F
John Forrest Tomlinson wrote:
>
>
> Wow, I agree with Frank....
Hey, somebody write this down! ;-)
- Frank Krygowski
>
>
> Wow, I agree with Frank....
Hey, somebody write this down! ;-)
- Frank Krygowski
F
Callistus Valerius wrote:
> This whole
> discussion seems out of place here, when you see on some of the most popular
> bike roads, littered with empty and full gu gel remains. I admit, I toss
> them too.
Good grief! Why? Too heavy to carry?
- Frank Krygowski
> This whole
> discussion seems out of place here, when you see on some of the most popular
> bike roads, littered with empty and full gu gel remains. I admit, I toss
> them too.
Good grief! Why? Too heavy to carry?
- Frank Krygowski
R
Robin Hubert
Guest
[email protected] wrote:
> Mike Reed wrote:
>
>>Yeah, moving on is the way to handle it. Many years ago, I had an RTD
>>driver nearly kill me as he blatently ran a light in Downtown Denver. I
>>turned right to follow him to his next stop. I parked my bike on the
>>curb, got on the bus, pulled the keys out, exited, and threw the keys
>>into some nearby shrubs. Then I got on my bike and went the other way
>>down the sidewalk.
>
>
> I must say, I like it.
>
> But, I think that's some sort of federal
> offense now, stepping onto a bus to
> confront the driver. I once served a
> half eaten burrito through the driver's
> window of an RTD. He deserved it,
> believe me.
>
> BTW, the proper way to address
> issues with RTD drivers is to get the
> number of the bus, take note of the
> exact time and location of the incident
> and report it to RTD. They have been
> very responsive to cyclist complaints.
>
> Also, people should note that the
> messenger in question in this photo
> series is a woman. Both escalated
> the confrontation but then the dude
> gets out and apparently starts inflicting
> physical violence on this female, and
> on her bicycle, at which point passers-
> by come to her aid.
>
> Don't hit girls.
Unless they hit you ....
> Robert
>
Robin
> Mike Reed wrote:
>
>>Yeah, moving on is the way to handle it. Many years ago, I had an RTD
>>driver nearly kill me as he blatently ran a light in Downtown Denver. I
>>turned right to follow him to his next stop. I parked my bike on the
>>curb, got on the bus, pulled the keys out, exited, and threw the keys
>>into some nearby shrubs. Then I got on my bike and went the other way
>>down the sidewalk.
>
>
> I must say, I like it.
>
> But, I think that's some sort of federal
> offense now, stepping onto a bus to
> confront the driver. I once served a
> half eaten burrito through the driver's
> window of an RTD. He deserved it,
> believe me.
>
> BTW, the proper way to address
> issues with RTD drivers is to get the
> number of the bus, take note of the
> exact time and location of the incident
> and report it to RTD. They have been
> very responsive to cyclist complaints.
>
> Also, people should note that the
> messenger in question in this photo
> series is a woman. Both escalated
> the confrontation but then the dude
> gets out and apparently starts inflicting
> physical violence on this female, and
> on her bicycle, at which point passers-
> by come to her aid.
>
> Don't hit girls.
Unless they hit you ....
> Robert
>
Robin
J
john
Guest
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.
I thought about it for a while. Neither is correct nor is either
totally wrong. Clearly the motorist did the most & worst things, but
the courier is no angel either. The Police were very wrong to make the
woman press charges against the motorist.
Then it dawned on me. The cops should have charged them both. Her w/
opening his door, "relittering" & scratching his car. Then they should
have charged him w/ mayhem, battery, littering or whatever he actually
did. They should be charged w/ one count of exactly each thing they did
wrong. Not this absurd B.S., that the cops do all the time, of charging
someone w/ five charges describing the same offence. That way they
would each carry the weight of their respective wrongdoings.
Please excuse me, but obviously I don't know cop speak for the proper
terms to describe their offences. I can only use general terms for what
happened.
Perhaps the most telling / chilling part of this incident is the
police's attitude toward bicyclists, and women. Having lived in
Vancouver for a year while on an assignment, I've held a picture of
Canada being a more enlightened place that the USA. That a major city
anyplace would allow the police to get away w/ this type of prejudice
is disheartening, but particularly in Canada. Of course any country
that would elect Dubba twice doesn't push any other country (even Iraq)
hard for greater enlightenment title.
I also wonder what happened prior to his throwing the litter?
