cyclist shoots motorist

Discussion in 'Road Cycling' started by Steven M. O'Nei, Feb 9, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.


  1. Kevan Smith

    Kevan Smith Guest

    On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 14:02:16 -0500, "Q." <LostVideos-AT-hotmail.com> from
    wrote:

    >There are plenty of places in the world for you to live if you don't like America ...

    America: Love it or leave it.

    That's the logical fallacy known as a false dilemma.

    --
    [email protected]
    What mistakes did you make last time?
    91
     
  2. Q.

    Q. Guest

    "Jacques Moser" <[email protected]> wrote
    > >
    > > There are plenty of places in the world for you to live if you don't
    like
    > > America ... places without "hillbillies in pickup trucks" and where
    armed
    > > robbers are allowed to roam the streets unopposed. Try Angola.
    >
    > There are plenty of places in the world where it is very, very unusual to carry any kind of gun,
    > and which are much safer than the US. Angola is no fair comparison as Angola probably has no
    > proper police to enforce law.

    I admit I was a little perturbed at the statement I was responding to. I was just pointing out that
    this civilization (the U.S. and a few other nations to be fair), with all its many flaws, is simply
    the best that has existed throughout history and much better than many places out there right now.
    You're right, Angola no longer has a proper police force ... my big sister was raped there by them.

    > Your position as an NRA member doesn't make sense to me. You make it clear that this guy Urick
    > should "rot just for having an illegal handgun"; yet (as an NRA member I assume you do) you fight
    > again gun control, while said gun control could prevent Ulrick from carry _his_ gun but let _you_
    > have any number of guns since you are probably a decent guy with no criminal history.

    Gun control in this nation has gotten a bit out of hand, mainly because it was the hot political
    potato for a while. Basically, it was a cheep way of getting votes and pretending to do something
    about violence but not actually lifting a finger ... a scapegoat if you will. I stated I had no
    problem with gun control if they start with the bad guys ... but that's not what happens. It's all
    political and they pass more laws to make it harder for law abiding citizens to do anything, yet do
    nothing to fight poverty and it's twin, crime. Anyway, this is something that can be argued even
    more than helmet laws so I'll stop myself while I still can (c:

    > You advocate guns as a way to protect yourself against... all these guns that freely circulate in
    > the country. Sure, there may be situations where carrying a gun will save your life;

    Many people are killed with knives and blunt objects as well ... violence is a separate issue. There
    are times when nobody is around and the only thing you have to protect yourself is that gun.
    Happened to me once and I'll never forget it. I was *very* glad I keep a loaded shotgun in my house.

    >but there will be more situations where temptation to use your gun will lead to escalation and
    >actual use of guns from both parties.

    Interestingly enough, the opposite seems to be the case. Many people have attested to that on this
    thread, and I can as well. When some drunk guys showed up at my house with sticks all I said, very
    calmly, was "you got the wrong house boys". If you're a legal gun owner the temptation is *not* to
    use it but it's nice to know you can hold your own too if it comes to that. The "flight or fight"
    response is routed in fear ... when there is no fear things are different.

    C.Q.C.
     
  3. Q.

    Q. Guest

    "Kevan Smith" <[email protected]> wrote

    > >There are plenty of places in the world for you to live if you don't like America ...
    >
    > America: Love it or leave it.

    That's not *exactly* what I said ... if I wanted to say that I would have.

    > That's the logical fallacy known as a false dilemma.

    How you translated what I wrote forced it to be a false dilemma. The underlying thought behind what
    I wrote, perhaps unclearly, is that people here have the right to leave anytime they want. In many
    places you can't do that, or even talk about how much that country sucks. That's not a fallacy, it's
    a fact. Nobody is forcing anyone to live here ... it's a freedom we take for granted. You don't HAVE
    to love it to live here, but if you're miserable living here you have a choice.

    C.Q.C.
     
  4. On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 22:11:12 +0100, "Jacques Moser"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >As a Swiss citizen I _had_ to keep my military gun (a Weapon of Mass Demotivation) at home
    >during 20 years.I was released from the army last fall and could finally return the gun. It was
    >a great relief.

    Did they let you keep your knife, though?

    It's a little-known fact, but incontrovertibly true. The reason

    knives.
     
  5. On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 16:59:08 -0600, Kevan Smith
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 14:02:16 -0500, "Q." <LostVideos-AT-hotmail.com> from wrote:
    >
    >>There are plenty of places in the world for you to live if you don't like America ...
    >
    >America: Love it or leave it.
    >
    >That's the logical fallacy known as a false dilemma.

