Those caring sharing motorists again

David Hansen said:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/3759692.stm has an article on
another example of childish stupidity from a motorist, this time
towards someone on a skateboard.

==================================================================

The court heard that he stabbed the teenager in the heart during a
confrontation on Dundonald Road.

Johnson, a father of two with convictions stretching back to 1995,
was driving with his girlfriend when they passed Mr Jones and a
group of friends.

He leapt out of the car to threaten the group, two of whom were on
skateboards including Mr Jones, after nearly hitting one of them.

==================================================================

Well, it's lucky he didn't leap out of a house, then, or you'd have
to brand all house-livers childish and stupid. How does the fact he
was a violent person with convictions in the past reflect on the
majority of motorists?

--
Trevor Barton

On 20 Oct 2004 16:11:09 GMT someone who may be Trevor Barton
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

How does the fact he
was a violent person with convictions in the past reflect on the
majority of motorists?

Where did I say or imply that this reflected on the majority of
motorists?

You can be sure that if a cyclist was responsible the mass media
would have made a lot more of it though.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

David Hansen said:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/3759692.stm has an article on
another example of childish stupidity from a motorist, this time
towards someone on a skateboard.

That sounds like the sort of attack which has more to do with the person
than the fact that he was driving. Had the skateboarder nearly bumped into
him as a pedestrian the outcome might well have been the same.

You weaken good arguments about the lack of care and consideration shown by
many motorists by linking this crime to a motorist rather than a violent
criminal who just happened to be driving a car just before his crime.

If he had been cycling when he had the confrontation with then skateboarder
victim would you have been happy to be likened to him?

pk

David Hansen vaguely muttered something like ...

Quoted message said:

On 20 Oct 2004 16:11:09 GMT someone who may be Trevor Barton
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

How does the fact he
was a violent person with convictions in the past reflect on the
majority of motorists?

Where did I say or imply that this reflected on the majority of
motorists?

err .. the subject line gives that implication. You definitely didn't say "
Previously convicted violent person again ..."

Quoted message said:

You can be sure that if a cyclist was responsible the mass media
would have made a lot more of it though.

So that makes it Ok then ?

--
Paul ...
(8(|) Homer Rules !!!
"A [censored] is a [censored], no matter what mode of transport they're using."

"PK" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

David Hansen said:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/3759692.stm has an article on
another example of childish stupidity from a motorist, this time
towards someone on a skateboard.

That sounds like the sort of attack which has more to do with the person
than the fact that he was driving. Had the skateboarder nearly bumped into
him as a pedestrian the outcome might well have been the same.

You weaken good arguments about the lack of care and consideration shown

by

Quoted message said:

many motorists by linking this crime to a motorist rather than a violent
criminal who just happened to be driving a car just before his crime.

If he had been cycling when he had the confrontation with then

skateboarder

Quoted message said:

victim would you have been happy to be likened to him?

^ <AOL> What he said </AOL>

There are sadly alot of nutters in the world - it just happens that few of
them happen to drive cars :-(

"David Hansen" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

On 20 Oct 2004 16:11:09 GMT someone who may be Trevor Barton
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

How does the fact he
was a violent person with convictions in the past reflect on the
majority of motorists?

Where did I say or imply that this reflected on the majority of
motorists?

You can be sure that if a cyclist was responsible the mass media
would have made a lot more of it though.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

Typical Edinburgh cyclist response there. In fact typical Edinburgh
response, full stop.

David Hansen [email hidden] opined the following...

Quoted message said:

Where did I say or imply that this reflected on the majority of
motorists?

"Those caring sharing motorists again" was a bit of a give-away. It has
to be said that the relevance of his being a driver is pretty minimal.

Jon

"PK" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

That sounds like the sort of attack which has more to do with the person
than the fact that he was driving....

A bit like the story about the "cyclist" who went round destroying the tyres
of hundreds of cars in southampton a few months ago.

David Hansen said:

On 20 Oct 2004 16:11:09 GMT someone who may be Trevor Barton
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

How does the fact he
was a violent person with convictions in the past reflect on the
majority of motorists?

Where did I say or imply that this reflected on the majority of
motorists?

You can be sure that if a cyclist was responsible the mass media
would have made a lot more of it though.

But how do you know he wasn't also a cyclist? He was indeed a
motorist in the sense that he got out of a car. Before that he
was presumably a householder, because that's what he gets into
his car from. Or a bedist, because I bet he gets out of one each
morning. Your whole tone in your post suggested that you
thought that his attitude was typical of motorists in general,
and that's bollox. It's about as much bollox as me saying your
attitude is typical anti-car user cyclist rhetoric.

--
Trevor Barton

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 00:11:21 +0100 someone who may be Jon Senior
<jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Where did I say or imply that this reflected on the majority of
motorists?

"Those caring sharing motorists again" was a bit of a give-away.

Which bit of, "another example of childish stupidity from a
motorist", is so difficult for some to understand? Note that I did
not say "all motorists".

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 00:19:22 +0100 someone who may be "Adrian
Boliston" <[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

That sounds like the sort of attack which has more to do with the person
than the fact that he was driving....

