Path: ...!npeer.as286.net!npeer-ng0.as286.net!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: cyclists attack auto driver
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2024 13:03:08 -0500
Organization: Yellow Jersey, Ltd.
Lines: 101
Message-ID: <v9qokt$20b68$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v9l8ud$10n7l$2@dont-email.me>
 <o4csbjdtu8t99sjjeeijjshjs17ko4miln@4ax.com> <v9ldee$10n7m$7@dont-email.me>
 <v9ldkv$11ai1$2@dont-email.me> <uefubjl289nishqcq5eqdeqdj0vj0rt7t6@4ax.com>
 <v9o65q$1h8t3$1@dont-email.me> <0ibvbjtnogf47avmn1v8rj5sf94g9corum@4ax.com>
 <v9ot76$1kbqe$3@dont-email.me> <v9p1b4$1kr20$4@dont-email.me>
 <v9p25b$1kbqe$10@dont-email.me> <v9q8ib$1tr17$3@dont-email.me>
 <qv91cj16mii1vspjgoii6v8dtgv6mtb03n@4ax.com> <v9qe9g$1ulvl$1@dont-email.me>
 <aeh1cj5t0uq1pct9g8270i9bh035o3arqs@4ax.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2024 20:03:10 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="34e2c7e9af7928a732b379e00e27d287";
	logging-data="2108616"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18pKiDcMB0T8IQShKaxwwXm"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:QnNRN7v+DEe3JRt8DVED0jfIERI=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <aeh1cj5t0uq1pct9g8270i9bh035o3arqs@4ax.com>
Bytes: 5749

On 8/17/2024 10:46 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 10:06:23 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> 
>> On 8/17/2024 8:52 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>>> On Sat, 17 Aug 2024 08:28:43 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 8/16/2024 9:33 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>> On 8/16/2024 10:19 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/16/2024 8:08 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/16/2024 3:59 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Krygowski has yet to comprehend the simple fact that
>>>>>>>> benefits and
>>>>>>>> detriments are subjective.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Benefits and detriments can very often be measured. The
>>>>>>> benefits of bicycling have been measured in terms of
>>>>>>> increased health, reduced health care costs, years of
>>>>>>> life saved, pollution reduced, etc. etc. I've seen and
>>>>>>> filed at least five studies that have done that, each one
>>>>>>> showing that the benefits of bicycling far outweigh its
>>>>>>> tiny risks.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The detriments of American gun craziness can also be
>>>>>>> measured. As just one example, huge numbers of schools
>>>>>>> now hire full time security guards in case some whacko
>>>>>>> with an AR attempts to enter the building. The buildings
>>>>>>> themselves are now often "hardened," with various weapon
>>>>>>> detecting and weapon resisting technologies. That was
>>>>>>> never the case until the current gun mania came into
>>>>>>> fashion; and taxpayers pick up the bill for that extra
>>>>>>> security - as they do for advanced protective equipment
>>>>>>> for most policing. So we all pay for the gun fetishists
>>>>>>> fantasy hobby.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It would make sense to levy a massive tax on every gun
>>>>>>> with, say, more than 6 rounds capacity, to pay for the
>>>>>>> security expenses they generate. But of course, the
>>>>>>> "Gotta have a big gun" crew is also the "No new taxes"
>>>>>>> crew. They want others to pay for their play toys'
>>>>>>> consequences.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> p.s.
>>>>>> You cannot tax an enumerated right. *example = poll tax)
>>>>>> This is once again in the courts.
>>>>>
>>>>> You may be right. But I didn't say it was legally possible.
>>>>> I said only that it would make sense.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not in our (yet relatively)  free Constitutional Republic.
>>>> It's nonsense.
>>>>
>>>> More deeply, as Chesterton actually wrote (popularly
>>>> misquoted by JFK):
>>>>
>>>> In the matter of reforming things, as distinct from
>>>> deforming them, there is one plain and simple principle; a
>>>> principle which will probably be called a paradox. There
>>>> exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us
>>>> say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected
>>>> across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily
>>>> up to it and says, “I don’t see the use of this; let us
>>>> clear it away.” To which the more intelligent type of
>>>> reformer will do well to answer: “If you don’t see the use
>>>> of it, I certainly won’t let you clear it away. Go away and
>>>> think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do
>>>> see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it.
>>>>
>>>> Our Framers had indeed thought deeply before composing our
>>>> Constitution and argued, discussed, fought and reconsidered
>>>> repeatedly before writing.
>>>
>>> How wonderful is the fact that they made the requirments for amending
>>> the Constitution too difficult and complex for the bureaucrats to
>>> fiddle with it in accordance with their whims and presumptions.
>>
>>
>> Uh, mostly.
>> Not including the occasional mass hysteria:
>>
>> https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-18/
>>
>> Or our modern inability to think logically or compose clearly:
>>
>> https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-25/
> 
> 
> ...and occasional outright stupidity...
> 
> https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-17/


'Stupid' discounts the value of 'pernicious'. It was a naked 
power move, for which we suffer even yet.
-- 
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971