To the Roadie on the West Coast Road Last night

[Patchelicious]

Actually, just consider what you are saying.. you are questioning his fact with your assumption. Sure it is one side of the story, but you don't have any claim to warrant your suggestions, do you?

 

Perhaps, but you are also assuming his fact is indeed fact. (As I was not there when the incident happened lastnight, I cannot comment on. I can only comment on what is being said here. and no Hairy, Im not questioning your integrity ) You are very right that I have no claim to warrant my suggestion, but thats the point I was making.

 

ps: this was an older post, much positive progress has been since.

[Showtime]

The guy riding without lights is sharing the road with all the other road users so it's not his human right to make that decision. The poor car driver who is going to squash him has to live with that incident for the rest of his life so I wouldn't even have a problem if Hairy confiscated his bike.

[Patchelicious]

I believe that one (Hairy in this instance) should take every chance he can get to carry on riling said rider, until such time as he does buy a light. Ostracize him, effectively, until such time as he realises that, by using a light, he is in fact contributing to the safety of fellow cyclists, road users, and pedestrians.

 

Which is, once again, how moral fibre is reinforced. By MAKING someone realise, through demonstration, example, lecture or otherwise, what the correct course of action should be.

 

 

Making him realise, by way of demonstration, example CONSTRUCTIVE lecture etc I agree with 1billion percent!!!, the first part sounds a bit like bullying him into what you want though.

[Thor Buttox]

could be seen as such and sorry if it was considered as such

No worries at all, Hairy! Sometimes it's the smallest bloody things that cause the arguments and obscure all the important stuff! I know from the other threads! Keep up the good work.

[(Deon)]

Perhaps, but you are also assuming his fact is indeed fact. (As I was not there when the incident happened lastnight, I cannot comment on. I can only comment on what is being said here. and no Hairy, Im not questioning your integrity ) You are very right that I have no claim to warrant my suggestion, but thats the point I was making.

 

ps: this was an older post, much positive progress has been since.

Seems not, you are still trying to impose your otherwise skewed view of the point - which is plain ignorance from the rider.

 

His choice which you have so eloquently conveyed, to choose not to listen is a very real problem in our society. You condone this and "attack" the argument.

 

Nice one bud, well done for undermining the good guy based on your offence in his choice of words.

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

Making him realise, by way of demonstration, example CONSTRUCTIVE lecture etc I agree with 1billion percent!!!, the first part sounds a bit like bullying him into what you want though.

 

Which is, as I said before, how morally correct beliefs / constructs sometimes need to be imparted. If I tell you enough times that you should have your lights on after dark, it eventually becomes a habit. You then realise it IS the right thing to do.

 

Just how you educate a child when they do wrong.

 

No, XXX, that's bad. You mustn't do that 'cos of XYZ Peter Pan goldilocks. You must do this instead.

 

Simplistic example, but it puts the point across. Sometimes a "bully-like" approach is the only way.

[Patchelicious]

The guy riding without lights is sharing the road with all the other road users so it's not his human right to make that decision. The poor car driver who is going to squash him has to live with that incident for the rest of his life so I wouldn't even have a problem if Hairy confiscated his bike.

 

Ride with no light, you try to steal my bike. I try to defend my property and resist, you try harder and it gets out of hand, I have more right to defend my property than you have of proving a point so I get physical defending my R50k bike from a hijacker, you retaliate and violence occurs. See CPT Armpies, getting closer to mob justice. It might not be there yet, but a few small steps in the wrong direction and one crosses a line that can cannot be undone. Rather try and passively educate the guys than try and force them. People just don't like being forced and will resist.

[Showtime]

Making him realise, by way of demonstration, example CONSTRUCTIVE lecture etc I agree with 1billion percent!!!, the first part sounds a bit like bullying him into what you want though.

 

It's got nothing do with what anybody wants. If somebody is riding in the dark without lights he is endangering other road users and it is not allowed. This is not an I prefer Aero, you prefer Bar One kind of disagreement.

[Showtime]

Ride with no light, you try to steal my bike. I try to defend my property and resist, you try harder and it gets out of hand, I have more right to defend my property than you have of proving a point so I get physical defending my R50k bike from a hijacker, you retaliate and violence occurs. See CPT Armpies, getting closer to mob justice. It might not be there yet, but a few small steps in the wrong direction and one crosses a line that can cannot be undone. Rather try and passively educate the guys than try and force them. People just don't like being forced and will resist.

 

This entire thread is an elaborate exercise in missing the point by you. Just put on your lights if you cycle in the dark is all I have to say.

[Patchelicious]

 

His choice which you have so eloquently conveyed, to choose not to listen is a very real problem in our society. You condone this and "attack" the argument.

 

Nice one bud, well done for undermining the good guy based on your offence in his choice of words.

 

BS! I NEVER condoned the guys stupidity, I agreed with guys it was dumb. I was merely saying that he has the right to ignore advice. Unless you have taken every piece of advice you have ever received, your argument holds no value.

 

The choice of words used was the ENTIRE reason I got involved in the thread. I have been saying the whole time, BE A GOOD GUY, JUST DONT BE A DOUCHE ABOUT IT. Is that clear enough for you? Sheez and they troll sprayed me!

[(Deon)]

This entire thread is an elaborate exercise in missing the point by you. Just put on your lights if you cycle in the dark is all I have to say.

 

What do you expect, his back is arched, his chin is out which puts his nose in the air.

 

Archwhatever, you are acting like a TWAT.

[Patchelicious]

Just put on your lights if you cycle in the dark is all I have to say.

 

And that is all that should have been said in the first place.

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

The choice of words used was the ENTIRE reason I got involved in the thread. I have been saying the whole time, BE A GOOD GUY, JUST DONT BE A DOUCHE ABOUT IT.

 

Well then why not say that in the frikkin first place! Say his words were a bit strong, instead of coming in all ArchedBackChinOut and saying he's acting like a douche and only presenting one side of the story, then getting abrasive when people take you on as a perceived sympathiser with the roadie guy?

 

Way to get a point across.

[(Deon)]

I'm fine with that, the one guy you should shake hands with is "the roadie on West Coast Road lastnight" who also agreed to disagree with you.....

 

I call BS!

 

Look at your post.. you want H to shake hands with the guy who chose not to acknowledge or even consider that he could possibly be at fault.

 

You are condoning his actions to ignore the advice.

[bj horn]

This is where we met him last ... no shoulder and great cycle lane

I live just up the road from this spot and regularly commute to CT on a Sat and Sun at about 4.30am .It scares me to be on the Cycletrack with the speeds that the cars are doing .These must be jollers on there way home .Who knows when they are going to fall asleep /hit the curb.Often see damaged fences,black skid marks on the cycletrack.You wont find me on that road!

[Captain Fastbastard Mayhem]

And that is all that should have been said in the first place.

 

It IS all that was said in the first post. The rest of it was providing context and reasons for using a light, in that the rider was and is the typical "cyclist" one sees, and as a result will be the person who we see as being more at risk of being eliminated due to his own stupidity.