Oldjohnw wrote:The heading of this article is accurate.
Just saying.
only if you also agree that a mass shooting incident in the USA could be titled
Not all gun owners are perfect (gunman shoots X people )
Oldjohnw wrote:The heading of this article is accurate.
Just saying.
soapbox wrote:Tangled Metal wrote:It isn't what you see yourself as but what others see you as. They see you ride a bike, you're a cyclist. Once you're a cyclist, you're one of a group. How you see it doesn't alter that viewpoint of others. There's more "others" than there are you or us (whether you believe in "us" or not).
+ 1
Oldjohnw wrote:Oh I agree. But how often do we get all motorists written off as idiots?
..
Cyril Haearn wrote:Oldjohnw wrote:Oh I agree. But how often do we get all motorists written off as idiots?
..
Nearly all mortons are illiterate
Try spending some time observing traffic at a STOP sign
Cunobelin wrote:The hysterical desire of some to malign "cyclists" is classic here.
If someone commits a crime and gets away on a cycle then "Cyclist" commits a crime. If they getaway in a car, why is it never reported "Motorist" commits crime?
When did you last see "Motorist" burgles/robs/ mugs etc?
Cunobelin wrote:The hysterical desire of some to defend "cyclists" is classic here.
If someone commits a crime and gets away on a cycle then "Cyclist" commits a crime. If they getaway in a car, why is it never reported "Motorist" commits crime?
When did you last see "Motorist" burgles/robs/ mugs etc?
Tangled Metal wrote:Cunobelin wrote:The hysterical desire of some to defend "cyclists" is classic here.
If someone commits a crime and gets away on a cycle then "Cyclist" commits a crime. If they getaway in a car, why is it never reported "Motorist" commits crime?
When did you last see "Motorist" burgles/robs/ mugs etc?
FTFY!
Seriously though. It's often the case on this site above most other cycling sites I visit where there is a higher rate of hysterical defence of cyclists. I used your wording to describe it because as someone who sees individuals as the ones committing offences not an assigned label I can see and fully accept that people commit offences and sometimes used bikes, cars, Shank's pony or any other mode to get to the location if the offence.
Isn't it time we all learnt to condemn the crime / not jump to a defence when a cyclist it's involved and in the process lose the attitude of concentrating on the transport method in cases like this?
reohn2 wrote:Cyclist jumps a red,nearly knocks someone down,who protests.Then returns and headbutts complainant.
Offence is directly related to hte cyclist's behaviour so in this instance the cyclist(rightly identified as such)is a thug,end of.
Cugel wrote:.......... The devil's in the detail.
Cugel
reohn2 wrote:Cugel wrote:.......... The devil's in the detail.
Cugel
But the answer in this case is in the CCTV footage, the cyclist was a thug,end of.
Cugel wrote:reohn2 wrote:Cugel wrote:.......... The devil's in the detail.
Cugel
But the answer in this case is in the CCTV footage, the cyclist was a thug,end of.
The question that I'm asking, though, is: did the thug act thuggish because he was cycling or a cyclist; or was the thug already imbued with thuggery from other causes and just happened to do-a-thug whilst riding a bike, rather than when walking to Weatherspoons to get polatik or riding his horse to the gymkhana where he likes to trample small horsey girls on Shetland ponies?
Cugel