What Sort of ******** Does This?



Z

Zebee Johnstone

Guest
In aus.bicycle on Fri, 15 Feb 2008 21:32:00 +1100
ritcho <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> The perpetrators of the girl's injuries showed a callous disregard for
> others' safety, far in excess of the injustice they could possibly have


I think it more likely they knew exactly what the effect on other's
safety was.

They just didn't think about who the "other" was.

They wanted the people on the trail bikes to be hurt. They didn't
comprehend that people other than the trail bike riders might get
hurt.

They might not have known that other 2 wheelers used the trail.
They might have known and forgotten. I think it's a big stretch to
say they knew and didn't care. They intended that someone be hurt,
but they intended someone to be hurt they thought deserved it.

(very few people in this world are psycopaths, wanting to hurt people
who don't deserve it.)

I doubt they intended people who didn't deserve it be hurt. It's very
unlikely to be disregard for all others' safety. It was, as so often,
not what they didn't know that was the problem, it was what they thought
they knew that wasn't true.

And that requires a different approach.

Zebee
 
G

G-S

Guest
Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>
> I doubt they intended people who didn't deserve it be hurt. It's very
> unlikely to be disregard for all others' safety. It was, as so often,
> not what they didn't know that was the problem, it was what they thought
> they knew that wasn't true.
>


Whilst I agree with you... IMHO that actually makes it worse not better.

They are attempting to justify punishing and demonizing a subgroup of
people because "they aren't like us".




G-S
 
Z

Zebee Johnstone

Guest
In aus.bicycle on Sat, 16 Feb 2008 08:24:29 +1100
G-S <[email protected]> wrote:
> Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>>
>> I doubt they intended people who didn't deserve it be hurt. It's very
>> unlikely to be disregard for all others' safety. It was, as so often,
>> not what they didn't know that was the problem, it was what they thought
>> they knew that wasn't true.
>>

>
> Whilst I agree with you... IMHO that actually makes it worse not better.
>
> They are attempting to justify punishing and demonizing a subgroup of
> people because "they aren't like us".


I'm not sure that's so.

I think they were trying to solve a problem. I don't like the method
they used, or the mindset that could think it was a good idea, but I
can see why they thought that way.

"teach them a lesson" is a very human thing. Wanting to have power
over someone who seems to have power over you, someone who won't
listen, who makes your life difficult... that's very human too.

Was an article somewhere talking about why the suicide bombers in the
UK were middle class. The article postulated that violence is
difficult and middle class people find it very difficult. A suicide
bomb is not violence in the same way letting loose with a gun is, it's
a simple anonymous act. Easier, less confronting.

Stringing a wire across a trail is easier than cronfronting people.
And probably a lot more effective too. If you confront the riders
they won't listen and few will have the ability to make them. If the
law won't or can't help then there's powerlessness and anger. What
next?

Zebee
 

ritcho

New Member
May 24, 2004
934
0
0
Zebee Johnstone said:
In aus.bicycle on Fri, 15 Feb 2008 21:32:00 +1100
ritcho <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> The perpetrators of the girl's injuries showed a callous disregard for
> others' safety, far in excess of the injustice they could possibly have


I think it more likely they knew exactly what the effect on other's
safety was.

They just didn't think about who the "other" was.

They wanted the people on the trail bikes to be hurt. They didn't
comprehend that people other than the trail bike riders might get
hurt.

They might not have known that other 2 wheelers used the trail.
They might have known and forgotten. I think it's a big stretch to
say they knew and didn't care. They intended that someone be hurt,
but they intended someone to be hurt they thought deserved it.

(very few people in this world are psycopaths, wanting to hurt people
who don't deserve it.)

I doubt they intended people who didn't deserve it be hurt. It's very
unlikely to be disregard for all others' safety. It was, as so often,
not what they didn't know that was the problem, it was what they thought
they knew that wasn't true.

And that requires a different approach.

Zebee

As you say, they wanted the people on the trail bikes to get hurt. This is different from wanting the people on the trail bikes to ride somewhere else, which is what they wanted in the first place. The fact that they didn't comprehend that someone else could be hurt by their actions is the definition of recklessness. I hope for the perpetrators' sakes that well meaning relatives and friends of the victim don't have the same approach to seeking redress as they do.

