J
J
Joshua Goldberg
Guest
had a friend who saw his riding buddy mowed down by a car, the driver got a
cash fine and a couple of points off his license. My friend began riding
with a Flare Gun, intending to use it the next time some dumbass car driver
did something stupid near him with their car. As long as the courts go easy
on car drivers, cyclists will be victimized. Not sure arming yourself is the
solution though. I prefer a well aimed Kryptonite U Lock...since they are
useless as a lock/
"john riley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/11/28/BAG05A2R5U1.DTL
cash fine and a couple of points off his license. My friend began riding
with a Flare Gun, intending to use it the next time some dumbass car driver
did something stupid near him with their car. As long as the courts go easy
on car drivers, cyclists will be victimized. Not sure arming yourself is the
solution though. I prefer a well aimed Kryptonite U Lock...since they are
useless as a lock/
"john riley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/11/28/BAG05A2R5U1.DTL
F
Freewheeling
Guest
Joshua:
If it's useless as a lock wouldn't it be a better idea to carry something
that's useful, like a wrench or a hammer? The justification for carrying a
firearm isn't really as protection from cars.
I agree about aggressive prosecution of drivers who harm cyclists, but it
requires a cycling organization that's not composed of wimps. That is to
say, something other than LAB.
--
--Scott
"Joshua Goldberg" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news
[email protected]...
> had a friend who saw his riding buddy mowed down by a car, the driver got
> a cash fine and a couple of points off his license. My friend began riding
> with a Flare Gun, intending to use it the next time some dumbass car
> driver did something stupid near him with their car. As long as the courts
> go easy on car drivers, cyclists will be victimized. Not sure arming
> yourself is the solution though. I prefer a well aimed Kryptonite U
> Lock...since they are useless as a lock/
>
> "john riley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/11/28/BAG05A2R5U1.DTL
>
>
If it's useless as a lock wouldn't it be a better idea to carry something
that's useful, like a wrench or a hammer? The justification for carrying a
firearm isn't really as protection from cars.
I agree about aggressive prosecution of drivers who harm cyclists, but it
requires a cycling organization that's not composed of wimps. That is to
say, something other than LAB.
--
--Scott
"Joshua Goldberg" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news
[email protected]...> had a friend who saw his riding buddy mowed down by a car, the driver got
> a cash fine and a couple of points off his license. My friend began riding
> with a Flare Gun, intending to use it the next time some dumbass car
> driver did something stupid near him with their car. As long as the courts
> go easy on car drivers, cyclists will be victimized. Not sure arming
> yourself is the solution though. I prefer a well aimed Kryptonite U
> Lock...since they are useless as a lock/
>
> "john riley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/11/28/BAG05A2R5U1.DTL
>
>
F
Freewheeling
Guest
John:
California is a "may issue" state, so it's not very likely the gun was
legal.
It's highly unlikely that a legal or legitimate gun owner with a CCW permit,
in California or anywhere else, would retaliate against a near collision
with the gun. The general rule of thumb is that if you use such a weapon
"in the gravest extreme" it's going to cost you in the neighborhood of
$10,000 in legal fees, whether you're in the right or not. I might fire on
the guy if, having missed me once, he lines up for a second try run at it...
but by that time I'd be off the bike.
One thing a gun might do for you in such a situation is to remind you that
riding and acting defensively is the best defense, unless you're confronting
someone with clear criminal intent. In other words, it'll remind you not to
escalate the situation.
--
--Scott
"john riley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/11/28/BAG05A2R5U1.DTL
California is a "may issue" state, so it's not very likely the gun was
legal.
It's highly unlikely that a legal or legitimate gun owner with a CCW permit,
in California or anywhere else, would retaliate against a near collision
with the gun. The general rule of thumb is that if you use such a weapon
"in the gravest extreme" it's going to cost you in the neighborhood of
$10,000 in legal fees, whether you're in the right or not. I might fire on
the guy if, having missed me once, he lines up for a second try run at it...
but by that time I'd be off the bike.
One thing a gun might do for you in such a situation is to remind you that
riding and acting defensively is the best defense, unless you're confronting
someone with clear criminal intent. In other words, it'll remind you not to
escalate the situation.
--
--Scott
"john riley" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/11/28/BAG05A2R5U1.DTL
D
Doug Huffman
Guest
" ... something other than LAB." http://www.labreform.org
"Freewheeling" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Joshua:
>
> I agree about aggressive prosecution of drivers who harm cyclists, but it
> requires a cycling organization that's not composed of wimps. That is to
> say, something other than LAB.
>
>
"Freewheeling" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Joshua:
>
> I agree about aggressive prosecution of drivers who harm cyclists, but it
> requires a cycling organization that's not composed of wimps. That is to
> say, something other than LAB.
>
>
D
Doug Huffman
Guest
Heightening my awareness and the situational-awareness training is precisely
why I ride armed.
"Freewheeling" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> John:
>
>
> One thing a gun might do for you in such a situation is to remind you that
> riding and acting defensively is the best defense, unless you're
> confronting someone with clear criminal intent. In other words, it'll
> remind you not to escalate the situation.
>
why I ride armed.
