Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 91
  1. #51
    Banned.
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    2,325
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by SlimRider View Post
    While Jefferson and Locke were great historic figures and philosophers. They lived centuries ago. Times have changed. Today, Jefferson would no longer be able to own slaves, and Locke would no longer be able to profit from "The Royal Africa" slave trading company. Moral values have changed as well. Most Americans no longer live by the motto, "Spare the rod, spoil the child" either. We have somewhat evolved as a society, to the point of accepting people with diverse ethnicities, and biological differences.

    Violence does not really solve any type of a non-violent crime. Of course, you could go round up all of the bike thieves within a fifty-mile radius and have them all summarily shot in the head. However, should you stop there?
    Why not kill car thieves? ...Why not kill all forgers, burglars, and drug dealers?...Why not kill all convicted felons?

    Be careful, there may be some white-collar felons in there too...You know how much we hate to convict and punish white-collar criminals! Should they be rounded up and killed too?

    I say, if these thieves are on drugs, then let's see to it that as part of their sentencing, they are committed to some drug rehab facility. If they are non-violent repeated offenders, then let's provide a honorable trade, by which they may return to society so that they can support themselves and their families.

    If they are repeated violent offenders, then let's make certain that they are released with a skill, given appropriate counseling, and kept under strict scrutiny for two years. However, after three strikes, you're out!

    Personally, I beileve, that most older bike thieves are drug addicts. Drug addiction is a disease that can be cured by many other means than death or violence...

    - Slim

    Slim,

    You confuse change with "evolution". There is nothing more "evolved" about our society versus that of Jefferson or Locke's--it is just different. And Locke's philosophy (like any philosophical system) is timeless. His system is built on axioms (like any philosophical system) and if you accept those axioms, the rest follows logically. Clearly, you don't accept his axiom that property is the most fundamental of all rights... You certainly have that choice... and the logical result is that anyone who wishes to can take your property without consequence--after all you wouldn't be willing to use violence to prevent them.

    Since the only prevention is violence. Either your committing the violence directly, or having the government commit the violence for you in the form of a police officer/judicial system. And simply jailing a criminal is a form of violence. Violence is not a binary action (non-violence/violence), it is a description of degrees, In any situation where two or more persons interact there is some degree of violence. One definition (and a good one) of violence is the depriving of someone else through force (or threat of force) the action that they wish to commit. For instance, in marriage, that violence usually takes the form of compromise or verbal arguments/discussions to achieve such compromise...

    I personally find the theft of property to be as heinous as murder. I don't care if the theft is a bike, a car, or a package of bubble gum... The perpetrator has relinquished all rights to belong in a civilized society.

  2. #52
    Blissketeer HokuLoa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,335
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by jimnolimit View Post
    i think we've veered off course, let's bring it back towards the topic at hand, bike thieves.

    i'll simplify my outlook on the situation: violence isn't the only answer, but sometimes a person deserves an ass kicking.
    No, actually those responses were fully on topic. The topic is roughly justice as exampled by physically punishing a bike thief. While you and others may find that justified the law DOES NOT. So not only is it not legally warranted but it is also a silly mistake in a world of armed and often organized thieves. Make all the justifications you like but I and others who know better can provide volumes of actual experiences where your sort of "justice" goes wrong and land the theft victim seriously injured, dead, or in jail awaiting trial. There are far wiser options that punish the thief and do not open the victim up to further victimization regardless of the "pacifism" question. Bottom line, there ARE times to get physical and from a cost benefit standpoint (given other options) theft simply isn't one of them.

  3. #53
    Blissketeer HokuLoa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,335
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by myrridin View Post
    Theft of property can and should be a capitol crime.

    Most of us have heard the phrase "Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". What many are unaware of is that Jefferson plagiarized the concept from John Locke (whose ideas served as the philosophical underpinnings of our society) who coined the original phrase "Life, liberty, and property".