Ritch
 

ritcho

New Member
May 24, 2004
934
0
0
Zebee Johnstone said:
[snip]

Stringing a wire across a trail is easier than cronfronting people.
And probably a lot more effective too. If you confront the riders
they won't listen and few will have the ability to make them. If the
law won't or can't help then there's powerlessness and anger. What
next?

Zebee

Probably not more effective. An urban vigilante unable to confront people could have dumped a pile of logs in the way of the trail which would have blocked access and the girl wouldn't have been injured. These people were intent on doing damage, not to prevent access by motorbikes. I'd rather have the motorbikes.

Ritch
 
T

Tomasso

Guest
"Zebee Johnstone" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]
> In aus.bicycle on Sat, 16 Feb 2008 08:24:29 +1100
> G-S <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>>>
>>> I doubt they intended people who didn't deserve it be hurt. It's very
>>> unlikely to be disregard for all others' safety. It was, as so often,
>>> not what they didn't know that was the problem, it was what they thought
>>> they knew that wasn't true.
>>>

>>
>> Whilst I agree with you... IMHO that actually makes it worse not better.
>>
>> They are attempting to justify punishing and demonizing a subgroup of
>> people because "they aren't like us".

>
> I'm not sure that's so.
>
> I think they were trying to solve a problem. I don't like the method
> they used, or the mindset that could think it was a good idea, but I
> can see why they thought that way.
>
> "teach them a lesson" is a very human thing. Wanting to have power
> over someone who seems to have power over you, someone who won't
> listen, who makes your life difficult... that's very human too.
>
> Was an article somewhere talking about why the suicide bombers in the
> UK were middle class. The article postulated that violence is
> difficult and middle class people find it very difficult. A suicide
> bomb is not violence in the same way letting loose with a gun is, it's
> a simple anonymous act. Easier, less confronting.
>
> Stringing a wire across a trail is easier than cronfronting people.
> And probably a lot more effective too. If you confront the riders
> they won't listen and few will have the ability to make them. If the
> law won't or can't help then there's powerlessness and anger. What
> next?
>
> Zebee


Sometimes I think Zebee is some kind of fascist-apoligist Jesuit-educated
polemicist. A bit like Michael Duffy in drag, or Miranda Devine who has
momentarily forgotten that cycling is evil.

Other times I think she's some kind of OC focus junkie who will post some
kind of contrarian nonsense to anything. A person like that who leave enough
gaps to maintain a thread but basically wastes bandwidth. That kind of OC
focus junkie (Theo being the classic and crusty lead example of the type)
rely on the fact that their boss hasn't found out yet.

And yet other times, Zebee post stuff that makes me think.

Her post above is mostly the first kind of Zebee, with a bit of the second.

The kinds of personalities at the extremes who string up piano wire (if it
was) across an entrance to a park, or who a "middle class suicide bombers"
are not what you come across every day (not even driving a Jeep 4WD).
They are pathological and likely to repeat. The best approach to them
is to encourage their "friends" to dob them in, and by a combination of
punishment and counselling, re-orient them.

T.
 
Z

Zebee Johnstone

Guest
In aus.bicycle on Sat, 16 Feb 2008 14:17:02 +1100
ritcho <[email protected]> wrote:
> As you say, they wanted the people on the trail bikes to get hurt. This
> is different from wanting the people on the trail bikes to ride
> somewhere else, which is what they wanted in the first place. The fact
> that they didn't comprehend that someone else could be hurt by their
> actions is the definition of recklessness. I hope for the perpetrators'


I'd have thought not caring was the definition of recklessness.

Not realising is closer to stupidity.

> sakes that well meaning relatives and friends of the victim don't have
> the same approach to seeking redress as they do.


Eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind.

The question is... how to stop people doing this? You do realise this
isn't the first time, it won't be the last either.

PEople don't think of themselves as stupid or evil. They think of
themselves as doing the right thing. That's the hard part. When
people are hurt, some quantity of them will lash out, how to minimise
the damage?

I don't know, but I do see why they did what they did, and want to
work out how to discourage others. The usual I suppose - much more
surveillance plus doing something about the problem that triggered it
in the first place. Will that happen? Pig's **** it will. Just a lot
of holier than thou about how awful someone is, and no real change.

Zebee
 
T

Terryc

Guest
Tomasso wrote:

> The kinds of personalities at the extremes who string up piano wire (if it
> was) across an entrance to a park,


From the wire shown (strange) in the TV report, it looked to be
ordinary fencing wire and the position was a light "fence" that seemed
to dive two sections of "parklands"

> or who a "middle class suicide bombers"


My guess is it was military training they received about 60 years ago.


