"fvck Off"

arybvtcw0eolkf

Almost forgot to relate this one to the board.

I was sitting at traffic lights yesterday evening in Clontarf, waiting for the filter light to take me onto the Alfie Byrne road (just painting the picture).

I looked to my left at the traffic stopped there, and waiting beside me was a respectable looking woman (I purposely won't call her a lady) in her late 20's, driving a nice Merc. She smiled over to me ( this happens to me all the time ) and I smile back, but noticed her young child standing between the back and front seats.

Now I wouldn't be a smart arse with anyone, but I just pointed to the baby and said "Your going to kill her child" ... "WHAT" ... "your going to kill that child, he should be strapped in" ... "FVCK OFF AND MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS"... was the reply, flipped me the middle finger and fvcked off up the road!.

What a wagon.
__________________

Huggles

Stupid Bitch tbh. Fair play for saying something Mairt.

Mairt wrote:

Almost forgot to relate this one to the board.

I was sitting at traffic lights yesterday evening in Clontarf, waiting for the filter light to take me onto the Alfie Byrne road (just painting the picture).

I looked to my left at the traffic stopped there, and waiting beside me was a respectable looking woman (I purposely won't call her a lady) in her late 20's, driving a nice Merc. She smiled over to me ( this happens to me all the time ) and I smile back, but noticed her young child standing between the back and front seats.

Now I wouldn't be a smart arse with anyone, but I just pointed to the baby and said "Your going to kill her child" ... "WHAT" ... "your going to kill that child, he should be strapped in" ... "FVCK OFF AND MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS"... was the reply, flipped me the middle finger and fvcked off up the road!.

What a wagon.
__________________

tallus

The Dozy bint doesn't deserve kids. I wouldn't even put a cat into a car without restraining it in some way.

JohnnyStones

tallus wrote:

The Dozy bint doesn't deserve kids. I wouldn't even put a cat into a car without restraining it in some way.

your right i always put my cat in the boot;)

Jigsaw

JohnnyStones wrote:

your right i always put my cat in the boot;)

Do you take the corners at high speed?

GerryRyan

mmh, very insightful thread (I'm stuck in college waiting for the next bus )

AlmightyCushion

In fairness you were a bit blunt about. You'd be pretty pissed off too if someone told you that you are going to kill your child.

humbert

The poor woman was obviously overwhelmed with desire and your well meaning suggestion that she was going to kill her kid cut her to the quick.

DonJose

Mairt wrote:

beside me was a respectable looking woman (I purposely won't call her a lady) in her late 20's, driving a nice Merc. She smiled over to me ( this happens to me all the time ) and I smile back

Ouch, how fast situations change. Instead of getting laid, you got fingered.

Jesus Wept

Mairt wrote:

She smiled over to me ( this happens to me all the time ) and I smile back, but noticed her young child standing between the back and front seats.

lol. fúcker.

Jesus Wept

|Cookies wrote:

Her child, not yours. Mind your own business.

Yeah, that makes perfect sense.

It's her child, if she wants to put the child's life in danger, that's her right. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

indough

|Cookies wrote:

Her child, not yours. Mind your own business.

While it may have been a bit of an abrupt way to put it (although in those circumstances there wasn't much time for subtlety), I think it's responsible to point things like that out. The child's safety was obviously in potential danger in that situation, and it may not be the first time that it had happened.

Aoife9

if she had a waterford crystal vase in the back I'll bet she'd make sure it was safe:(

spurious

|Cookies wrote:

Her child, not yours. Mind your own business.

Unless it's you or yours it hits as it sails out the windscreen at 30/40 miles an hour should she have a collision.

WindSock

How many of us were strapped in as children?

Pighead

There was no child was there Mairt?
There was no initial smile from her to you, was there Mairt?

You were leering at her weren't you Mairt?
You had drool dribbling down your chin and you done that gesture that hornbags do to indicate a lady has a fine rack on her. You were in caveman mode and she didn't appreciate it did she Mairt?

Only then did she tell you to fvck off. Pigheads right isn't he Mairt?

MooseJam

you shoulda called the guards on her

DeVore

boreds wrote:

How many of us were strapped in as children?

Yes, hands up all those who didn't die in road accidents!

You should google the Anthropic Principle if you still don't understand why thats a logical fallacy

DeV.

humbert

DeVore wrote:

Yes, hands up all those who didn't die in road accidents!

You should google the Anthropic Principle if you still don't understand why thats a logical fallacy

DeV.

Wouldn't that be more applicable if he/she were asking who wasn't strapped in. Not that it's of any consequence, the kid would have been better off wearing a seatbelt.

c0rk3r

DeVore wrote:

You should google the Anthropic Principle
DeV.