    When dealing with the anti-social (of which all criminals are but one example) there are two possibilities capitulation or violence. That violence can be vigilante or governmental--never the less it is violence.
    That is so silly it barely warrants a reply. If you truly believe the death penalty is the appropriate response to theft then you surpass even the draconian "morality" of Islamic states. Think about that for a second and you may want to revise your ideology. What is more, your attempt to reduce responses to crime as a binary choice of violence or capitulation is immensely short sighted and problematic. I'm sure it was just hyperbole but it is certainly nonsense and unworthy of utterance even as a conceptual position. If you really think years in prison for non-violent criminal activity is "capitulation" then that is truly sad. By your measure the response to all criminal activity is violence so what do you suggest as punishment for drug possession, public nudity, hacking, public intoxication, or solicitation?? Caning perhaps??

    EDIT:

    Yes, I read your following post. My position stands. I would simply contend that there is little reason to debate our real world position to your philosophical one. Not that there isn't intellectual value to debating the latter but it is not a level sided and useful discussion then. I would however cation you that philosophical systems are not "timeless" in the way you imply. The are informed by the historical context in which they emerge and while some components in the world are timeless, much else is dynamic so new challenges to philosophies can and do render them "dated" and less relevant if not completely inaccurate.
    Last edited by HokuLoa; 10-11-11 at 04:24 PM.

  4. #54
    attacking the streets!
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Brooklyn
    My Bikes
    Jamis Coda Elite
    Posts
    249
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by HokuLoa View Post
    No, actually those responses were fully on topic. The topic is roughly justice as exampled by physically punishing a bike thief. While you and others may find that justified the law DOES NOT. So not only is it not legally warranted but it is also a silly mistake in a world of armed and often organized thieves. Make all the justifications you like but I and others who know better can provide volumes of actual experiences where your sort of "justice" goes wrong and land the theft victim seriously injured, dead, or in jail awaiting trial. There are far wiser options that punish the thief and do not open the victim up to further victimization regardless of the "pacifism" question. Bottom line, there ARE times to get physical and from a cost benefit standpoint (given other options) theft simply isn't one of them.
    a lot of responses are way out in left field. the original topic was about a bike thief getting pushed and slapped a few times after being caught. now people are bringing up murder and the end of the world.

    if someone is trying to steal your bike, you're not going to be able to do anything except scream "bike thief" if you don't get physical. should the day ever come, each person needs to assess that particular situation. should i find someone trying to steal my bike, chances are slim that i'll be screaming "bike thief" while the guy runs.

  5. #55
    Blissketeer HokuLoa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,335
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by jimnolimit View Post
    a lot of responses are way out in left field. the original topic was about a bike thief getting pushed and slapped a few times after being caught. now people are bringing up murder and the end of the world.

    if someone is trying to steal your bike, you're not going to be able to do anything except scream "bike thief" if you don't get physical. should the day ever come, each person needs to assess that particular situation. should i find someone trying to steal my bike, chances are slim that i'll be screaming "bike thief" while the guy runs.
    Hyperbole is one thing but the basic gist is "does turning a witnessed theft warrant or necessitate a violent response and is it wise to do so. I'm telling you simply it doesn't when the end result can likely be a knife or *** pulled and/or escalation including other parties. So, is "justice" by violent reprisal a good idea if the "victim" ends up severely beaten or dead? Not for me. How about if the confrontation escalates and the only option results in the thief maimed or dead? Does that serve the victim to be criminally or civilly liable just to save their bike. Again, not for me. As you said it is a decision for each to assess. Having seen the ramifications of poor decisions (both legally and physically) I know better than to play the "you must defend" fallacy unless it is actually truly necessary.

