PygaSchmyga Posted June 4, 2020 Posted June 4, 2020 Of course its never as black and white as that but that fits the general trend. Here's an extreme example: Should Apartheid laws have been obeyed?Many, many people didn't and I'm sure you were one of them. Does that make you a bad person?pulls pin, retires to safe distance....
DieselnDust Posted June 4, 2020 Posted June 4, 2020 Weren't you the guy that defended CSA when they were imposing draconian rules on cyclists? remind me because I don't recall
Eldron Posted June 4, 2020 Posted June 4, 2020 Of course its never as black and white as that but that fits the general trend. Here's an extreme example: Should Apartheid laws have been obeyed?Many, many people didn't and I'm sure you were one of them. Does that make you a bad person? I'm not sure what point you're trying to make...of course apartheid laws were wrong. We could go around in circles with me asking asking the equal and opposite question - can I rape, murder and pillage because I don't believe in those laws and think they shouldn't apply to me (and use the apartheid law to justify my actions cos not all laws are right). Me - I like the social responsibility approach to laws. Do the right thing. Of course that is subjective but by and large people have a good right/wrong barometer. I figure corona is a great example. Wearing a mask protects others - do it. Riding is non essential - if you feel uncomfortable in a mask then ride your bike at home on Zwift where you get to ride AND not leave your trail of virus all over the road, lamp post, coffee shops etc. This whole I want to do what I want, how I want, when I want and it has nothing to do with you me me me me ME approach is never going to build a cohesive society. Stefalbertyn, Yassis, The Ouzo and 4 others 7
Fisan Posted June 4, 2020 Posted June 4, 2020 This fred is getting more entertaining every day. I'm really curious as this is a cycling forum after all: how many of you stop at red robot? Or how many go nah 'people in apartheid/nazi germany did not abide by the silly rules' and just jump it? Do you do the same in a car? If so, why or why not? mazambaan, Paul Ruinaard and dave303e 3
PygaSchmyga Posted June 4, 2020 Posted June 4, 2020 I'm not sure what point you're trying to make...of course apartheid laws were wrong. We could go around in circles with me asking asking the equal and opposite question - can I rape, murder and pillage because I don't believe in those laws and think they shouldn't apply to me (and use the apartheid law to justify my actions cos not all laws are right). Me - I like the social responsibility approach to laws. Do the right thing. Of course that is subjective but by and large people have a good right/wrong barometer. I figure corona is a great example. Wearing a mask protects others - do it. Riding is non essential - if you feel uncomfortable in a mask then ride your bike at home on Zwift where you get to ride AND not leave your trail of virus all over the road, lamp post, coffee shops etc. This whole I want to do what I want, how I want, when I want and it has nothing to do with you me me me me ME approach is never going to build a cohesive society.your logic encourages blind obedience, and is equally problematic. There is no substance to your earlier argument that by critically considering laws we will end up in an inevitable societal breakdown. Quite the opposite, and the e-tolls saga is a perfect example gemmerbal and DieselnDust 2
PygaSchmyga Posted June 4, 2020 Posted June 4, 2020 This fred is getting more entertaining every day. I'm really curious as this is a cycling forum after all: how many of you stop at red robot? Or how many go nah 'people in apartheid/nazi germany did not abide by the silly rules' and just jump it? Do you do the same in a car? If so, why or why not?in my car i stop at every single red light, irrespective of time of day, lack of traffic. On my bike, I stop to check, and if clear I will proceed
Chris_ Posted June 4, 2020 Posted June 4, 2020 your logic encourages blind obedience, and is equally problematic. There is no substance to your earlier argument that by critically considering laws we will end up in an inevitable societal breakdown. Quite the opposite, and the e-tolls saga is a perfect example I forget the etolls exactly, there were petitions right? legal groups were formed. Majority of people didn't/don't pay. were there protests ever?
Paul Ruinaard Posted June 4, 2020 Posted June 4, 2020 This fred is getting more entertaining every day. I'm really curious as this is a cycling forum after all: how many of you stop at red robot? Or how many go nah 'people in apartheid/nazi germany did not abide by the silly rules' and just jump it? Do you do the same in a car? If so, why or why not?How can you expect a car or motorist to respect you if you refuse to abide by the laws of the road that are operative. If everyone used your logic no matter what vehicle they were in there would be underlying chaos. The system needs people to subscribe especially as the number of participants gets bigger otherwise chaos results. Do you get indignant when taxis run red lights? What happened if they had "checked" and thought it was safe and took you or your loved ones out? Would you sue them for hopping a red light and would you be happy if their defence in court was a video of you doing the same on your bike that it was a commonly accepted practice? You wnat cars to respect you on your bike behave like a road user that is safe. You behave otherwise you get the same back from them. I have never seen a guy on a bicycle almost get taken out when safely stopped at a red light but i have often seen guys get taken out or almost get seriously hurt when either they did not stop or a car did not stop at a light. Back to masks and the law: I am pretty sure wearing a mask will protect me and others - it may be a chore and inconvenience but i am 100% certain that not wearing one makes all of us less safe. So a decision to subscribe to variations of the law increases the risks you expose others to via your choices. Stop at the lights when you are on your bike. It isn't that difficult. Wear a mask in public and whenever you can on your ride. Think of others #just saying Stefalbertyn and Quagga 2
The Ouzo Posted June 4, 2020 Posted June 4, 2020 This fred is getting more entertaining every day. I'm really curious as this is a cycling forum after all: how many of you stop at red robot? Or how many go nah 'people in apartheid/nazi germany did not abide by the silly rules' and just jump it? Do you do the same in a car? If so, why or why not?This argument that keeps coming up of "if youve done wrong you cant comment on others doing wrong" holds no water. By that reasoning there is not a single person in this world that can make or enforce any laws/rules gemmerbal, PygaSchmyga, Patchelicious and 1 other 4
Eldron Posted June 4, 2020 Posted June 4, 2020 your logic encourages blind obedience, and is equally problematic. There is no substance to your earlier argument that by critically considering laws we will end up in an inevitable societal breakdown. Quite the opposite, and the e-tolls saga is a perfect exampleHow do you equate socially responsible to blind obedience? That makes no sense. Ah yes etolls. The public did nothing. Exactly that. Nothing. OUTA that changed that for you. Patchelicious, dsw, Quagga and 1 other 4
River Rat Posted June 4, 2020 Posted June 4, 2020 remind me because I don't recallhttps://community.bikehub.co.za/topic/168504-wtf-csa/page-56?do=findComment&comment=3389852It just seems in congruent to argue on the one topic that rules and regulations are important only to call for dissent on another. NickGM 1
Chris_ Posted June 4, 2020 Posted June 4, 2020 This argument that keeps coming up of "if youve done wrong you cant comment on others doing wrong" holds no water. By that reasoning there is not a single person in this world that can make or enforce any laws/rules Yes I agree. But a good point was raised earlier about likening our L4 rules to whats happening in the US with BLM protest, and Apartheid, and possibly etolls. My problem though, is that all the above have a single message that is taken through mass protest to govt. People did work, took to the streets, groups formed, communication, support channels, tangible affects. I don't think coming to an online forum and gloating about flouting a rule when it least suits you individually fits a viable protest logic. Of course I don't know what said individuals are doing in the background but I suspect its nothing. Vetplant 1
River Rat Posted June 4, 2020 Posted June 4, 2020 Yes I agree. But a good point was raised earlier about likening our L4 rules to whats happening in the US with BLM protest, and Apartheid, and possibly etolls. My problem though, is that all the above have a single message that is taken through mass protest to govt. People did work, took to the streets, groups formed, communication, support channels, tangible affects. I don't think coming to an online forum and gloating about flouting a rule when it least suits you individually fits a viable protest logic. Of course I don't know what said individuals are doing in the background but I suspect its nothing.If the Zuma protests is a yardstick you won't see these online protesters do anything. My wife and I stood outside the union buildings shoulder to shoulder with EFF and IFP supporters there were very few whiteys to be seen. We are fantastic keyboard warriors and rebels in our own lunchtime but that's about it. DieselnDust, Vetplant, Patchelicious and 4 others 7
PygaSchmyga Posted June 4, 2020 Posted June 4, 2020 I forget the etolls exactly, there were petitions right? legal groups were formed. Majority of people didn't/don't pay. were there protests ever? How do you equate socially responsible to blind obedience? That makes no sense. Ah yes etolls. The public did nothing. Exactly that. Nothing. OUTA that changed that for you.People just didn't pay. It was the law to pay, but they considered it an unjust and irrational law - don't you get that? OUTA took over to try to get the law changed. DieselnDust 1
PygaSchmyga Posted June 4, 2020 Posted June 4, 2020 How can you expect a car or motorist to respect you if you refuse to abide by the laws of the road that are operative. If everyone used your logic no matter what vehicle they were in there would be underlying chaos. The system needs people to subscribe especially as the number of participants gets bigger otherwise chaos results. Do you get indignant when taxis run red lights? What happened if they had "checked" and thought it was safe and took you or your loved ones out? Would you sue them for hopping a red light and would you be happy if their defence in court was a video of you doing the same on your bike that it was a commonly accepted practice? You wnat cars to respect you on your bike behave like a road user that is safe. You behave otherwise you get the same back from them. I have never seen a guy on a bicycle almost get taken out when safely stopped at a red light but i have often seen guys get taken out or almost get seriously hurt when either they did not stop or a car did not stop at a light. Back to masks and the law: I am pretty sure wearing a mask will protect me and others - it may be a chore and inconvenience but i am 100% certain that not wearing one makes all of us less safe. So a decision to subscribe to variations of the law increases the risks you expose others to via your choices. Stop at the lights when you are on your bike. It isn't that difficult. Wear a mask in public and whenever you can on your ride. Think of others #just sayingThis is a lazy argument, and ignores the real point. The pseudo moral high ground "Think of the children when you buy that next plane ticket man" can be used to to rain judgement on ANY behaviour, if you want to be perfectly righteous. If, however, you want to try to balance workable solutions that adequately protect society, while at the same time critically considering the laws around you, then sure, you have to get into the weeds. And THIS is the real point that is being debated. Responsible, clear thinking citizens have considered SOME of the lockdown regulations, and have decided to ignore them. If this makes you uncomfortable, then so be it. I guess you can take the moral high ground because "RULES IS RULES", but society also has critical thinkers that ultimately effect change that benefits everyone Paul Ruinaard and DieselnDust 2
River Rat Posted June 4, 2020 Posted June 4, 2020 (edited) This is a lazy argument, and ignores the real point. The pseudo moral high ground "Think of the children when you buy that next plane ticket man" can be used to to rain judgement on ANY behaviour, if you want to be perfectly righteous. If, however, you want to try to balance workable solutions that adequately protect society, while at the same time critically considering the laws around you, then sure, you have to get into the weeds. And THIS is the real point that is being debated. Responsible, clear thinking citizens have considered SOME of the lockdown regulations, and have decided to ignore them. If this makes you uncomfortable, then so be it. I guess you can take the moral high ground because "RULES IS RULES", but society also has critical thinkers that ultimately effect change that benefits everyoneLet's all be rebels it's the smart thing to do.https://youtu.be/8_Yej-fFYsI Edited June 4, 2020 by River Rat
Recommended Posts