John
http://spacing.ca/wire/?p=491
Summary: Driver throws litter out window. Cyclist throws it back in.
Fight ensues which is caught on camera.
I thought about it for a while. Neither is correct nor is either
totally wrong. Clearly the motorist did the most & worst things, but
the courier is no angel either. The Police were very wrong to make the
woman press charges against the motorist.
Then it dawned on me. The cops should have charged them both. Her w/
opening his door, "relittering" & scratching his car. Then they should
have charged him w/ mayhem, battery, littering or whatever he actually
did. They should be charged w/ one count of exactly each thing they did
wrong. Not this absurd B.S., that the cops do all the time, of charging
someone w/ five charges describing the same offence. That way they
would each carry the weight of their respective wrongdoings.
Please excuse me, but obviously I don't know cop speak for the proper
terms to describe their offences. I can only use general terms for what
happened.
Perhaps the most telling / chilling part of this incident is the
police's attitude toward bicyclists, and women. Having lived in
Vancouver for a year while on an assignment, I've held a picture of
Canada being a more enlightened place that the USA. That a major city
anyplace would allow the police to get away w/ this type of prejudice
is disheartening, but particularly in Canada. Of course any country
that would elect Dubba twice doesn't push any other country (even Iraq)
hard for greater enlightenment title.
I also wonder what happened prior to his throwing the litter?
John
S
Sorni
Guest
Callistus Valerius wrote:
> ...This whole discussion seems out of place here, when
> you see on some of the most popular bike roads, littered with empty
> and full gu gel remains. I admit, I toss them too.
You toss WHAT, too? Gu wrappers? WTF do you do that?!?
Bill "you always this dumb?" S.
> ...This whole discussion seems out of place here, when
> you see on some of the most popular bike roads, littered with empty
> and full gu gel remains. I admit, I toss them too.
You toss WHAT, too? Gu wrappers? WTF do you do that?!?
Bill "you always this dumb?" S.
J
john 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.
>
>
> I thought about it for a while. Neither is correct nor is either
> totally wrong. Clearly the motorist did the most & worst things, but
> the courier is no angel either. The Police were very wrong to make the
> woman press charges against the motorist.
>
> Then it dawned on me. The cops should have charged them both. Her w/
> opening his door, "relittering" & scratching his car. Then they should
> have charged him w/ mayhem, battery, littering or whatever he actually
> did. They should be charged w/ one count of exactly each thing they did
> wrong. Not this absurd B.S., that the cops do all the time, of charging
> someone w/ five charges describing the same offence. That way they
> would each carry the weight of their respective wrongdoings.
>
> Please excuse me, but obviously I don't know cop speak for the proper
> terms to describe their offences. I can only use general terms for what
> happened.
>
> Perhaps the most telling / chilling part of this incident is the
> police's attitude toward bicyclists, and women. Having lived in
> Vancouver for a year while on an assignment, I've held a picture of
> Canada being a more enlightened place that the USA. That a major city
> anyplace would allow the police to get away w/ this type of prejudice
> is disheartening, but particularly in Canada. Of course any country
> that would elect Dubba twice doesn't push any other country (even Iraq)
> hard for greater enlightenment title.
>
> I also wonder what happened prior to his throwing the litter?
>
> John
I wondered how long it was going to take before someone figured out
this was W's fault...
Joseph
> 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.
>
>
> I thought about it for a while. Neither is correct nor is either
> totally wrong. Clearly the motorist did the most & worst things, but
> the courier is no angel either. The Police were very wrong to make the
> woman press charges against the motorist.
>
> Then it dawned on me. The cops should have charged them both. Her w/
> opening his door, "relittering" & scratching his car. Then they should
> have charged him w/ mayhem, battery, littering or whatever he actually
> did. They should be charged w/ one count of exactly each thing they did
> wrong. Not this absurd B.S., that the cops do all the time, of charging
> someone w/ five charges describing the same offence. That way they
> would each carry the weight of their respective wrongdoings.
>
> Please excuse me, but obviously I don't know cop speak for the proper
> terms to describe their offences. I can only use general terms for what
> happened.
>
> Perhaps the most telling / chilling part of this incident is the
> police's attitude toward bicyclists, and women. Having lived in
> Vancouver for a year while on an assignment, I've held a picture of
> Canada being a more enlightened place that the USA. That a major city
> anyplace would allow the police to get away w/ this type of prejudice
> is disheartening, but particularly in Canada. Of course any country
> that would elect Dubba twice doesn't push any other country (even Iraq)
> hard for greater enlightenment title.