I really wish i hadnt. Chemistry is what the universe is about. pfft physic. pfft i say!

eoin5

|Cookies wrote:

Her child, not yours. Mind your own business.

This kind of connundrum happens in work to me sometimes. I think I know the happy medium. If the parent isnt watching the child and the child is putting him/herself in obvious danger then you tell the parent. If the parent is watching the kid and the kid is in obvious danger a firm accusing glance will generally do the trick. If the kid is in immediate danger (ie. young kid picks up something small enough to fit in the mouth but big enough to choke on) then try to help directly no matter what the consequences.

Dyr

DeVore wrote:

Yes, hands up all those who didn't die in road accidents!

You should google the Anthropic Principle if you still don't understand why thats a logical fallacy

DeV.

*googles "logical fallacy" *

bronte

I remember years ago on holidays,my dad witnessed a lady slapping her little girl full force across the face for getting ice cream on the lady's jacket.
He stepped in and told her it was way out of line, and he got a bollocking himself. :rolleyes:
It's hard to know what to do sometimes.

WindSock

DeVore wrote:

Yes, hands up all those who didn't die in road accidents!

You should google the Anthropic Principle if you still don't understand why thats a logical fallacy

DeV.

And so I did. That Rupert Scopwick must have been some guy! lived to be about 635 he did.

Unpossible

What Mairt said (or should that be mouthed, as I guess the windows were up):
"Your going to kill your child"
What she understood:
"I'm going to kill your child"

Mairt: "He is not strapped in"
her understanding: "I will do him in"

Poor woman was probably scared s**tless

Jigsaw

I'm more head in the sand than this. If I'd seen this I would have of course disapproved but I don't reckon I would've been roaring at someone at the traffic lights.

OP's motives were 100% sound though and I could not criticise him at all.

6ix

"You're going to kill your child"?

I hope you're not that blunt in everything you say. Of course the parent was wrong not to have the child strapped in, but surely you could have worded it better. If someone spoke to me in such a condescending tone, I certainly wouldn't respond well.

BanzaiBk

Unpossible wrote:

What Mairt said (or should that be mouthed, as I guess the windows were up):
"Your going to kill your child"
What she understood:
"I'm going to kill your child"

Mairt: "He is not strapped in"
her understanding: "I will do him in"

Poor woman was probably scared s**tless

I see this carry on all the time, I agree with the poster who said if she had a crystal vase in the backseat she'd make sure it was secure. Sad but true:rolleyes:

star-pants

Doesn't surprise me... seems some people don't care about strapping in their kids.

Example: driving down.. Kylemore road (?) towards ballyfermot - after the Shelbourne hotel along there, just before the bridge, waiting to go straight and a big white Hiace comes from the left turning towards me and the guy has a BABY ... maybe 12-18mths on his LAP... one arm round the child, one on the steering wheel. WTF like? .. one crash and that childs crushed... how did he intend changing gear? let go of the wheel or the baby? AND there was someone in the passenger seat too... I just sat in shock going.. "is that for real?" :eek:

Terry

Unpossible wrote:

What Mairt said (or should that be mouthed, as I guess the windows were up):
"Your going to kill your child"
What she understood:
"I'm going to kill your child"

Mairt: "He is not strapped in"
her understanding: "I will do him in"

Poor woman was probably scared s**tless

"I'm going to do your child"
I have a strap-on".

boreds

boreds wrote:

How many of us were strapped in as children?

Well, when I was growing up, cars didn't even have belts in the front let alone the back.

Did see one kid at school with scars after leaving the car @30mph via the windscreen.

cazzy

boreds wrote:

How many of us were strapped in as children?

back in the day cars didnt have back seat belts and noone used the belts in the front. Nowadays Ive got so used to a seat belt that I'd feel naked without it. Noone wore seat belts in Galway in the 80's. It was unheard of. But then I guess there was a lot less cars on the road. O k Im rambling now.


Still theres no excuse for rudeness - maybe though you shud have been a bit more tactical in telling her off. At least you did your part.

Unpossible

julep wrote:

"I'm going to do your child"
I have a strap-on".

I didnt want to go that far, thought I might get banned

Terry

Unpossible wrote:

I didnt want to go that far, thought I might get banned

No rule against satire.

























Unless I make one up in order to ban you.

eoin5

6ix wrote:

"You're going to kill your child"?

I hope you're not that blunt in everything you say. Of course the parent was wrong not to have the child strapped in, but surely you could have worded it better. If someone spoke to me in such a condescending tone, I certainly wouldn't respond well.

Condescending tone vs childs life. Round one... fight!

Where does the responsibility of tact fall exactly?

Unpossible

now I don't know whether or not to keep pushing on the julep thing

Capt'n Midnight

in the olden days cars did not have seat belts

in the olden days
* pre scrappage the Average car was 8 years old, with company cars pushing the average down
* car wern't as fast
* drivers did not go as fast, no ABS , worse brakes

One person in my class in primary and in secondary died on the roads as did a person in a cycling club I was in.

Then again our roads would be a lot safer if passengers used belts and the drivers air bag was replaced with a harpoon.

And our motorway stats are freaky, in most other countries motorways are FAR safer than ordinary roads, here they are only a bit safer.

Reku

Just shows that you don't need to be poor to be a bit of a selfcentred scumbag...
Just keep reminding yourself OP that she'll be off the roads in no time (or at least she would if the Gardai* would get the finger out) since a passanger not using their seatbelt = points on your licence.

As for how many of us were strapped in as kids:
1. Many cars did not have rear passenger seatbelts.
2. It was not legally required
3. People drove less then, now people won't even walk 5 minutes to the shop if they have a car.
4. Fewer people had cars in the pre-celtic tiger days (possibly part of the reason for point 3), less cars on the road = less chance of a collision.







*can't do fadas thanks to the new boards software!

Hagar

Press down and hold the "Alt Gr" key, right of space bar, while typing your letter áéíóú ÁÉÍÓÚ.

Reku

Doesn't work for me, just results in italics tags. Worked fine last week so the boards software change is all I can put it down to.
áé(italics tag)ó(underline tag)

But that wouldn't explain why you're not getting the same problem...

Unpossible

Many cars did not have rear passenger seatbelts.

How long ago was this? A couple of posters have mentioned this yet I can never remember any of my family's cars not having seatbelts (and my parents always made us wear them).
In some countries I've been in its seen as an insult to the driver to wear a seat belt (Russia and China), I told them it was the other drivers I didn't trust

Hagar

Very good chart near the bottom of the link.

dade

Unpossible wrote: »

How long ago was this? A couple of posters have mentioned this yet I can never remember any of my family's cars not having seatbelts

Late 80s i think, i only became mandatory for all cars in this country to have belts fitted then but i don't know if it was mandatory to wear them. I believe it was a case of wear them if you've got them. but you couldn't be done if the car was not fitted with them or something like that

SpitfireIV

JohnnyStones wrote: »

your right i always put my cat in the boot;)

I can remember going places in my aunts car, a mid 80's fiesta, and me and my brother had to sit in the boot on them 'lumps' over the back wheel as the back seat would be full! we used to make faces at the cars behind us and write notes and stick them on the window to distract the driver or get him/her to flash the lights....

That was about 12 or 13 years back, sure what need had we for seatbelts or safety then?

Unpossible

dade wrote:

Late 80s i think, i only became mandatory for all cars in this country to have belts fitted then but i don't know if it was mandatory to wear them.

Come to think of it, at least one of the seatbelts was home made (my gran was able to make them from the right material), my parents were pretty insistant on the seatbelt thing so I guess they made sure we always had them.

Latchy

Quote Forfar Just shows that you don't need to be poor to be a bit of a selfcentred scumbag

So understated , i can picture this em lady sitting over her morning cofee moaning about how the countrys gone to the dogs lol .Bad manners and road etiquette still abound quite a lot .

John Mason

Mairt, you done the right thing, fair play to you.

I was sitting in traffic in between Croke Park and Jurys Hotel one morning. The car in front of me had a a young child not strapped in, in fact she has hanging out the window. Now unbeknowest to myself, there was an unmarked police car behind me, they drive up read the woman the riot act and made her get out of the car and strap the screaming child in.

these parents should have their licences revoked and be heavily fined, this is child abuse - god damit

Nuttzz

childern are over rated....

biko

Terry wrote: »

"I'm going to do your child"
I have a strap-on".

First LOL of the day. Thanks mate

MOH

DeVore wrote: »

Yes, hands up all those who didn't die in road accidents!

You should google the Anthropic Principle if you still don't understand why thats a logical fallacy

DeV.

I did, and got confused. Then depressed because I was confused. But then I felt better after I read:
"The anthropic principle has led to more than a little confusion and controversy, partly because several distinct ideas carry this label"


Anyway, the obvious explanation is that the woman actually was on her way to a secluded location to kill her child, and panicked when the OP rumbled her.

WindSock

farohar wrote: »

2. It was not legally required

So only now that it has become a legal requirement, it is suddenly disgusting child abuse to not strap them in, whereas it was not as dangerous when there was no law for it?