  6. #56
    Banned.
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    2,325
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by HokuLoa View Post
    That is so silly it barely warrants a reply. If you truly believe the death penalty is the appropriate response to theft then you surpass even the draconian "morality" of Islamic states. Think about that for a second and you may want to revise your ideology. What is more, your attempt to reduce responses to crime as a binary choice of violence or capitulation is immensely short sighted and problematic. I'm sure it was just hyperbole but it is certainly nonsense and unworthy of utterance even as a conceptual position. If you really think years in prison for non-violent criminal activity is "capitulation" then that is truly sad. By your measure the response to all criminal activity is violence so what do you suggest as punishment for drug possession, public nudity, hacking, public intoxication, or solicitation?? Caning perhaps??

    EDIT:

    Yes, I read your following post. My position stands. I would simply contend that there is little reason to debate our real world position to your philosophical one. Not that there isn't intellectual value to debating the latter but it is not a level sided and useful discussion then. I would however cation you that philosophical systems are not "timeless" in the way you imply. The are informed by the historical context in which they emerge and while some components in the world are timeless, much else is dynamic so new challenges to philosophies can and do render them "dated" and less relevant if not completely inaccurate.
    So you believe that prison for theft is not violence? Imprisoning a criminal is no less violent than whacking on them when you catch them (the op video scenario). Capitulation is not engaging in some form of violence to defend your property--even if that violence is calling a public servant to commit that violence in your name... And frankly, the only crimes I would consider crimes are those that cause harm to someone else against their will--so drugs, public nudity, intoxication, etc... shouldn't be crimes... By making them so we are committing a form of violence (threat of punishment) for no legitimate purpose. Hacking would be an exception in your list, since it (much like theft) is a crime that causes harm to another. And frankly, since committing a crime is a personal choice, I consider the death penalty societies best option for dealing with the anti-social human refuse that commits crimes...OF ANY KIND.

    Oh, and a philosophical argument can never be dated (since it is a self contained logical argument), but it can loose relevance for a society that no longer shares beliefs in the philosophies axioms... A distinction you among others seem incapable of understanding... Calling it dated is as self aggrandizing as the OP's use of the term "enlightened" or "evolved" when he refers to his pacifism, as opposed to those brutal human animals that commit violence...

  7. #57
    Banned.
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    2,325
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by HokuLoa View Post
    While you and others may find that justified the law DOES NOT. So not only is it not legally warranted ...
    You are mistaken (or at least generalizing too much). In many places (my state for one) the law does allow the use of force (including lethal force) to defend one's property. My state also indemnifies the citizen against civil suite if the legal system deems the use of force justified.

    Oh, and there is ample evidence that law-abiding citizens in many places are also armed, not just the criminals.., Many examples occur daily of such law abiding citizens causing those criminals to look for better targets...

  8. #58
    Blissketeer HokuLoa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,335
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by myrridin View Post
    So you believe that prison for theft is not violence? Imprisoning a criminal is no less violent than whacking on them when you catch them (the op video scenario). Capitulation is not engaging in some form of violence to defend your property--even if that violence is calling a public servant to commit that violence in your name... And frankly, the only crimes I would consider crimes are those that cause harm to someone else against their will--so drugs, public nudity, intoxication, etc... shouldn't be crimes... By making them so we are committing a form of violence (threat of punishment) for no legitimate purpose. Hacking would be an exception in your list, since it (much like theft) is a crime that causes harm to another. And frankly, since committing a crime is a personal choice, I consider the death penalty societies best option for dealing with the anti-social human refuse that commits crimes...OF ANY KIND.

    Oh, and a philosophical argument can never be dated (since it is a self contained logical argument), but it can loose relevance for a society that no longer shares beliefs in the philosophies axioms... A distinction you among others seem incapable of understanding... Calling it dated is as self aggrandizing as the OP's use of the term "enlightened" or "evolved" when he refers to his pacifism, as opposed to those brutal human animals that commit violence...
    Yeah, sorry but I'm not going to engage in a debate driven by semantics. Much less with someone who simultaneously tries to infuse that debate with THEIR OWN PERSONAL definitions. You know full well what REAL WORLD application we were discussing. Twisting the frame of discussion to fit your own position is as disingenuous as your patronizing and pathetic "incapable of understanding" comment. I have extensive educational background in this and related theory and decades of real world experience that informs my decision making and position so save your cop-out attempts at discrediting me. I'm happy to discuss this rationally but not with someone who insists on shifting the frame of discussion to fit their position.