    It's actually a false dichotomy, but who's keeping score?

    Hate it, stay within the borders, and work assiduously to help your terrorist comrades to
    destroy it.

    Just don't get in my way.
     
  6. On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 14:41:12 -0700, "Bestest Handsander" <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    >The NRA's official position as an organization is "enforcement of reasonable gun laws",

    Yes, that is our position. But we're beginning to doubt we'll ever see it happen. Just more laws
    that aren't enforced. Locks to keep out honest people.

    Scofflaws, by definition, scoff at laws. Giving them more laws to scoff at won't deter them much
    because scoffing is, by and large, easy work.
     
  7. On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 19:45:02 -0500, "Q." <LostVideos-AT-hotmail.com>
    wrote:

    > Happened to me once and I'll never forget it. I was *very* glad I keep a loaded shotgun in
    > my house.

    Bet nobody got shot and it didn't hit the papers.

    One of millions of "defensive gun uses" that deterred crime without a shot being fired. I defy you
    to find one such story in any major newspaper.
     
  8. Q.

    Q. Guest

    "David Reuteler" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > Q. <LostVideos-AT-hotmail.com> wrote:
    > : No, but as far as I'm concerned a "non verbal gesture" is an invitation
    to a
    > : conversation. On more than one occasion I've stopped and had a
    "discussion"
    > : with some rude prick. If they don't want a confrontation, don't start
    one.
    >
    > well, you're right but what's your point? flipping someone off isn't an open invite for them to
    > try and kick your ass or run you off the road. it is *NOT* any manner of assault nor does it even
    > begin to approximate
    it.
    > so he flipped him off. so what? every time i've flipped someone off i've had pretty good reason.
    > sometimes we have a "discussion" .. usually they flip me off and drive away.

    Well, occasionally the point is ... or what actually happens ... is not a confrontation but a
    reality slap. It's easy to dehumanize when you're yelling something at someone driving away. It's
    harder to do it when they're right in front of you.

    I'll never forget what happened to this one nice Jewish lady. A neo-Nazi punk called her up and
    threatened her. You know what she did? She talked to him. That's all, just talked. Asked him why he
    wanted to kill her and stuff like that. She actually turned him around, and made him realize she was
    just a nice lady.

    C.Q.C.
     
  9. Kevan Smith

    Kevan Smith Guest

    On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:02:06 -0500, "Q." <LostVideos-AT-hotmail.com> from
    wrote:

    >
    >"Kevan Smith" <[email protected]> wrote
    >
    >> >There are plenty of places in the world for you to live if you don't like America ...
    >>
    >> America: Love it or leave it.
    >
    >That's not *exactly* what I said ... if I wanted to say that I would have.
    >
    >> That's the logical fallacy known as a false dilemma.
    >
    >How you translated what I wrote forced it to be a false dilemma. The underlying thought behind what
    >I wrote, perhaps unclearly, is that people here have the right to leave anytime they want. In many
    >places you can't do that, or even talk about how much that country sucks. That's not a fallacy,
    >it's a fact. Nobody is forcing anyone to live here ... it's a freedom we take for granted. You
    >don't HAVE to love it to live here, but if you're miserable living here you have a choice.

    You're still just rephrasing "America: love it or leave it."

    I don't like many things about living here, and I really do like other things about it. Certainly
    I'm free to leave, but I don't want to. I have a third option -- to work to make the things I don't
    like get better. That's the real freedom in America.

    --
    [email protected]
    Don't break the silence.
    85
     
  10. Kevan Smith

    Kevan Smith Guest

    On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:28:09 -0600, Zippy the Pinhead
    <[email protected]> from Xavier Onassis Associates wrote:

    >On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 16:59:08 -0600, Kevan Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >>On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 14:02:16 -0500, "Q." <LostVideos-AT-hotmail.com> from wrote:
    >>
    >>>There are plenty of places in the world for you to live if you don't like America ...
    >>
    >>America: Love it or leave it.
    >>
    >>That's the logical fallacy known as a false dilemma.
    >
    >It's actually a false dichotomy, but who's keeping score?
    >
    >Hate it, stay within the borders, and work assiduously to help your terrorist comrades to
    >destroy it.
    >
    >Just don't get in my way.

    I will if I want. It's a free country.