"Freewheeling" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> John:
>
>
> One thing a gun might do for you in such a situation is to remind you that
> riding and acting defensively is the best defense, unless you're
> confronting someone with clear criminal intent. In other words, it'll
> remind you not to escalate the situation.
>
E
Eric Jorgensen
Guest
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 01:54:48 -0500
"Freewheeling" <[email protected]> wrote:
> John:
>
> California is a "may issue" state, so it's not very likely the gun was
> legal.
>
> It's highly unlikely that a legal or legitimate gun owner with a CCW
> permit, in California or anywhere else, would retaliate against a near
> collision with the gun. The general rule of thumb is that if you use
Not every state. Take Utah, for example. Nearly anybody can get a
concealed carry permit here.
Granted, probably not if they have a history of convictions for violent
crimes, but, ask any neighbor of a serial killer whether quiet, mild
mannered, even gentle people sometimes snap.
The oversight is surprisingly lax. Shortly after our looser CCW law was
passed, an escaped criminal was legging it up the canyon on a nice summer
day, trying to evade the swarm of cops looking for him, ran headlong into a
picnic area, and was shot dead in mid-step by a salt lake city alderman
who'd had his CCW permit for something like two weeks.
He spent about an hour talking to the cops and was released, and that
was the end of it. His story was something along the lines of "he was
brandishing a knife". The interesting part that got a lot of comment in the
media was that if a cop had shot him, that cop would be driving a desk for
six months or more during the internal investigation. But an alderman is
off the hook before dinner.
I've never advocated violence. OK, maybe i have, in the 'a little
revolution, now and then' sense. I'm a pacifist. But that doesn't mean i
don't get really angry sometimes - just that I'm a wimp about it.
I can understand wanting to shoot somebody for almost killing me with
their surburban assault vehicle, I'd just never actually go through with
it.
A friend tells me that, during his motorcycling days, he got a lot less
trouble on the road when he started wearing a welded link chain as a sash,
even though he never had the occasion to wield it. I wonder what the
equivalent for a cyclist is.
"Freewheeling" <[email protected]> wrote:
> John:
>
> California is a "may issue" state, so it's not very likely the gun was
> legal.
>
> It's highly unlikely that a legal or legitimate gun owner with a CCW
> permit, in California or anywhere else, would retaliate against a near
> collision with the gun. The general rule of thumb is that if you use
Not every state. Take Utah, for example. Nearly anybody can get a
concealed carry permit here.
Granted, probably not if they have a history of convictions for violent
crimes, but, ask any neighbor of a serial killer whether quiet, mild
mannered, even gentle people sometimes snap.
The oversight is surprisingly lax. Shortly after our looser CCW law was
passed, an escaped criminal was legging it up the canyon on a nice summer
day, trying to evade the swarm of cops looking for him, ran headlong into a
picnic area, and was shot dead in mid-step by a salt lake city alderman
who'd had his CCW permit for something like two weeks.
He spent about an hour talking to the cops and was released, and that
was the end of it. His story was something along the lines of "he was
brandishing a knife". The interesting part that got a lot of comment in the
media was that if a cop had shot him, that cop would be driving a desk for
six months or more during the internal investigation. But an alderman is
off the hook before dinner.
I've never advocated violence. OK, maybe i have, in the 'a little
revolution, now and then' sense. I'm a pacifist. But that doesn't mean i
don't get really angry sometimes - just that I'm a wimp about it.
I can understand wanting to shoot somebody for almost killing me with
their surburban assault vehicle, I'd just never actually go through with
it.
A friend tells me that, during his motorcycling days, he got a lot less
trouble on the road when he started wearing a welded link chain as a sash,
even though he never had the occasion to wield it. I wonder what the
equivalent for a cyclist is.
E
Eric Jorgensen
Guest
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 01:41:01 -0500
"Freewheeling" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Joshua:
>
> If it's useless as a lock wouldn't it be a better idea to carry something
> that's useful, like a wrench or a hammer? The justification for carrying
> a firearm isn't really as protection from cars.
>
> I agree about aggressive prosecution of drivers who harm cyclists, but it
> requires a cycling organization that's not composed of wimps. That is to
> say, something other than LAB.
Be careful what you wish for. One of the bigger problems with modern
society is that to effectively influence governance one is required to
exercise considerable care in their choice of tactics, show a lot of
diplomatic restraint, and generally keep their pants on, but those who feel
most strongly about issues that are genuinely important have a tendency to
elect their most fervent fellow as their leader. And this person is
invariably a complete basket case.
"Freewheeling" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Joshua:
>
> If it's useless as a lock wouldn't it be a better idea to carry something
> that's useful, like a wrench or a hammer? The justification for carrying
> a firearm isn't really as protection from cars.
>
> I agree about aggressive prosecution of drivers who harm cyclists, but it
> requires a cycling organization that's not composed of wimps. That is to
> say, something other than LAB.
Be careful what you wish for. One of the bigger problems with modern
society is that to effectively influence governance one is required to
exercise considerable care in their choice of tactics, show a lot of
diplomatic restraint, and generally keep their pants on, but those who feel
most strongly about issues that are genuinely important have a tendency to
elect their most fervent fellow as their leader. And this person is
invariably a complete basket case.