A bit like the story about the "cyclist" who went round destroying the tyres
of hundreds of cars in southampton a few months ago.

Agreed.

The motorist story did make it onto a minor bit of the radio news,
in marked contrast to the cyclist story you mentioned. It is an
interesting example of media bias, especially as the former did kill
someone while the latter did not (though could well have).

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

Adrian Boliston said:

"PK" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

That sounds like the sort of attack which has more to do with the
person than the fact that he was driving....

A bit like the story about the "cyclist" who went round destroying
the tyres of hundreds of cars in southampton a few months ago.

No. Different. His actions were motivated by what motorists had done to him
as a cyclist. In his mind he was (apparently) redressing the balance between
mototists and cyclists. While deploring his actions many had sympathy for
the treatment he had received from some motorists as a cyclist.

There was absolutey no relevance to URC of the article about the thug who
attacked the skateboarder. Moreover, the title was clearly an attempt to
link all motorists to the actions of the thug.

pk

I should have to agree. This type of action has nothing to do with the
actual incident involved as a cartelist and far more to do with the type of
person involved. Clearly without looking into the exact circumstances of
the case any assignment of exact motivation is purely speculative however
the previous history of this person as a violent and aggressive tends to
support the premise that no matter what the circumstances he was of a mind
to satisfy his frustration on somebody. The fact that the fellow was armed
in the first place goes someway to this indication although to be fair it
does not say what the weapon used was.
I have often attended incidents where the actual outcome was far in excess
of the normal response to the incident, in almost every case there has been
another reason for the escalation of the incident into a violent attack
other than the orginal incident itself. I fail to see the relevance of the
post to the newsgroup unless to say that violent offenders should not be
allowed a drivers licence in the first place due to the immoderation of
their tempers. I doubt that would have any effect as they would just drive
anyway.

--
Sniper8052

David Hansen said:

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 00:11:21 +0100 someone who may be Jon Senior
<jon_AT_restlesslemon_DOTco_DOT_uk> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Where did I say or imply that this reflected on the majority of
motorists?

"Those caring sharing motorists again" was a bit of a give-away.

Which bit of, "another example of childish stupidity from a
motorist", is so difficult for some to understand? Note that I did
not say "all motorists".

whe in a hole stop digging!

You allowed anti motorist rhetoric to get the better of you. No need to
grovel, but don't make it worse!

pk

On 21 Oct 2004 06:46:40 GMT someone who may be Trevor Barton
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Your whole tone in your post suggested that you
thought that his attitude was typical of motorists in general,

Incorrect.

That is why I went to the trouble of typing the following "another
example of childish stupidity from a motorist". Note the last two
words.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 07:50:10 +0000 (UTC) someone who may be "PK"
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

A bit like the story about the "cyclist" who went round destroying
the tyres of hundreds of cars in southampton a few months ago.

No. Different. His actions were motivated by what motorists had done to him
as a cyclist.

In this case the motorist's actions appear to have been motivated by
his perceptions of what the skateboarders had done to him (got "too
close" to his car). A very similar motivation.

--
David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

David Hansen said:

On 21 Oct 2004 06:46:40 GMT someone who may be Trevor Barton
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Your whole tone in your post suggested that you
thought that his attitude was typical of motorists in general,

Incorrect.

That is why I went to the trouble of typing the following "another
example of childish stupidity from a motorist". Note the last two
words.

Sigh. The point is, there is no need to classify him as a motorist.
It serves no purpose other than to advertise a prejudice against a
particular subset of humanity. Oh bollox, there's no point going on,
is there ...

--
Trevor Barton

Quoted message said:

Sigh. The point is, there is no need to classify him as a motorist.
It serves no purpose other than to advertise a prejudice against a
particular subset of humanity. Oh bollox, there's no point going on,
is there ...

Dunno, I appreciated the irony of the driver nearly killing someone, and
being so angry about nearly killing him that he killed him anyway.

Of course a gobby skateboarder mouthing off to an armed, violent criminal
was the cause, rather than anger at having missed someone but I guess
that's not so funny for the media to major on.

David Hansen said:

On Thu, 21 Oct 2004 07:50:10 +0000 (UTC) someone who may be "PK"
<[email hidden]> wrote this:-

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

A bit like the story about the "cyclist" who went round destroying
the tyres of hundreds of cars in southampton a few months ago.

No. Different. His actions were motivated by what motorists had done to him
as a cyclist.

In this case the motorist's actions appear to have been motivated by
his perceptions of what the skateboarders had done to him (got "too
close" to his car). A very similar motivation.

I doubt it. Some people just look for reasons to be unpleasant and then
blame others when they find them.
Surely some motorists are 'pigs' others are not. This person whilst
being a motorist at the time could not be described as being typical of
a majority. The majority do not carry or use concealed weapons, also the
majority would not purposefully run down or otherwise injure another
road user.
Accidents happen, people drive badly, speed or otherwise break the rules
of the road but even these would mostly stop short of deliberate
physical assault and / or murder.

Sniper8052