Road rager v. cyclist on camera

[[email protected]]

John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
> It's the right thing to do. We shouldnt' stand by and let **** like
> that slide. I'm not saying people should risk their safety to do it,
> but I admire people who do it and am proud when I do it.

I confess an admiration for these people as well and certainly don't
think we should cede all facets of society to the hooligans. I know I
am being naive, but I really wish there was another answer besides what
seem to be increasingly violent confrontations. Heaven forbid if
someone had been killed or seriously injured over what started out as
"littering".

 

[[email protected]]

Neil Brooks wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>
> >Robin Hubert wrote:
> >
> >> > Don't hit girls.
> >>
> >> Unless they hit you ....
> >
> >
> >No, not even then. Maybe if she
> >came at you with some sort of knife
> >or something, or if she was some
> >deadly martial artist a la kill bill.
>
> If Uma Thurman ever comes at /me/, I will do everything in my power to
> diffuse that adrenaline-fueled rage, converting it instead to
> unbridled passion and ....

Ever seen Dangerous Liaisons? They should
rename that Dangerous Gazongas.

Apologies. Seriously, though.

R

 

[G.T.]

"Matt O'Toole" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
> On Wed, 01 Feb 2006 17:03:33 +0000, Ted Bennett wrote:
>
> > Matt O'Toole <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> I saw a fistfight erupt over a tossed cigarette, between two people who
> >> should definitely know better. The ******, someone I actually know, is
> >> a high end corporate health insurance rep. The ******-back, owner of a
> >> multi-million dollar home, who happened to be out getting his morning
> >> paper when the cigarette was tossed. What's with these people?
> >
> >
> > How would the size of someone's home indicate that he should "know
> > better"?
>
> It's not a large home, just an expensive one.
>
> Most people of such means have careers that demand well-developed social
> skills. Of course there are exceptions, but I'm confident that in
> general, high incomes correlate with IQ and EQ on the high side of the
> bell curve.
>
> This isn't a new concept. My grandparents' generation and those before
> made distinctions between "gentlemen/gentlewomen" and the rest of the
> rabble.
>
> Miss Manners would probably agree that tossing a cigarette back at someone
> is ungentlemanly, but getting out of one's car to assault someone who
> did this is much, much worse.
>
> Note:
>
> Littering = infraction, like a parking ticket
> Assault = misdemeanor or felony
>

arson = major felony

Greg

 

[Johnny Sunset]

G.T. wrote:
>
> Considering how many brush fires are caused by lit cigarettes I don't see
> anything wrong with the home owner's actions.

The filthy habit of using the world as an ashtray also leads to more
flats for cyclists according to J. Brandt.

"In summer flats are caused by puncture vine thorns, a plant that grows
only on barren soil. There isn't much of that around except peculiarly
on roadsides that have been sprayed to prevent grass from growing,
grass that when dry presents a fire hazard for cigarettes discarded
from cars. Puncture vine grows on these barren roadsides that have been
created for safer cigarette disposal. If roadsides were not sprayed,
puncture vine would be a rare occurrence along roads where bicyclists
most often ride." [1]

There should be a mandatory deposit put on cigarettes, to make the
habit of littering a very expensive one.

[1] <http://sheldonbrown.com/brandt/thorns.html>.

--
Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley

 

[Johnny Sunset]

[email protected] wrote:
> bernmart wrote:
> > Tossing food through somebody's window is an uncool
> > thing to do, whether the litterer goes over the edge or not.
>
> Yes. This aspect of it makes it difficult for me to be fully
> sympathetic to the courier. No matter how I try and rationalize her
> actions I just can't convince myself that what she did was something
> that we, as civilized society, should condone....

The driver had no problems with fouling the commons, so having his car
fouled with his own refuse is just deserts.

--
Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley

 

[[email protected]]

Johnny Sunset wrote:

> The driver had no problems with fouling the commons, so having his car
> fouled with his own refuse is just deserts.

I understand this sentiment but where does it end? After she "returned"
his trash to him the situation stopped being about his idiotic behavior
and it devolved into retalitory acts of violence between strangers. I
suppose it is fortunate that the situation didn't actually escalate
further. What if that motorist had ready access to a hand gun or some
other type of weapon-of-no-return?

I still think that the prudent thing for the courier to do would have
been to let the guy know that she disapproved of his actions without
getting confrontational. Yes, chances are that if he is brazen enough
to litter like that then he is not going to be phased one iota by a
mild public berating. Yet neither will he suddenly become enlightened
by any sort of confrontation. So, what have you gained? However, on
the off-chance the you are dealing with a usually-rational person who
just happened to have a brain-cramp that day, then perhaps your
admonishment will simply serve as a reminder to him/her that other
people live in the world too.