>
> I also wonder what happened prior to his throwing the litter?
>
> John
I wondered how long it was going to take before someone figured out
this was W's fault...
Joseph
J
John Forrest Tomlinson
Guest
On 31 Jan 2006 22:57:33 -0800, "john" <[email protected]> wrote:
The cops should have charged them both. Her w/
>opening his door,
Did she open it or just toss the thing through the window?
> "relittering"
She didn't do anything wrong with that one. It was his stuff and she
was returning it.
> & scratching his car.
_Maybe_ but if the scratch was as a consequence of the struggle that's
not her fault.
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
The cops should have charged them both. Her w/
>opening his door,
Did she open it or just toss the thing through the window?
> "relittering"
She didn't do anything wrong with that one. It was his stuff and she
was returning it.
> & scratching his car.
_Maybe_ but if the scratch was as a consequence of the struggle that's
not her fault.
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
L
Luke
Guest
In article <[email protected]>,
john <[email protected]> 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.
>
>
> I thought about it for a while. Neither is correct nor is either
> totally wrong. Clearly the motorist did the most & worst things, but
> the courier is no angel either. The Police were very wrong to make the
> woman press charges against the motorist.
>
That the two antagonists are identified as a courier and a motorist
focuses attention on an irrelevancy - even more so since the woman was
walking her bike at the time of the initial encounter and the male
actually drove off then ran back to resume hostilities. The source of
aggression was not rooted in a traffic mishap, but the consequence of
one (litterer) defiling a public space and another, taking offense,
returning the favour upon a private space (throwing a hamburger into
the litterer's car).
But I agree, both parties erred. Most likely, they both regret their
contribution to the fracas.
> Then it dawned on me. The cops should have charged them both. Her w/
> opening his door, "relittering" & scratching his car. Then they should
> have charged him w/ mayhem, battery, littering or whatever he actually
> did. They should be charged w/ one count of exactly each thing they did
> wrong. Not this absurd B.S., that the cops do all the time, of charging
> someone w/ five charges describing the same offence. That way they
> would each carry the weight of their respective wrongdoings.
>
> Please excuse me, but obviously I don't know cop speak for the proper
> terms to describe their offences. I can only use general terms for what
> happened.
You're too severe on the police. The woman was informed that if she
proceeded with charges against her assailant, then she would also be
charged with mischief (scratching the car). She *declined* to press the
matter, and everyone let it drop. But the police were prepared to go
ahead just as you thought proper.
I've been involved in accidents where the police have asked me outright
if I'd like to press charges against a motorist and have declined too.
There is nothing untoward here; often it makes more sense to just drop
the whole matter, letting those involved make their own amends or lick
their wounds.
>
> Perhaps the most telling / chilling part of this incident is the
> police's attitude toward bicyclists, and women. Having lived in
> Vancouver for a year while on an assignment, I've held a picture of
> Canada being a more enlightened place that the USA. That a major city
> anyplace would allow the police to get away w/ this type of prejudice
> is disheartening, but particularly in Canada.
<snip>
Your inferences from this episode are absurd. The police 'getting away
with this type of prejudice'?!!. Examine the case. After chasing down
the hamburger hurler and satisfying themselves to the facts of the
fracas they arrive at a conclusion quite similar to none other than
yourself: That both parties could be charged. That they should be
charged, however, is another matter; and contingent upon the will and
cooperation of the concerned parties. They don't want to, there's no
point. How would justice be served by pressing a case?
To my mind, more discretion of this sort - both by the parties involved
and police - would better serve everyone. The conclusion: Burger boy
learns about littering and courier babe learns that flinging food in
autos is only appreciated at drive thrus. Justice is served.
Luke
john <[email protected]> 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.
>
>
> I thought about it for a while. Neither is correct nor is either
> totally wrong. Clearly the motorist did the most & worst things, but
> the courier is no angel either. The Police were very wrong to make the
> woman press charges against the motorist.
>
That the two antagonists are identified as a courier and a motorist
focuses attention on an irrelevancy - even more so since the woman was
walking her bike at the time of the initial encounter and the male
actually drove off then ran back to resume hostilities. The source of
aggression was not rooted in a traffic mishap, but the consequence of
one (litterer) defiling a public space and another, taking offense,
returning the favour upon a private space (throwing a hamburger into
the litterer's car).