    On a further note, you are SO SO off base if you think philosophies cannot be dated. Time and temporal realities are a fundamental component of any philosophy and its foundation. To simultaneously say one cannot be dated but CAN lose relevance is just absurd UNLESS you are pigeon holing your position with tailored semantics.

    So no. Not gonna happen. Your next post further supports the futility of engaging in rational further discussion. Application is everything and of course one can support a position in the abstract by tailoring the parameters of the discussion. However, real world experience informs one of REAL WORLD realities. I have both the theoretical and the world experience to know that escalation to PERSONALLY DIRECTED PHYSICAL VIOLENCE does not make sense for a non-violent crime. Bravado and naivety (and perhaps personal luck) may lead one to think otherwise but extensive experience is VERY strong support for choosing other more effective and less risky options.

    Bottom line, people believe what they believe until experience informs them otherwise.....

  9. #59
    Senior Member bigbadwullf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    West, Tn.
    Posts
    1,763
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Things are really a LOT easier with a .40 caliber.
    Generally your hands don't get hurt and dude doesn't get another chance to steal a bike.

    http://tickers.TickerFactory.com/ezt...S/exercise.png

    2012 Specialized Tarmac Elite Rival Mid Compact
    2007 Cannondale Caffeine 29er Lefty. Crank Bros pedals, wireless cateye. Specialized body geometric seat(uh, saddle)

  10. #60
    Blissketeer HokuLoa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,335
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by bigbadwullf View Post
    Things are really a LOT easier with a .40 caliber.
    Generally your hands don't get hurt and dude doesn't get another chance to steal a bike.
    Of course generally speaking you also don't get to enjoy your bike anymore from your new prison home either....

  11. #61
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,793
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If I caught someone trying to steal my bike, I'd have one thing to say:

    "QUIT YOUR F****IN' SCREAMING AND WIPE YOUR BLOOD OFF MY SHOE!"

  12. #62
    Banned.
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    2,325
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by HokuLoa View Post
    Yeah, sorry but I'm not going to engage in a debate driven by semantics. Much less with someone who simultaneously tries to infuse that debate with THEIR OWN PERSONAL definitions. You know full well what REAL WORLD application we were discussing. Twisting the frame of discussion to fit your own position is as disingenuous as your patronizing and pathetic "incapable of understanding" comment. I have extensive educational background in this and related theory and decades of real world experience that informs my decision making and position so save your cop-out attempts at discrediting me. I'm happy to discuss this rationally but not with someone who insists on shifting the frame of discussion to fit their position.

    On a further note, you are SO SO off base if you think philosophies cannot be dated. Time and temporal realities are a fundamental component of any philosophy and its foundation. To simultaneously say one cannot be dated but CAN lose relevance is just absurd UNLESS you are pigeon holing your position with tailored semantics.

    So no. Not gonna happen. Your next post further supports the futility of engaging in rational further discussion. Application is everything and of course one can support a position in the abstract by tailoring the parameters of the discussion. However, real world experience informs one of REAL WORLD realities. I have both the theoretical and the world experience to know that escalation to PERSONALLY DIRECTED PHYSICAL VIOLENCE does not make sense for a non-violent crime. Bravado and naivety (and perhaps personal luck) may lead one to think otherwise but extensive experience is VERY strong support for choosing other more effective and less risky options.

    Bottom line, people believe what they believe until experience informs them otherwise.....
    Yes your right, your so brilliant I just didn't see it since I was blinded by your "light"

    However, there is plenty of evidence that the use of personal violence or the threat there of does wonders at discouraging thieves... Or at least getting rid of them. And as I said despite your "highly educated" claims to the contrary the use of force (including lethal force) is LEGAL in many states (mine included)...

