

Highways is what we were talking about.  We weren't talking about riding 
in your backyard or on mountain trails.  We were talking obligations 
and rights about riding bikes vs. those of driving cars.  Pretty much the 
only place where you'll find both riding together are on highways.

> Or do I have to come up with examples too?  I got one immediately off
> the top of my head.
> OK, here it goes (since I know you'll not admit you were wrong).
> Cars by law are required to have insurance.  Cyclists are not.
> Want more?

Insurance is a legal requirement of operating a motor vehicle in a public 
highway, yes.  So it a helmet for a cyclist.  Heavy trucks are also 
subject to additional exterior lighting requirements that are required of 
neither cars nor bikes.

But neither the car insurance, nor the helmet, nor the truck lighting make 
any difference on how the vehicle is to be driven/operated on highways, 
which is what we were talking about, and to what the "same rights and 
obligatins" refers.

K.