> are not what you come across every day (not even driving a Jeep 4WD).
> They are pathological and likely to repeat. The best approach to them
> is to encourage their "friends" to dob them in, and by a combination of
> punishment and counselling, re-orient them.
> T.
 
T

Theo Bekkers

Guest
Tomasso wrote:
> "Zebee Johnstone wrote


>> I'm not sure that's so.
>>
>> I think they were trying to solve a problem. I don't like the method
>> they used, or the mindset that could think it was a good idea, but I
>> can see why they thought that way.
>>
>> "teach them a lesson" is a very human thing. Wanting to have power
>> over someone who seems to have power over you, someone who won't
>> listen, who makes your life difficult... that's very human too.
>>
>> Was an article somewhere talking about why the suicide bombers in the
>> UK were middle class. The article postulated that violence is
>> difficult and middle class people find it very difficult. A suicide
>> bomb is not violence in the same way letting loose with a gun is,
>> it's a simple anonymous act. Easier, less confronting.
>>
>> Stringing a wire across a trail is easier than cronfronting people.
>> And probably a lot more effective too. If you confront the riders
>> they won't listen and few will have the ability to make them. If the
>> law won't or can't help then there's powerlessness and anger. What
>> next?


> Sometimes I think Zebee is some kind of fascist-apoligist
> Jesuit-educated polemicist.


I was educated by their close relatives, the Marist Brothers. :)

I don't think Zebee was apologising for the fence (not piano) wire
stringers, neither was I. I think we were both responding to the question
posed in the subject line above, Zeb probably better than I.

> Other times I think she's some kind of OC focus junkie who will post
> some kind of contrarian nonsense to anything. A person like that who leave
> enough gaps to maintain a thread but basically wastes bandwidth. That kind
> of OC focus junkie (Theo being the classic and crusty lead example of the
> type) rely on the fact that their boss hasn't found out yet.


ROTFL. That was very clever indeed, painting us both as small furtive
creatures afraid of being found out by our bosses. If you follow my email
adress to the bekkers.com.au website, you will find I have little to be
afraid of my boss.

> And yet other times, Zebee post stuff that makes me think.


She does that for me as well.

> The kinds of personalities at the extremes who string up piano wire
> (if it was) across an entrance to a park, or who a "middle class suicide
> bombers" are not what you come across every day (not even driving a Jeep
> 4WD).
> They are pathological and likely to repeat. The best approach to them
> is to encourage their "friends" to dob them in, and by a combination
> of punishment and counselling, re-orient them.


Agreed, I'm afraid you may find that they are not the thoughtless bogans you
imagine them to be, but otherwise normal locals, who have put up with the
noise, and the councils inaction, for years. Not an excuse for their
behaviour, just saying who they are.

Theo
 
Z

Zebee Johnstone

Guest
In aus.bicycle on Sun, 17 Feb 2008 12:18:19 +0900
Theo Bekkers <[email protected]> wrote:
> Tomasso wrote:
>
>> Other times I think she's some kind of OC focus junkie who will post
>> some kind of contrarian nonsense to anything. A person like that who leave
>> enough gaps to maintain a thread but basically wastes bandwidth. That kind
>> of OC focus junkie (Theo being the classic and crusty lead example of the
>> type) rely on the fact that their boss hasn't found out yet.

>
> ROTFL. That was very clever indeed, painting us both as small furtive
> creatures afraid of being found out by our bosses. If you follow my email
> adress to the bekkers.com.au website, you will find I have little to be
> afraid of my boss.


Heh. Last job I had I got because of my usenet posts. THe people who
offered it to me had never met me until they invited me for the
interview. (I knew one of them from aus.moto but only via posts.)

I got the current one partly because of my usenet and mailing list
profile too. As I post with my real name and use the same email on all
my net.interactions it wouldn't be hard for my boss to find what I was
posting. As they've done before and no doubt will again. I have been
told in job interviews that they've googled me (and in one interview
that what they found was a major plus.)

(I do find it funny when people who post with names like "Tomasso"
<[email protected]> accuse me of being scared of someone finding my
posts. My mother reads usenet, I'd be more worried about her thinking
ill of me than a boss doing so. So far if I have disappointed her she
has not said so.)


> Agreed, I'm afraid you may find that they are not the thoughtless bogans you
> imagine them to be, but otherwise normal locals, who have put up with the
> noise, and the councils inaction, for years. Not an excuse for their
> behaviour, just saying who they are.


That's the problem. THey took a solution that seemed to be the only
one they had. Why couldn't they think of another one? What other
things had they tried?

I don't know. THe papers don't say, so I doubt anyone here knows
either.

THey might be reckless stupid aggressive sociopaths. I doubt it, I
think it is more likely they were ordinary people tried beyond
endurance who saw no other solution. meaning there has to be a way to
show such people other solutions because this isn't the first time
it's been done and won't be the last.

Zebee
 
T

Theo Bekkers

Guest
Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> Theo Bekkers wrote:


>> ROTFL. That was very clever indeed, painting us both as small furtive
>> creatures afraid of being found out by our bosses. If you follow my
>> email adress to the bekkers.com.au website, you will find I have
>> little to be afraid of my boss.


> Heh. Last job I had I got because of my usenet posts. THe people who
> offered it to me had never met me until they invited me for the
> interview. (I knew one of them from aus.moto but only via posts.)
>
> I got the current one partly because of my usenet and mailing list
> profile too. As I post with my real name and use the same email on
> all my net.interactions it wouldn't be hard for my boss to find what
> I was posting. As they've done before and no doubt will again. I
> have been told in job interviews that they've googled me (and in one
> interview that what they found was a major plus.)
>
> (I do find it funny when people who post with names like "Tomasso"
> <[email protected]> accuse me of being scared of someone finding my
> posts. My mother reads usenet, I'd be more worried about her thinking
> ill of me than a boss doing so. So far if I have disappointed her she
> has not said so.)


I know your mother approves of you Zebee. Hi Clare if you're lurking here.

I also find that hilarious Zebee. I have been posting with the same address
for 14 years now. Sorry, not true, I may for a while have been posting as
[email protected], or [email protected]. or maybe [email protected]
or .com.au. All are still current valid adresses. Then you hear some
bleating from [email protected] about being afraid someone will see
your post. :)

>> Agreed, I'm afraid you may find that they are not the thoughtless
>> bogans you imagine them to be, but otherwise normal locals, who have
>> put up with the noise, and the councils inaction, for years. Not an
>> excuse for their behaviour, just saying who they are.


> That's the problem. THey took a solution that seemed to be the only
> one they had. Why couldn't they think of another one? What other
> things had they tried?
>
> I don't know. THe papers don't say, so I doubt anyone here knows
> either.
>
> THey might be reckless stupid aggressive sociopaths. I doubt it, I
> think it is more likely they were ordinary people tried beyond
> endurance who saw no other solution. meaning there has to be a way to
> show such people other solutions because this isn't the first time
> it's been done and won't be the last.


If you assume bogans out being stupid, and wait for them to do it again in a
nearby area, you will have a long wait.

Theo
 
On Feb 16, 5:56 pm, "Tomasso" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sometimes I think Zebee is some kind of fascist-apoligist Jesuit-educated
> polemicist. A bit like Michael Duffy in drag, or Miranda Devine who has
> momentarily forgotten that cycling is evil.
>
> Other times I think she's some kind of OC focus junkie who will post some
> kind of contrarian nonsense to anything. A person like that who leave enough
> gaps to maintain a thread but basically wastes bandwidth.


It's called empathy, you should try it some time.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/empathy
 
T

Theo Bekkers

Guest
[email protected] wrote:
> On Feb 16, 5:56 pm, "Tomasso" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Sometimes I think Zebee is some kind of fascist-apoligist
>> Jesuit-educated polemicist. A bit like Michael Duffy in drag, or
>> Miranda Devine who has momentarily forgotten that cycling is evil.
>>
>> Other times I think she's some kind of OC focus junkie who will post
>> some kind of contrarian nonsense to anything. A person like that who
>> leave enough gaps to maintain a thread but basically wastes
>> bandwidth.

>
> It's called empathy, you should try it some time.
> http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/empathy


Hehe. Rhymes with apathy.
Up until now I didn't even know that Jesuit-educated was an insult.

Theo
Who's Michael Duffy?
 
On Feb 18, 12:18 pm, "Theo Bekkers" <[email protected]> wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
> > On Feb 16, 5:56 pm, "Tomasso" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Sometimes I think Zebee is some kind of fascist-apoligist
> >> Jesuit-educated polemicist. A bit like Michael Duffy in drag, or
> >> Miranda Devine who has momentarily forgotten that cycling is evil.

>
> >> Other times I think she's some kind of OC focus junkie who will post
> >> some kind of contrarian nonsense to anything. A person like that who
> >> leave enough gaps to maintain a thread but basically wastes
> >> bandwidth.

>
> > It's called empathy, you should try it some time.
> >http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/empathy

>
> Hehe. Rhymes with apathy.
> Up until now I didn't even know that Jesuit-educated was an insult.


Me either actually.

> Theo
> Who's Michael Duffy?


Never heard of him.
 
Z

Zebee Johnstone

Guest
In aus.bicycle on Mon, 18 Feb 2008 10:18:45 +0900
Theo Bekkers <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hehe. Rhymes with apathy.
> Up until now I didn't even know that Jesuit-educated was an insult.
>


Jesuitical as in "Jesuitical argument" is an insult I believe. OF the "dammit, too clever by half
I'd prefer to settle it behind the bike sheds" variety.

I wonder if Jesuit-educated is a riff on that as in "Not quite clever
enough to be Jesuitical".

I was State school educated so missed out on all that.

Zebee
 
T

Theo Bekkers

Guest
Zebee Johnstone wrote:
> Theo Bekkers wrote:


>> Up until now I didn't even know that Jesuit-educated was an insult.


> Jesuitical as in "Jesuitical argument" is an insult I believe. OF
> the "dammit, too clever by half I'd prefer to settle it behind the
> bike sheds" variety.
>
> I wonder if Jesuit-educated is a riff on that as in "Not quite clever
> enough to be Jesuitical".
>
> I was State school educated so missed out on all that.


I went to Montessori Kindy, then Catholic Primary for 4 years, migrated, two
years in Marist Bros primary, three years in Marist Bros boarding school,
then two years in a State high school.

Theo
 
G

G-S

Guest
Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>
> THey might be reckless stupid aggressive sociopaths. I doubt it, I
> think it is more likely they were ordinary people tried beyond
> endurance who saw no other solution.
>


Isn't one definition of a sociopath someone who can't empathize
sufficiently with other people, such that other peoples pain and
injuries become unreal.

And if that person strings wire can't understand that it may cause
serious injury or even death then doesn't that automatically define them?

That's one possibility...

The other I see is that they do understand that their actions have a
real possibility to cause injury and/or death but they place
noise/inconvenience higher in the scheme of things than other peoples
health/life.

Either way... however ordinary they may seem... that's not 'normal'. [1]


G-S

[1] I concede that the persistent noise might drive some people over the
edge and could concievably have been a contributing factor to the mental
issues, but again I can't see defining that as 'normal' or 'ordinary'.
 
G

G-S

Guest
Zebee Johnstone wrote:
>
> PEople don't think of themselves as stupid or evil. They think of
> themselves as doing the right thing.
>


Of course! I never claimed that wasn't the case.

The fact that they 'think' this however doesn't mean it is in fact true.


G-S
 
G

Graeme Dods

Guest
On Feb 17, 1:17 pm, "Theo Bekkers" <[email protected]> wrote:

> I also find that hilarious Zebee. I have been posting with the same address
> for 14 years now. Sorry, not true, I may for a while have been posting as
> [email protected], or [email protected] or maybe [email protected]
> or .com.au. All are still current valid adresses. Then you hear some
> bleating from [email protected] about being afraid someone will see
> your post. :)


You do get some weird complaints about the ID you post with. In an
effort to reduce the chances of receiving spam as a result of my
usenet postings I munged my address a little by inserting
"removethisbit" before the ".com". Then somebody complained it was a
valid domain and somebody might want to start using it (a guide for
clueless surgeons maybe?). A few clicks of the mouse and some credit
card details later and that problem was solved, I see it's about to
expire though, so I should update my details. Either way, I don't even
use that address now, but I'm certainly not anonymous! :)


Graeme
Graeme
 
D

Dave Hughes

Guest
On Sat, 23 Feb 2008 19:04:59 -0800, Graeme Dods wrote:

> You do get some weird complaints about the ID you post with.


At the risk of generating a bucket of spam, "spambait" is actually a valid
address at my vanity domain. Gets stuff all mail, and since "bait" gets
silently dropped the despamming robots tend to shoot themselves in the
foot.

--
Dave Hughes - [email protected]
You're a classic example of that inverse
ratio between the size of the mouth and the
size of the brain - Doctor Who