But I agree, both parties erred. Most likely, they both regret their
contribution to the fracas.
> Then it dawned on me. The cops should have charged them both. Her w/
> opening his door, "relittering" & scratching his car. Then they should
> have charged him w/ mayhem, battery, littering or whatever he actually
> did. They should be charged w/ one count of exactly each thing they did
> wrong. Not this absurd B.S., that the cops do all the time, of charging
> someone w/ five charges describing the same offence. That way they
> would each carry the weight of their respective wrongdoings.
>
> Please excuse me, but obviously I don't know cop speak for the proper
> terms to describe their offences. I can only use general terms for what
> happened.
You're too severe on the police. The woman was informed that if she
proceeded with charges against her assailant, then she would also be
charged with mischief (scratching the car). She *declined* to press the
matter, and everyone let it drop. But the police were prepared to go
ahead just as you thought proper.
I've been involved in accidents where the police have asked me outright
if I'd like to press charges against a motorist and have declined too.
There is nothing untoward here; often it makes more sense to just drop
the whole matter, letting those involved make their own amends or lick
their wounds.
>
> Perhaps the most telling / chilling part of this incident is the
> police's attitude toward bicyclists, and women. Having lived in
> Vancouver for a year while on an assignment, I've held a picture of
> Canada being a more enlightened place that the USA. That a major city
> anyplace would allow the police to get away w/ this type of prejudice
> is disheartening, but particularly in Canada.
<snip>
Your inferences from this episode are absurd. The police 'getting away
with this type of prejudice'?!!. Examine the case. After chasing down
the hamburger hurler and satisfying themselves to the facts of the
fracas they arrive at a conclusion quite similar to none other than
yourself: That both parties could be charged. That they should be
charged, however, is another matter; and contingent upon the will and
cooperation of the concerned parties. They don't want to, there's no
point. How would justice be served by pressing a case?
To my mind, more discretion of this sort - both by the parties involved
and police - would better serve everyone. The conclusion: Burger boy
learns about littering and courier babe learns that flinging food in
autos is only appreciated at drive thrus. Justice is served.
Luke
F
Luke wrote:
>
> You're too severe on the police. The woman was informed that if she
> proceeded with charges against her assailant, then she would also be
> charged with mischief (scratching the car).
If her account is true, that sounds like bad police work.
She said "He then lost it, and jumped out of his car and threw 2 large
Timmies at meand then grabbed me by my helmet and tried to toss me
around a bit.It was at that point that my bike lock key (that I wear on
a bracelet around my wrist) scratched his car."
So what happened? He threw her against his car and her bracelet
scratched paint, so _she_ should be charged? That makes no sense.
If he began tossing her around and she said "I'll show you!" and
deliberately scratched his paint - sorry, I'd think the cop should
never mention that. To me, it's a minor version of the burglar
breaking into a home, then suing the homeowner for defending his
property.
To me, if a yahoo does something illegal, he should receive negative
feedback, both from the legal system and the public. The cops
discouraged that from happening. They shouldn't have.
By the way, does anyone know the name of the yahoo in question? It's
great that his picture is so popular on the internet. I hope all his
potential girlfriends and potential employers see it and remember it.
- Frank Krygowski
>
> You're too severe on the police. The woman was informed that if she
> proceeded with charges against her assailant, then she would also be
> charged with mischief (scratching the car).
If her account is true, that sounds like bad police work.
She said "He then lost it, and jumped out of his car and threw 2 large
Timmies at meand then grabbed me by my helmet and tried to toss me
around a bit.It was at that point that my bike lock key (that I wear on
a bracelet around my wrist) scratched his car."
So what happened? He threw her against his car and her bracelet
scratched paint, so _she_ should be charged? That makes no sense.
If he began tossing her around and she said "I'll show you!" and
deliberately scratched his paint - sorry, I'd think the cop should
never mention that. To me, it's a minor version of the burglar
breaking into a home, then suing the homeowner for defending his
property.
To me, if a yahoo does something illegal, he should receive negative
feedback, both from the legal system and the public. The cops
discouraged that from happening. They shouldn't have.
By the way, does anyone know the name of the yahoo in question? It's
great that his picture is so popular on the internet. I hope all his
potential girlfriends and potential employers see it and remember it.
- Frank Krygowski
R
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.