 

[Johnny Sunset]

[email protected] wrote:
> Johnny Sunset wrote:
>
> > The driver had no problems with fouling the commons, so having his car
> > fouled with his own refuse is just deserts.
>
> I understand this sentiment but where does it end? After she "returned"
> his trash to him the situation stopped being about his idiotic behavior
> and it devolved into retalitory acts of violence between strangers. I
> suppose it is fortunate that the situation didn't actually escalate
> further....

If the cyclist had instead been a large person highly skilled in hand
to hand combat, I wouldn't have lost any sleep over the outcome.

Having someone pick up your garbage is not excuse for violence.

--
Tom Sherman - Fox River Valley

 

[Ted Bennett]

"Johnny Sunset" <[email protected]> wrote:

> [email protected] wrote:
> > bernmart wrote:
> > > Tossing food through somebody's window is an uncool
> > > thing to do, whether the litterer goes over the edge or not.
> >
> > Yes. This aspect of it makes it difficult for me to be fully
> > sympathetic to the courier. No matter how I try and rationalize her
> > actions I just can't convince myself that what she did was something
> > that we, as civilized society, should condone....
>
> The driver had no problems with fouling the commons, so having his car
> fouled with his own refuse is just deserts.

That caused a double take.

[pause]

But then I realized you meant "just desserts".

Glad to be of service to the group.

--
Ted Bennett

 

[Michael Press]

In article
<[email protected]>,
"Johnny Sunset" <[email protected]> wrote:

> [email protected] wrote:
> > bernmart wrote:
> > > Tossing food through somebody's window is an uncool
> > > thing to do, whether the litterer goes over the edge or not.
> >
> > Yes. This aspect of it makes it difficult for me to be fully
> > sympathetic to the courier. No matter how I try and rationalize her
> > actions I just can't convince myself that what she did was something
> > that we, as civilized society, should condone....
>
> The driver had no problems with fouling the commons, so having his car
> fouled with his own refuse is just deserts.

By responding in kind to behavior we profess to disapprove
of we demonstrate that we approve of the behavior.

I am reminded of the scene in Miller's Crossing where
Tom Reagan is sleeping it off in the office of the club.

Tad: Wake up, Tom.
Tom Reagan: I am awake.
Tad: Your eyes are shut.
Tom Reagan: Who you gonna believe?

--
Michael Press

 

[Michael Press]

In article
<[email protected]>
,
Ted Bennett <[email protected]> wrote:

> "Johnny Sunset" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > [email protected] wrote:
> > > bernmart wrote:
> > > > Tossing food through somebody's window is an uncool
> > > > thing to do, whether the litterer goes over the edge or not.
> > >
> > > Yes. This aspect of it makes it difficult for me to be fully
> > > sympathetic to the courier. No matter how I try and rationalize her
> > > actions I just can't convince myself that what she did was something
> > > that we, as civilized society, should condone....
> >
> > The driver had no problems with fouling the commons, so having his car
> > fouled with his own refuse is just deserts.
>
> That caused a double take.
>
> [pause]
>
> But then I realized you meant "just desserts".
>
> Glad to be of service to the group.

Did you catch the instance of `phased' being used where
`fazed' should have been?

Set fazers on smack down.

--
Michael Press

 

[Luke]

In article <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]> wrote:

> I think we need to carefully distinguish between three scenarios:
>
> 1) The scenario where the victim volunteers that she is not interested
> in pressing charges, or will not cooperate with an attempt to do so.
>

<snip>

> The situation in this thread is an example of #3. Given the photos,
> the witnesses, and the physical differences between the combatants, the
> cops' approach seems extremely inappropriate. "I was beating her up
> and she scratched my car" just doesn't get any sympathy from me. "She
> scratched my car so I was beating her up" doesn't, either.
>
> Even if she intentionally scratched the car and precipitated his rage
> (very unlikely, ISTM) her act would be impossible to prove deliberate,
> thus impossible to convict. I think it should have been absolutely
> ignored by the cops on that basis alone. They _certainly_ should not
> have used it to dissuade her from pressing charges.
>
> - Frank Krygowski

Good argument, you've given me cause to reconsider. Although, there's
one aspect of your reasoning that doesn't sit well with me: that's the
notion that the prospect of a minor charge[1] had a coercive effect in
the woman dropping the matter. I think you're overstating its
significance.

And though I concede the charge of scratching of the car probably
should've been dismissed directly by the cops, thankfully one cannot
expect to embark on the course of justice on one's own terms; at times
the vagaries of its enforcers must be suffered before justice will
emerge via the court.