    Of course that is a different issue from my opinion that Thieve (and criminals in general) do not deserve to continue breathing. And in a less screwed up society they wouldn't.

  13. #63
    Blissketeer HokuLoa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,335
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by myrridin View Post
    Yes your right, your so brilliant I just didn't see it since I was blinded by your "light"

    However, there is plenty of evidence that the use of personal violence or the threat there of does wonders at discouraging thieves... Or at least getting rid of them. And as I said despite your "highly educated" claims to the contrary the use of force (including lethal force) is LEGAL in many states (mine included)...

    Of course that is a different issue from my opinion that Thieve (and criminals in general) do not deserve to continue breathing. And in a less screwed up society they wouldn't.
    I never claimed brilliance. I just pointed out that your patronizing condescension ("incapable of understanding") is WAY misplaced with someone who has advanced degrees with heavy emphasis on the subject (realism, power, violence, law etc) and LOTS of global, first hand experience. You are the one resorting to absurdly dismissive personal comments and irrational arguments. If you fail to back up your position without re-framing, drifting to theoretical abstraction, or just plain old inaccuracy that is your problem not mine. It reflects a ton more on you than it does on me so flame away, you simply are not worth my time....

    Enjoy!

  14. #64
    Senior Member jack002's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Southwest MO
    My Bikes
    (1) 1993 Cannondale R900, red
    Posts
    594
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DX-MAN View Post
    If I caught someone trying to steal my bike, I'd have one thing to say:

    "QUIT YOUR F****IN' SCREAMING AND WIPE YOUR BLOOD OFF MY SHOE!"
    LOL! +1
    I can totally defend that.
    Biking isn't a sport because anybody can do it. I can bike, you can bike. For goodness sakes, my mother can bike! You don't see her on the cover of Sports Illustrated, do you?

  15. #65
    Member JamesSGE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Worldwide
    My Bikes
    GT Aggressor
    Posts
    31
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by SlimRider View Post
    Ever been so pissed, you just plain lose it?

    - Slim

    I'm just say'n...

    Legend !!!

  16. #66
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    4,793
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Wow.

    HokuLoa and myrriddin getting INTO it on a somewhat metaphysical level!

    OK, my two cents......

    1. Education is not wisdom; neither is one man's, or one group's, life experiences the yardstick for all. Hoku, you need to dial it back a touch. Your background may well be full of deep experiences of life, but you're as susceptible to error as all of us.

    2. Myrr, redefining crime and then advocating for capital punishment for ALL crime is theory in its most ethereal; let's stay on topic.

    Sure, it's a fact that more than a few people have been hurt and/or wrongly imprisoned for 'taking the law into their own hands'; MANY have NOT. Those that have not are usually people who have some real-life experience to draw from, and not just a societal more'.

    I said it before, only a little bit tongue-in-cheek, that I would tell a thief to quit screaming and wipe his blood off my shoe. My foundation for that is this:

    I'm an old soldier, with a variety of training; I didn't just start with basic, nor did I stop there. I made it a point to learn deadly force with hands and feet, because I believe someday I will need that knowledge. HAVING that knowledge allows for non-deadly, but still significant, force to be applied. If someone decides that MY property, a material thing that I decided would make my life better (and therefore traded for the fruits of my irreplaceable hours of life and labor), should be theirs JUST because they think they can TAKE it, well... come and get it, partner. It's the manifest of a piece OF my life you're trying to take, and YOU JUST WON'T BE DOING IT WITHOUT ME HAVING A PROBLEM WITH IT.

  17. #67
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,502
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If I catch a bike thief red-handed, I don't condone violence.

    I would thank whoever blindsided, cold-cocked him to the side of the face.
    ... and watch the dazed thief trip and hit his face on the pavement. Repeatedly.