It's lame when adult males hit women
or children.
Robert
> > 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.
It's lame when adult males hit women
or children.
Robert
T
Ted Bennett
Guest
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"?
--
Ted Bennett
> 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"?
--
Ted Bennett
N
Neil Brooks
Guest
[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 ....
--
Live simply so that others may simply live
>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 ....
--
Live simply so that others may simply live
R
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 old adage of two
wrongs not making a right never seemed more apt.
Was it really necessary for her to throw the litter back at him in
order to make her point? Why not just pick up his trash, say something
like: "Sir, that was disgraceful! As an adult you should know better!"
, throw the stuff away, and then ride off. Sure, this probably doesn't
make a dent but it also maybe it doesn't turn into WW III. The
motorist was a boorish moron that thought nothing of littering from his
car on a busy street. Does it really make sense to escalate things with
someone like that? What good can possibly come from provoking him?
Look at the damage that has resulted.
Digressing a bit: Isn't it odd how the behaviours and attitudes of
some people change dramatically when they are behind the wheel of a
car? For instance, do you think this guy would have littered like
that had he just been out walking? I 've heard some people say that
the "true nature" of a person gets revealed when they are in their
cars. Not sure I agree (or maybe I'm just in denial).
> 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 old adage of two
wrongs not making a right never seemed more apt.
Was it really necessary for her to throw the litter back at him in
order to make her point? Why not just pick up his trash, say something
like: "Sir, that was disgraceful! As an adult you should know better!"
, throw the stuff away, and then ride off. Sure, this probably doesn't
make a dent but it also maybe it doesn't turn into WW III. The
motorist was a boorish moron that thought nothing of littering from his
car on a busy street. Does it really make sense to escalate things with
someone like that? What good can possibly come from provoking him?
Look at the damage that has resulted.
Digressing a bit: Isn't it odd how the behaviours and attitudes of
some people change dramatically when they are behind the wheel of a
car? For instance, do you think this guy would have littered like
that had he just been out walking? I 've heard some people say that
the "true nature" of a person gets revealed when they are in their
cars. Not sure I agree (or maybe I'm just in denial).
F
[email protected] wrote:
>
> Was it really necessary for her to throw the litter back at him in
> order to make her point? Why not just pick up his trash, say something
> like: "Sir, that was disgraceful! As an adult you should know better!"
> , throw the stuff away, and then ride off.
You may be correct, and in a way, I admire the idea of remaining above
it all, acting more enlightened than the boors. But:...
> Sure, this probably doesn't
> make a dent but it also maybe it doesn't turn into WW III.
I'm convinced it wouldn't make a dent. It's too easy for them to
ignore.
ISTR that even Jesus of Nazareth thought it necessary to kick the
moneychangers out ot the temple, rather than simply say "Sirs, this is
disgraceful."
> The
> motorist was a boorish moron that thought nothing of littering from his
> car on a busy street. Does it really make sense to escalate things with
> someone like that? What good can possibly come from provoking him?
> Look at the damage that has resulted.
See, I think the effect has been pretty good. As I said earlier, the
jerk's photos are all over the internet. I imagine that a lot of
people who know him are nodding and saying "That's our jerk, all
right." And I imagine this can't have a positive effect on his
professional or social life. So society is doing what it should:
giving negative feedback to anti-social behavior.
- Frank Krygowski
>
> Was it really necessary for her to throw the litter back at him in
> order to make her point? Why not just pick up his trash, say something
> like: "Sir, that was disgraceful! As an adult you should know better!"
> , throw the stuff away, and then ride off.
You may be correct, and in a way, I admire the idea of remaining above
it all, acting more enlightened than the boors. But:...
> Sure, this probably doesn't
> make a dent but it also maybe it doesn't turn into WW III.
I'm convinced it wouldn't make a dent. It's too easy for them to
ignore.
ISTR that even Jesus of Nazareth thought it necessary to kick the
moneychangers out ot the temple, rather than simply say "Sirs, this is
disgraceful."
> The
> motorist was a boorish moron that thought nothing of littering from his
> car on a busy street. Does it really make sense to escalate things with
> someone like that? What good can possibly come from provoking him?
> Look at the damage that has resulted.
See, I think the effect has been pretty good. As I said earlier, the
jerk's photos are all over the internet. I imagine that a lot of
people who know him are nodding and saying "That's our jerk, all
right." And I imagine this can't have a positive effect on his
professional or social life. So society is doing what it should:
giving negative feedback to anti-social behavior.