L
LioNiNoiL_a t_Y a h 0 0_d 0 t_c 0 m
Guest
Eric Jorgensen wrote:
> Nearly anybody can get a concealed carry permit here [in Utah].
> ...
> The oversight is surprisingly lax. Shortly after our looser
> CCW law was passed, an escaped criminal was legging it up the
> canyon on a nice summer day, trying to evade the swarm of cops
> looking for him, ran headlong into a picnic area, and was shot
> dead in mid-step by a salt lake city alderman who'd had his CCW
> permit for something like two weeks.
>
> He spent about an hour talking to the cops and was released,
> and that was the end of it. His story was something along the
> lines of "he was brandishing a knife". The interesting part that
> got a lot of comment in the media was that if a cop had shot
> him, that cop would be driving a desk for six months or more
> during the internal investigation. But an alderman is off the
> hook before dinner.
I'm not seeing why he should be on the hook in the first place, unless
you know somehow that there was no knife, and that the alderman shot him
for sport rather than to protect himself and others in that picnic area
from an armed escapee; also not seeing how any of this adds up to lax
oversight, or on whose part.
--
"Bicycling is a healthy and manly pursuit with much
to recommend it, and, unlike other foolish crazes,
it has not died out." -- The Daily Telegraph (1877)
> Nearly anybody can get a concealed carry permit here [in Utah].
> ...
> The oversight is surprisingly lax. Shortly after our looser
> CCW law was passed, an escaped criminal was legging it up the
> canyon on a nice summer day, trying to evade the swarm of cops
> looking for him, ran headlong into a picnic area, and was shot
> dead in mid-step by a salt lake city alderman who'd had his CCW
> permit for something like two weeks.
>
> He spent about an hour talking to the cops and was released,
> and that was the end of it. His story was something along the
> lines of "he was brandishing a knife". The interesting part that
> got a lot of comment in the media was that if a cop had shot
> him, that cop would be driving a desk for six months or more
> during the internal investigation. But an alderman is off the
> hook before dinner.
I'm not seeing why he should be on the hook in the first place, unless
you know somehow that there was no knife, and that the alderman shot him
for sport rather than to protect himself and others in that picnic area
from an armed escapee; also not seeing how any of this adds up to lax
oversight, or on whose part.
--
"Bicycling is a healthy and manly pursuit with much
to recommend it, and, unlike other foolish crazes,
it has not died out." -- The Daily Telegraph (1877)
1
116
Guest
> I agree about aggressive prosecution of drivers who harm cyclists, but it
> requires a cycling organization that's not composed of wimps.
Other than Stinger missle-armed bicycles, I'd like the police to
set up "stings" like they do with people passing stopped
school buses. On some of my routes I nearly always get
harassed and a cop on a bike on the route with a radio
to a hidden cruiser along with media coverage would get
drivers thinking twice about who their next target
may be.
Comment for non-cyclists, these routes have a four-foot
shoulder with me going by myself on the far right of
the shoulder, i.e. in no way could the harassment be
excused by anyone as a reaction to a perceived bicycle
impediment.
> requires a cycling organization that's not composed of wimps.
Other than Stinger missle-armed bicycles, I'd like the police to
set up "stings" like they do with people passing stopped
school buses. On some of my routes I nearly always get
harassed and a cop on a bike on the route with a radio
to a hidden cruiser along with media coverage would get
drivers thinking twice about who their next target
may be.
Comment for non-cyclists, these routes have a four-foot
shoulder with me going by myself on the far right of
the shoulder, i.e. in no way could the harassment be
excused by anyone as a reaction to a perceived bicycle
impediment.
D
Doug Huffman
Guest
The shoulder, the area to the right of the whit fog-line is not the
'roadway'.
"116" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>> I agree about aggressive prosecution of drivers who harm cyclists, but it
>> requires a cycling organization that's not composed of wimps.
>
> Other than Stinger missle-armed bicycles, I'd like the police to
> set up "stings" like they do with people passing stopped
> school buses. On some of my routes I nearly always get
> harassed and a cop on a bike on the route with a radio
> to a hidden cruiser along with media coverage would get
> drivers thinking twice about who their next target
> may be.
>
> Comment for non-cyclists, these routes have a four-foot
> shoulder with me going by myself on the far right of
> the shoulder, i.e. in no way could the harassment be
> excused by anyone as a reaction to a perceived bicycle
> impediment.
'roadway'.
"116" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>> I agree about aggressive prosecution of drivers who harm cyclists, but it
>> requires a cycling organization that's not composed of wimps.
>
> Other than Stinger missle-armed bicycles, I'd like the police to
> set up "stings" like they do with people passing stopped
> school buses. On some of my routes I nearly always get
> harassed and a cop on a bike on the route with a radio
> to a hidden cruiser along with media coverage would get
> drivers thinking twice about who their next target
> may be.
>
> Comment for non-cyclists, these routes have a four-foot
> shoulder with me going by myself on the far right of
> the shoulder, i.e. in no way could the harassment be
> excused by anyone as a reaction to a perceived bicycle
> impediment.