    ... but I would just hog tie him and call the police, and tell them a bike thief is waiting for them.
    Always let the law take care of it. It will prevent the thief from being a repeat offender.

  18. #68
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Northern California
    My Bikes
    Raleigh Grand Prix, Giant Innova, Nishiki Sebring, Trek 7.5FX
    Posts
    5,804
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by cruiserhead View Post
    If I catch a bike thief red-handed, I don't condone violence.

    I would thank whoever blindsided, cold-cocked him to the side of the face.
    ... and watch the dazed thief trip and hit his face on the pavement. Repeatedly.


    ... but I would just hog tie him and call the police, and tell them a bike thief is waiting for them.
    Always let the law take care of it. It will prevent the thief from being a repeat offender.
    Cruiserhead!

    Shame on you! I've never heard of such a huge crock of BS in my entire life. Just say how you really feel! Stand up and be a man about it! Express your innermost feelings about the true details of the actual encounter between you and the bike thief that you catch red-handed trying to steal your bike. There's no shame in this revelation!
    C'mon! Just say it!


    - Slim

  19. #69
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Temecula, CA
    My Bikes
    Habanero 2009
    Posts
    94
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Friend of mine was takingnight classes at a college in NYC. Heleft after class to go to his car only to find a crowd near it and police witha suspect in cuffs. He then saw that hiswindow was broken and that his car stereo was on the sidewalk. (Crackhead brokeinto his car and tried to steal his stereo.)

    The police told him that theycould take the suspect into custody, or they could leave him there with myfriend so he could "educate" the perp.

    My friend said to leave himthere, whereupon the police uncuffed the perp and walked to their policecar. My friend started wailing on the perp,only to have the cops tell him to wait until they were gone!

    Law enforcement-approved street justice.

  20. #70
    Blissketeer HokuLoa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    1,335
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by DX-MAN View Post
    Wow.
    1. Education is not wisdom; neither is one man's, or one group's, life experiences the yardstick for all. Hoku, you need to dial it back a touch. Your background may well be full of deep experiences of life, but you're as susceptible to error as all of us.
    Debatable but not the point. I brought my educational and professional experience into the thread as a response to the "incapable of understanding" nonsense being used to dismiss my position. It served the purpose of informing the respondent what an absurd assumption his assertion was given the fact that both my education and my life experience are rooted in both the theory and application of the topics discussed. What it comes down to is that my education provided the foundation knowledge, the statistical background, and the analytical expertise to look at this and related subjects objectively.

    Am I open to error? Absolutely, and I am always happy to admit I'm wrong and learn. However, with both the education and decades of professional experience filled with anecdotal examples to back up the statistics I know to be true..., well I'm open to new data but it doesn't leave much room for argument. It is a basic difference between being truly objective versus subjective. So while yes I may be susceptible to error, I frankly am not "as susceptible as all of us" as you put it. That is kind of like saying a software engineer is as susceptible to error when discuss coding as is a lawyer. Sure as a generalization but definitely not when discussing their particular field.

    Either way, I've re-realized the futility of debate in online forums. People are not required to be objective or rational so there really is little point in trying. People will do/believe what they feel is right. I wish them all the best...

  21. #71
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,502
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    That's weird, when I put this through the 4G double-talk translator...
    Quote Originally Posted by HokuLoa View Post
    Debatable but not the point. I brought my educational and professional experience into the thread as a response to the "incapable of understanding" nonsense being used to dismiss my position. It served the purpose of informing the respondent what an absurd assumption his assertion was given the fact that both my education and my life experience are rooted in both the theory and application of the topics discussed. What it comes down to is that my education provided the foundation knowledge, the statistical background, and the analytical expertise to look at this and related subjects objectively.