- Frank Krygowski
G
G.T.
Guest
<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> bernmart wrote:
> >
> >
> > Tossing food through somebody's window is an uncool
> > thing to do, whether the litterer goes over the edge or not.
>
> I think whether it's "uncool" depends almost entirely on the direction
> of the toss. Tossing it out? Uncool, or worse. Tossing it back in?
> I think it's an elegant reaction, exactly what's deserved.
>
> I understand the risk. But I dislike the fact that many people feel no
> yahoo should ever get negative consequences for boorish behavior. Let
> the boors wipe the coffee and McSauce off their leather upholstery.
> It's appropriate.
>
I whole-heartedly agree.
> Requisite disclaimer: I've done the return toss myself, once.
>
I've squirted my water bottle in a car where the driver faked like he was
going to run me over.
My favorite story is from a motorcycle commuter friend of mine. In heavy
traffic on the freeway a car driver flicked a lit cigarette out onto the
freeway in front of him. My friend was splitting lanes so he stopped,
picked up the butt, flung it back into the car saying, "here ya go, I think
you dropped something" as polite as he could, and he continued on his merry
way.
Greg
news:[email protected]...
>
> bernmart wrote:
> >
> >
> > Tossing food through somebody's window is an uncool
> > thing to do, whether the litterer goes over the edge or not.
>
> I think whether it's "uncool" depends almost entirely on the direction
> of the toss. Tossing it out? Uncool, or worse. Tossing it back in?
> I think it's an elegant reaction, exactly what's deserved.
>
> I understand the risk. But I dislike the fact that many people feel no
> yahoo should ever get negative consequences for boorish behavior. Let
> the boors wipe the coffee and McSauce off their leather upholstery.
> It's appropriate.
>
I whole-heartedly agree.
> Requisite disclaimer: I've done the return toss myself, once.
>
I've squirted my water bottle in a car where the driver faked like he was
going to run me over.
My favorite story is from a motorcycle commuter friend of mine. In heavy
traffic on the freeway a car driver flicked a lit cigarette out onto the
freeway in front of him. My friend was splitting lanes so he stopped,
picked up the butt, flung it back into the car saying, "here ya go, I think
you dropped something" as polite as he could, and he continued on his merry
way.
Greg
G
G.T.
Guest
"Matt O'Toole" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news
[email protected]...
> >
> 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?
>
Considering how many brush fires are caused by lit cigarettes I don't see
anything wrong with the home owner's actions.
Greg
news
[email protected]...> >
> 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?
>
Considering how many brush fires are caused by lit cigarettes I don't see
anything wrong with the home owner's actions.
Greg
J
John Forrest Tomlinson
Guest
On 1 Feb 2006 12:55:22 -0800, [email protected] wrote:
>
>[email protected] wrote:
>>
>> Was it really necessary for her to throw the litter back at him in
>> order to make her point? Why not just pick up his trash, say something
>> like: "Sir, that was disgraceful! As an adult you should know better!"
>> , throw the stuff away, and then ride off.
>
>You may be correct, and in a way, I admire the idea of remaining above
>it all, acting more enlightened than the boors. But:...
>
>> Sure, this probably doesn't
>> make a dent but it also maybe it doesn't turn into WW III.
>
>I'm convinced it wouldn't make a dent. It's too easy for them to
>ignore.
Yeah, I tried that with someone who threw some food wrappers out the
window of a car near my house and they laughed and drove away. I wish
I'd been faster and got it into their car. (I was walking, not on a
bike).
JT
>
>ISTR that even Jesus of Nazareth thought it necessary to kick the
>moneychangers out ot the temple, rather than simply say "Sirs, this is
>disgraceful."
>
>> The
>> motorist was a boorish moron that thought nothing of littering from his
>> car on a busy street. Does it really make sense to escalate things with
>> someone like that? What good can possibly come from provoking him?
>> Look at the damage that has resulted.
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.
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
>
>[email protected] wrote:
>>
>> Was it really necessary for her to throw the litter back at him in
>> order to make her point? Why not just pick up his trash, say something
>> like: "Sir, that was disgraceful! As an adult you should know better!"
>> , throw the stuff away, and then ride off.
>
>You may be correct, and in a way, I admire the idea of remaining above
>it all, acting more enlightened than the boors. But:...