Another musing: We're all Monday morning QBs here. We have the benefit
of images and distance to determine the affair at leisure. Wouldn't it
be unfair to regard the photos as a rebuke of the officers' handling of
the situation if they were not privy to them at the time of
intercession? Perhaps contradictory statements and general confusion
were all they had to go on at the time.

Luke


1.
North of the border, the penalty for mischief is a fine at worst, most
likely the court would've thrown it out.

 

[Dave Larrington]

In article <[email protected]>,
Johnny Sunset ([email protected]) wrote:

> The filthy habit of using the world as an ashtray also leads to more
> flats for cyclists according to J. Brandt.
>
> "In summer flats are caused by puncture vine thorns, a plant that grows
> only on barren soil.

I should be interested to learn where the punctures I get all year round
in central London come from...

--
Dave Larrington - <http://www.legslarry.beerdrinkers.co.uk/>
It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for
Gary Busey to pass through the eye of a camel.

 

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On 1 Feb 2006 19:13:12 -0800, [email protected] wrote:

>
>Johnny Sunset wrote:
>
>> The driver had no problems with fouling the commons, so having his car
>> fouled with his own refuse is just deserts.
>
>I understand this sentiment but where does it end? After she "returned"
>his trash to him the situation stopped being about his idiotic behavior
>and it devolved into retalitory acts of violence between strangers. I
>suppose it is fortunate that the situation didn't actually escalate
>further. What if that motorist had ready access to a hand gun or some
>other type of weapon-of-no-return?

So the pedestrian putting hersef in danger for the public good is
something we should criticize, rather than someone retaliating with a
gun? I don't understand that and I don't accept it.

>to litter like that then he is not going to be phased one iota by a
>mild public berating.

Maybe. That's why I wish more people did stuff like that pedestrian
did -- so it is actually a likely outcome of littering.

BTW, returning people's litter probably works a little better when
they are with friends or other people so their jackassery can be
demonstrated more strongly and maybe they'll think about it a bit
more.

JT


****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

 

[John Forrest Tomlinson]

On Thu, 02 Feb 2006 02:08:24 -0500, Luke <[email protected]>
wrote:
: that's the
>notion that the prospect of a minor charge[1] had a coercive effect in
>the woman dropping the matter. I think you're overstating its
>significance.

I think the effect is very high, esp. on someone working for
presumably not a lot of money.

>
>And though I concede the charge of scratching of the car probably
>should've been dismissed directly by the cops, thankfully one cannot
>expect to embark on the course of justice on one's own terms; at times
>the vagaries of its enforcers must be suffered before justice will
>emerge via the court.

Where I live, cops let things go all the time. Constantly. I'm not
saying it's right or wrong, but it's clear that they have a lot of
choice in what to proceed with and what to ignore.

JT


****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************

 

[Jay Beattie]

"John Forrest Tomlinson" <[email protected]> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
> On 1 Feb 2006 19:13:12 -0800, [email protected] wrote:

<snip>

> BTW, returning people's litter probably works a little better
when
> they are with friends or other people so their jackassery can
be
> demonstrated more strongly and maybe they'll think about it a
bit
> more.

Yah, and then you can get beat up by a whole car load of trailer
trash. -- Jay Beattie.

 

[Steve G.]

Maybe that driver will run a cyclist off of the road in retaliation. Thanks
for spreading the goodwill !
"Luke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:300120061354577779%[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Strayhorn wrote:
> > > A sad tale:
> > >
> > > http://spacing.ca/wire/?p=491
> > >
> > > Summary: Driver throws litter out window. Cyclist throws it back in.
> > > Fight ensues which is caught on camera.
> > >
> > > --
> > > Strayhorn
> > >
> > > ³Excuse me, brother, who you jivin' with that cosmik debris?" - F.Z.
> >
> > On 3 different occasions I have thrown litter back into someone's car.
> > Only once was I on my bike, the other times I was a pedestrian. I am
> > 6'3" 220 pounds so most confrontations are just a matter of yelling and
> > puffy posturing. The guy who got a half filled McDonalds milkshake
> > tossed through his window was not a happy camper.
> >
>
>
> This echoes an episode between a litterer and myself - though in this
> case the milkshake was from Burger King. A pair of youths DWE (driving
> while eating), were disposing of their meal's packaging as they
> polished off their fare. Hamburger wraps, French fry containers,
> cutlery, I saw it all go out window by turns as we leap frogged each
> other through congested city traffic.
>
> After retrieving the half-full milkshake the fellow in the passenger
> seat had ejected, I caught the offenders as they waited at a stoplight,
> and tossed it into the lap of its rightful owner. His lap turned a
> sloppy shade of chocolate as he turned the air blue with his
> imprecations. Coward that I am, I avoided a confrontation by a quick
> U-turn and a retreat down an alley.
>
> Luke
>
> Luke