    Am I open to error? Absolutely, and I am always happy to admit I'm wrong and learn. However, with both the education and decades of professional experience filled with anecdotal examples to back up the statistics I know to be true..., well I'm open to new data but it doesn't leave much room for argument. It is a basic difference between being truly objective versus subjective. So while yes I may be susceptible to error, I frankly am not "as susceptible as all of us" as you put it. That is kind of like saying a software engineer is as susceptible to error when discuss coding as is a lawyer. Sure as a generalization but definitely not when discussing their particular field.

    Either way, I've re-realized the futility of debate in online forums. People are not required to be objective or rational so there really is little point in trying. People will do/believe what they feel is right. I wish them all the best...
    ...I get this--->
    Quote Originally Posted by DX-MAN View Post

    1. Education is not wisdom; neither is one man's, or one group's, life experiences the yardstick for all. Hoku, you need to dial it back a touch. Your background may well be full of deep experiences of life, but you're as susceptible to error as all of us.

  22. #72
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Northern California
    My Bikes
    Raleigh Grand Prix, Giant Innova, Nishiki Sebring, Trek 7.5FX
    Posts
    5,804
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Cruiserhead, you're truly a profound character...

    That was deep!

    - Slim

  23. #73
    Junior Member bikenooby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    South Georgia
    Posts
    6
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Honestly,
    You all have been tricked by a very good conversationalist. His name is Slim. He has been infected by the infamous troll disease. Symptoms: flip flopping your responses to encourage more responses, starting threads that have been talked to death in the past, and further more, posting just to get post counts above the norm. We all need to come together and cure poor Slim of his trollishness. Will you join me, and no longer respond to this troll, for Slim!

    Thanks,

    -- BN
    Last edited by bikenooby; 10-25-11 at 11:54 PM.

  24. #74
    Buddy Ratzinger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    406
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I watched that video. I find it ugly and sad to see one person trying to hurt another like that.
    I'm not judging the attacker. I don't know how I would react in that situation.

    This has been an interesting discussion. I would like to say that harsh justice often doesn't solve the root problems of crime and poverty to begin with.
    Also, there is a difference in what people do in the heat of the moment (like the guy in the video) and what the justice systems can do to people in cold blood (death penalty, for example). We need a system that rises above our human frailties.

  25. #75
    Banned
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Northern California
    My Bikes
    Raleigh Grand Prix, Giant Innova, Nishiki Sebring, Trek 7.5FX
    Posts
    5,804
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Bikenooby says:
    You all have been tricked by a very good conversationalist. His name is Slim.
    He has been infected by the infamous troll disease. Symptoms: flip flopping your
    responses to encourage more responses, starting threads that have been talked to
    death in the past, and further more, posting just to get post counts above the
    norm. We all need to come together and cure poor Slim of his trollishness. Will
    you join me, and no longer respond to this troll, for Slim!

    You're not too observant, Bikenooby.

    I really haven't given this thread that much attention, given that I started it. I've lost bikes due to theft before and it's a very painful experience. I've quite often thought about just what I would do, if I were to catch a thief red-handed at stealing my bike. Just wanted to get other people's opinions on the matter.

    It's just that simple! ...No trolling....Well, I don't know. Whenever, you start a thread, you do want people to pay attention to it, don't you? ...Therefore, since most trolls, post for attention, I guess, since I want people to read and comment on whatever I post, I guess that could make me a troll.

    However, it would also make most other people trolls too! Then, anybody who posts more than the average number of posts, could be considered as a troll.

    I have a few strong opinions about bike frame materials. In particular, I have an opinion about how aluminum entered into the bicycle market. It's possible that I'm wrong, but it's my opinion. It's an opinion that I find interesting and found a few others who agree with me and feel the exact same way. I love cycling and bicycles. I am currently not doing well health-wise and I find BF entertaining. I feel free to write or comment about my most beloved past time, cycling.

    If that makes me a troll, then I guess, I'm a troll!

    - Slim
    Last edited by SlimRider; 10-26-11 at 12:18 PM.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •