![]() |
View
New Forum Topics Today's Forum Topics Set as homepage |
|
|||||||
| |
||||
Welcome to CyclingForums.com You are currently viewing our website as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions. You will have to register before you can post to this thread. By joining our free online community you will have access to post new topics, communicate privately with other cyclingforums.com members (PM), respond to polls, upload photos and access other special features like product reviews and classifieds. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#16 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
G-S wrote:
> ProfTournesol wrote: >> you mean that there is more than one type of arsehole? > Oh without question! > > There are also (as only one example) the type of arsehole who throws > rocks off pedestrian bridges at traffic going underneath (and causes > injury or death as a result). Yes, my son was driving my car and lost a windscreen this way. Damn lucky. Theo |
|
|
|
#17 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 76
|
Quote:
But it's worth pointing out that membership of either type is not mutually exclusive: it is not hard to imagine that the kind of arsehole that strings up wire traps is highly likely to also get a perverse kick out of dropping rocks on cars. A significant overlap in the population of both groups should be expected--however a high IQ in any members of either group is not anticipated... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 876
|
Quote:
Oh come off it Tim, not having those impulses yourself is not the same as not understanding how others can have those impulses. If you can't understand how some people can have those impulses then you're at a serious disadvantage. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
In aus.bicycle on Wed, 13 Feb 2008 22:33:56 +1100
EuanB <EuanB.34pw1b@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> wrote: > > Oh come off it Tim, not having those impulses yourself is not the same > as not understanding how others can have those impulses. If you can't > understand how some people can have those impulses then you're at a > serious disadvantage. and if you dismiss them as subhuman then you have no way to solve the problem. Zebee |
|
|
|
#20 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 935
|
Quote:
I don't agree with the notion that Tim dismissed these idiots as subhuman, I think he rightly dismissed them as idiots. Anyone can understand frustration with the local council, I think most people can understand wishing they could "Do Something About It" and "Teach Them A Lesson They Won't Forget". I understand that there might be some idiots out there who will act without thinking about the consequences... not because I empathize with them, but because sadly I believe these idiots are out there. The perpetrators of the girl's injuries showed a callous disregard for others' safety, far in excess of the injustice they could possibly have felt due to council inaction. This kind of reckless behaviour should be stomped on from a great height as punishment for those involved and as a deterrent for other frustrated gutless individuals. There are now two problems to solve - get the council to take action to keep motorbikes out of the park and to find the gutless wonders who'd exchange noise pollution for someone's life and punish them. Ritch |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
In aus.bicycle on Fri, 15 Feb 2008 21:32:00 +1100
ritcho <ritcho.34tilc@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> 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 |
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
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 |
|
|
|
#23 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
In aus.bicycle on Sat, 16 Feb 2008 08:24:29 +1100
G-S <geoff@castbus.com.au> 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 |
|
|
|
#24 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 935
|
Quote:
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 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#25 | |
|
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 935
|
Quote:
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 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#26 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
"Zebee Johnstone" <zebeej@gmail.com> wrote in message news:slrnfrc1er.5i7.zebeej@gmail.com... > In aus.bicycle on Sat, 16 Feb 2008 08:24:29 +1100 > G-S <geoff@castbus.com.au> 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. |
|
|
|
#27 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
In aus.bicycle on Sat, 16 Feb 2008 14:17:02 +1100
ritcho <ritcho.34ut9b@no-mx.forums.cyclingforums.com> 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 arse it will. Just a lot of holier than thou about how awful someone is, and no real change. Zebee |
|
|
|
#28 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
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. |
|
|
|
#29 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
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 |
|
|
|
#30 |
|
Guest
Posts: n/a
|
In aus.bicycle on Sun, 17 Feb 2008 12:18:19 +0900
Theo Bekkers <tbekkers@bekkers.com.au> 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" <Tomasso@blank.blank> 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 |
|