[ First Message Last
| Table of Contents
| <- Digest ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
------------------------------
[ Message 1 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 970603 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 07:10:49 +0100
From: alan kind <alan@highwayman.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Interesting precedent...
In message <memo.45441@cix.compulink.co.uk>, Michael Dyer
><< The rule about bona fide journeys is ignored by the government when
>there is a heavy snowfall, or a storm that blows trees down. Then they
[ truncated by list-digester (was 14 lines)]
>:-) Mick Dyer
>From Alan Kind:
Very good point indeed. There's a strong parallel in some of the traffic
regulation legislation. There are powers to prohibit traffic to allow
children to play in streets; or for street parties. Neither are bona
fide passing and repassing by a million miles.
I once put this to the DoE when the argument was raging, yet again,
about what you can/can't do on a right of way (e.g. camping). The very
woolly answer was that "roads" are somehow different! Bollocks!
--
Alan kind
------------------------------
[ <- Message 2 -> end
| Table of Contents | <- Digest 970603 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]
END OF * LIST DIGEST
Input: messages 1 lines 42 [forwarded 14 whitespace 6]
Output: lines 71 [content 23 forwarded 4 (cut 10) whitespace 2]
[ First Message
| Table of Contents
| <- Digest 970603 ->
| Search
Archive Index
| <-
Browser ->
]