    --
    [email protected]
    Change nothing and continue with immaculate consistency.
    126
     
  11. Q. <LostVideos-AT-hotmail.com> wrote:
    : I'll never forget what happened to this one nice Jewish lady. A neo-Nazi punk called her up and
    : threatened her. You know what she did? She talked to him. That's all, just talked. Asked him why
    : he wanted to kill her and stuff like that. She actually turned him around, and made him realize
    : she was just a nice lady.

    yep. & that's why it's best to default to level-headed behaviour. well, i'll tell ya a story back. i
    had a commute that took me past a particuliar street that was fairly narrow (4-lane no shoulders ..
    cars had to pass in the other lane to get around me) .. there was a guy (pickup truck of course) who
    every time he saw me (2+ times a week) would buzz me very closely (enuf to be hit by his mirror on
    more than one occassion). after the 2nd or 3rd week i caught him at the light and came up along side
    him. i started to talk fairy reasonably to him (i was far from yelling) but he cut me off with this
    look ... the kind that gives me the creeps. pure hate. he told me, in addition to how i shouldn't be
    on the road, etc, that "your life ain't worth 10 seconds of my time" ... every day after that when
    he saw me he'd honk and buzz me. the next time i was able to catch him at the light i parked myself
    right in front of his truck and went absolutely berserk (tons of cars everywhere, held up traffic,
    the whole bit). he got the message from me screaming at him that to me it was a really big f'ing
    deal -- sometihng he didn't seem to understand before. he didn't understand one word of calm
    rational discourse. but he never did it again. that position sucked because i honestly believe that
    eventually if i hadn't done something like that he would have hit me but he could have easily tried
    to run me over right there in the intersection.

    i really believe it comes down to that most car drivers don't understand just how physically
    threatening it is to have a car 3" off you at 50mph. they view it the same way as another car to
    them. i can usually see the light bulb go on when they figure that out.

    blech, nothing makes you stupider and angier than getting into a car to goto work ... or daycare.
    --
    david reuteler [email protected]
     
  12. Mark Hickey

    Mark Hickey Guest

    Kevan Smith <[email protected]> wrote:

    >I don't like many things about living here, and I really do like other things about it. Certainly
    >I'm free to leave, but I don't want to. I have a third option -- to work to make the things I don't
    >like get better. That's the real freedom in America.

    Of course, since you tend toward a minority opinion, that pesky concept of "democracy" means you're
    never gonna get it like you really want it here. In fact, I'd have to suggest buying yourself a
    little island somewhere and setting up your own benevolent dictatorship. Just make sure and
    institute gun control so the populace doesn't storm your palace.

    ;-)

    Mark Hickey Habanero Cycles http://www.habcycles.com Home of the $695 ti frame
     
  13. Kevan Smith

    Kevan Smith Guest

    On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 22:21:54 -0700, Mark Hickey <[email protected]> from
    Habanero Cycles wrote:

    >Kevan Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >>I don't like many things about living here, and I really do like other things about it. Certainly
    >>I'm free to leave, but I don't want to. I have a third option -- to work to make the things I
    >>don't like get better. That's the real freedom in America.
    >
    >Of course, since you tend toward a minority opinion, that pesky concept of "democracy" means you're
    >never gonna get it like you really want it here.

    Our society doesn't guarantee happiness -- only the freedom to pursue it. And that's enough for me.
    Besides, one day I may just carry that rubber tree plant off.

    --
    [email protected]
    Make a sudden, destructive unpredictable action; incorporate.
    47
     
  14. Hunrobe <[email protected]> wrote:
    : An altercation begins when one person responds to the words or actions of another.

    ummm, if someone aims their car at me and tries to run me off the road that's not an altercation?
    ok, that's fine. but whatever that is that is not an altercation is far more important than the
    altercation that comes as a result. you did say action, didn't you? you just defined the altercation
    out of relevancy if the initial reason is anything but benign.

    : Nicoletti may have shouted first but until Urick responded there was no altercation.

    you just ran me over and damn near killed me but until i flipped you off there was no altercation.
    therefore what happens afterwards is my fault. rubbish.
    --
    david reuteler [email protected]
     
  15. Q.

    Q. Guest

    "David Reuteler" <[email protected]> wrote

    <snip>
    > you just ran me over and damn near killed me but until i flipped you off there was no altercation.
    > therefore what happens afterwards is my fault. rubbish.

    I'm not defending either guy, but recently I was involved in a heated discussion concerning just
    that with another bike group. It seems many cyclists take offense at just being beeped at ... not
    passing close or anything, just a friendly beep to let them know a car is going to pass. One cyclist
    was adamant that he always flipped the bird if someone beeped at him for any reason.

    I was surprised at how diametrically opposed most opinions were ... and they were all from cyclists.
    Some thought it just and proper to beep when passing in a dangerous situation (me for one, although
    I've probably only done it twice, if ever), and others thought it should never be done for any
    reason under pains of death. It was all quite illuminating.

    Often it's a matter of perspective. I got involved in a road rage incident with a guy once over his
    misunderstanding. I was completely in the right ... but up until the moment the police pointed out
    his error he thought he was right. The other guy got 9 months in prison for assault and battery with
    a deadly weapon by the way. You should have seen the look on his face when he realized he screwed up
    big time and was going to spend Christmas in jail (c:

    C.Q.C.
     
  16. On Thu, 12 Feb 2004 04:24:17 -0500, "Q." <LostVideos-AT-hotmail.com>
    wrote:

    >It seems many cyclists take offense at just being beeped at ... not passing close or anything, just
    >a friendly beep to let them know a car is going to pass.

    You've obviously not done much cycling.

    By the time one of these "friendly" drivers has decided to "beep" to let me know they're going to
    pass, I've been hearing them coming for the past mile they've traveled, seeing them coming for the
    past half mile, and smelling them coming for the last quarter mile. Fifteen feet before they pass,
    they suddenly notice me and feel compelled to "beep".

    Forgive me if I occasionally forget to use all five fingers when I give them a friendly wave
    in return.
     
  17. On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 21:34:00 -0600, Kevan Smith
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >>>America: Love it or leave it.
    >>>
    >>>That's the logical fallacy known as a false dilemma.
    >>
    >>It's actually a false dichotomy, but who's keeping score?
    >>
    >>Hate it, stay within the borders, and work assiduously to help your terrorist comrades to
    >>destroy it.
    >>
    >>Just don't get in my way.
    >
    >I will if I want. It's a free country.

    So you do, indeed, hate us because we're free?
     
  18. W K

    W K Guest

    "Kevan Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:eek:[email protected]...
    > On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 20:28:09 -0600, Zippy the Pinhead <[email protected]> from Xavier
    > Onassis Associates wrote:
    >
    > >On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 16:59:08 -0600, Kevan Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >
    > >>On Wed, 11 Feb 2004 14:02:16 -0500, "Q." <LostVideos-AT-hotmail.com>
    from
    > >>wrote:
    > >>
    > >>>There are plenty of places in the world for you to live if you don't
    like
    > >>>America ...
    > >>
    > >>America: Love it or leave it.
    > >>
    > >>That's the logical fallacy known as a false dilemma.
    > >
    > >It's actually a false dichotomy, but who's keeping score?
    > >
    > >Hate it, stay within the borders, and work assiduously to help your terrorist comrades to
    > >destroy it.
    > >
    > >Just don't get in my way.
    >
    > I will if I want. It's a free country.

    Its interestingly un-free. Disapproval and social shunning are powerful forces, and ultimately more
    oppressive than storm troopers. It was extremely shocking and eye-opening in the last conflict to
    realise that this "freedom" is all about freedom to agree.

    Reading back through this thread, the actual crime that is helping terrorists is to state that the
    current situation in America is not the best that the world has ever seen. Wow. Mental
    straightjackets.
     
  19. Hunrobe <[email protected]> wrote:
    :>you just ran me over and damn near killed me but until i flipped you off there was no altercation.
    :>therefore what happens afterwards is my fault. rubbish.
    :
    : Yes, saying that would be rubbish but there is absolutely no evidence that what you describe
    : actually occurred in this case. Again, Urick didn't claim that Nicoletti put him at any risk
    : whatsoever. Instead he claimed that Nicoletti shouted at him. Do you honestly believe that Urick
    : simply forgot to mention, "Oh yeah, and he almost ran me over." when explaining his own actions to
    : the police? Rubbish.

    i was objecting to your definition of altercation -- which must carry over to other cases and
    situations -- and specifically that an altercation starts with the reaction of the second party and
    the implication that blame falls there for any subsequent escalation.

    in this particuliar case, yea, i know nothing. but it does raise a flag to me that the newspaper
    stated that it started when the cyclist flipped off the driver. maybe. maybe he flipped him off for
    no reason, for a less than reasonable one, whatever .. i don't know. it wasn't mentioned in the
    story i read. it begs the question to me of what happened earlier. why did he flip him off. seems an
    odd place to start the story.
    --
    david reuteler [email protected]
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
Loading...