porqui Posted March 18, 2014 Posted March 18, 2014 (edited) Hey guys she's long gone - did you not read the last line in her last post and I quote. "I think I've got what I wanted out of this, so thanks everyone." You have been played! 14 pages - blows my beeper. (but I suspect she will peep every now and then - ha!) Edited March 18, 2014 by porqui
Eldron Posted March 18, 2014 Posted March 18, 2014 Hey guys she's long gone - did you not read the last line in her last post and I quote. Did you not read my post? I'm a rule bender - that's just how I roll. Blackbeard and porqui 2
BarHugger Posted March 18, 2014 Posted March 18, 2014 This would be EPIC........just imagine all the skid marks and dust.....
djsam Posted March 18, 2014 Posted March 18, 2014 Brake! said "My problem is with the bare assertion that the arguments put are all weak ones - OP, why is that so?" Thank you for your reasoned response. I realise you're coming in quite late in the discussion and so you probably haven't read the whole thread, but these were not bare assertions. The list was a summary and I've gone into great depth as to why each of those points are, in my view, weak. But of course, strength is relative and subjective - in my opinion, the increased convenience and safety of the manouever justifies breaking the law. For your benefit I'll summarise as fast as possible: "It's the law" - I don't cherry pick laws to follow or break, I disregard the law completely. Fact is, by and large, you do too. Even experienced lawyers do not know the law of the land by heart - so I'd contend you don't even know most of the time whether you are acting legally. I live a moral and decent life, and laws are completely superfluous to my needs. If you can't behave without a law to tell you what to do, you're a pretty sorry person. This is why I couldn't care whether the law is changed, I simply don't recognise its authority over me. The argument and the comparisons to apartheid were merely to demonstrate that the law is not the be-all-and-end-all. 2) You refuted your own argument when you said "BUT that involves every single cyclist riding by the rules of the road and being considerate". That will NEVER happen. Motorists hate cyclists, and as I keep saying I think that is because they are not cars (less visible and slower moving) rather than because they break laws. Motorists will still hate me and potentially hurt me regardless of whether I jump the light, just they won't feel as vindicated in it. 3) Setting a bad example. Parenting your children is not my responsibility. Children are smarter than you give them credit for, and there are plenty of things in the big wide scary world that you're going to need to teach your children not to do. I would absolutely teach my children to do as I do, not as I say. I would teach them to think for themselves and do good things because they make you feel good rather than because some authority told them they must. 4) Upsetting someone who kills you. I dismissed this because it is applicable to ANY cyclist, including a law-abiding one. In fact, if you are killed when you are breaking the law at least they have that to console themselves. If, as I argue, you're safer when you abide by common sense rather than the letter of the law, then you are also less likely to be killed than a law-abiding person. As I stated in the OP I'm just looking for opinions, not a golden bullet. I am now on day 2 of following the rules, and I am seeking better justification than those points that I myself laid out: better justification, not a golden bullet. Better is relative. You're not adding anything new. Thanks Tubehunter, Catatonic_Joe, Stoffies1, amongst others, for "getting" where I was coming from. Thanks Corvus for your interesting post, I'm not going to reply - as I stated, I'm not interested in changing the law, I'm only interested in the motivation behind the action. I think I've got what I wanted out of this, so thanks everyone. wow if you spent as much time training as you did debating a superfluous topic you'd be a pro.. sorry.. just way to long to read so i had a witty response... instead
DIPSLICK Posted March 18, 2014 Posted March 18, 2014 BUMPThree pages back this is what you said This thread has lost the plot.Please end the craziness. So adding to bogus BUT WHY.??? BogusOne 1
DIPSLICK Posted March 18, 2014 Posted March 18, 2014 Dale,,,bored or losing your mind buddy??? BogusOne 1
Capricorn Posted March 18, 2014 Posted March 18, 2014 Dale,,,bored or losing your mind buddy??? making sure he claims top spammer award 3 years straight. Who needs real jobs right? DIPSLICK 1
'Dale Posted March 18, 2014 Posted March 18, 2014 Dale,,,bored or losing your mind buddy??? Sarcastic BUMP *yawn* DIPSLICK 1
BogusOne Posted March 18, 2014 Posted March 18, 2014 making sure he claims top spammer award 3 years straight. Who needs real jobs right? Hahaha good one Capricorn
'Dale Posted March 18, 2014 Posted March 18, 2014 making sure he claims top spammer award 3 years straight. Who needs real jobs right? As if there's 10 000 Euros as reward for top poster...I don't spam either.Easy now, Capricorn.
SwissVan Posted March 18, 2014 Posted March 18, 2014 Did i ever tell you about the pedistrian crossing i jogged over the otherday without waiting for the little green man to come on? The Big Bad Norm 1
BogusOne Posted March 18, 2014 Posted March 18, 2014 Bring Up My Post Remember the old days when classifieds was still part of the threads we used to see plenty Bumps.... Wyatt Earp 1
Recommended Posts