>
>> Sure, this probably doesn't
>> make a dent but it also maybe it doesn't turn into WW III.
>
>I'm convinced it wouldn't make a dent. It's too easy for them to
>ignore.
Yeah, I tried that with someone who threw some food wrappers out the
window of a car near my house and they laughed and drove away. I wish
I'd been faster and got it into their car. (I was walking, not on a
bike).
JT
>
>ISTR that even Jesus of Nazareth thought it necessary to kick the
>moneychangers out ot the temple, rather than simply say "Sirs, this is
>disgraceful."
>
>> The
>> motorist was a boorish moron that thought nothing of littering from his
>> car on a busy street. Does it really make sense to escalate things with
>> someone like that? What good can possibly come from provoking him?
>> Look at the damage that has resulted.
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.
JT
****************************
Remove "remove" to reply
Visit http://www.jt10000.com
****************************
L
Luke
Guest
In article <[email protected]>,
<[email protected]> wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> >
> > Was it really necessary for her to throw the litter back at him in
> > order to make her point? Why not just pick up his trash, say something
> > like: "Sir, that was disgraceful! As an adult you should know better!"
> > , throw the stuff away, and then ride off.
>
> You may be correct, and in a way, I admire the idea of remaining above
> it all, acting more enlightened than the boors. But:...
Discussing this episode at work today, a colleague related the lesson
he learned when, as a wayward youth, he was a habitual litterer. The
teacher in this case was a cop and, judging by how he elegantly handled
the matter, one which we would benefit by having more of.
Cruising in a car full of teens, heading to the beach for a day of fun
in the sun, my buddy tossed some litter out the window. A cop,
following behind, saw it but did nothing. For the moment, at least.
Over a mile later the cop casually signalled the offenders over and
informed them that something had been accidentally 'dropped' back up
the road, "Would the one responsible please return to retrieve it - on
foot?".
So with the cop biding his time, and his impatient friends stewing
roadside, our penitent litterer - whose sentence really was a walk! -
trudged off, eventually returning to the jeers of his friends to
present the cop with the evidence of his crime. Lesson learned.
Luke
<[email protected]> wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> >
> > Was it really necessary for her to throw the litter back at him in
> > order to make her point? Why not just pick up his trash, say something
> > like: "Sir, that was disgraceful! As an adult you should know better!"
> > , throw the stuff away, and then ride off.
>
> You may be correct, and in a way, I admire the idea of remaining above
> it all, acting more enlightened than the boors. But:...
Discussing this episode at work today, a colleague related the lesson
he learned when, as a wayward youth, he was a habitual litterer. The
teacher in this case was a cop and, judging by how he elegantly handled
the matter, one which we would benefit by having more of.
Cruising in a car full of teens, heading to the beach for a day of fun
in the sun, my buddy tossed some litter out the window. A cop,
following behind, saw it but did nothing. For the moment, at least.
Over a mile later the cop casually signalled the offenders over and
informed them that something had been accidentally 'dropped' back up
the road, "Would the one responsible please return to retrieve it - on
foot?".
So with the cop biding his time, and his impatient friends stewing
roadside, our penitent litterer - whose sentence really was a walk! -
trudged off, eventually returning to the jeers of his friends to
present the cop with the evidence of his crime. Lesson learned.
Luke
M
Matt O'Toole
Guest
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
Matt O.
> 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
Matt O.
O
o-dawg
Guest
On 1 Feb 2006 00:03:38 -0800, [email protected] wrote:
>
>john wrote:
>> snip...
>> is disheartening, but particularly in Canada. Of course any country
>> that would elect Dubba twice doesn't push any other country (even Iraq)
>> hard for greater enlightenment title.
>>
>> I also wonder what happened prior to his throwing the litter?
>>
>> John
>
>I wondered how long it was going to take before someone figured out
>this was W's fault...
>
>Joseph
Everything is W's fault. That's why it doesn't come up too often.
>
>john wrote:
>> snip...
>> is disheartening, but particularly in Canada. Of course any country
>> that would elect Dubba twice doesn't push any other country (even Iraq)
>> hard for greater enlightenment title.
>>
>> I also wonder what happened prior to his throwing the litter?
>>
>> John
>
>I wondered how long it was going to take before someone figured out
>this was W's fault...
>
>Joseph
Everything is W's fault. That's why it doesn't come up too often.
Similar threads
