Red light jumping. Ok or not ?

[apollo179]

Why cant you all just stop bickering as i find it quite upsetting.

 

[rich p]

It's in Sodom & Gomorrah-by-Sea.

Shoreham? Hove?......

 

[rich p]

Use lifers instead. They have lost all human rights.

Bloody nora! I think I'll back out of this thread again!

 

[Angelfishsolo]

[QUOTE 1513399"]
...and I'm very glad then that you did mate.

I'm not having a go, I'm just genuinely interested in how those with views like yours deal with the conflict.
[/quote]

I appreciate that. You are 100% right it is conflict and something I am not 100% happy with but the other option hurts more people. As I care more about others than myself it is the lesser of two evils.

 

[martint235]

p.s. I take drugs, eat meat and occasionally ride on the pavement and rlj. Phew, I've got it off my chest Now, where's the amoral low-ground, please?

And I'd always thought of you as a friend!!

 

[rich p]

And I'd always thought of you as a friend!!

Don't go Mart, I have so few left!

The pavement bit is a stretch to get into my driveway and the rlj was on an fnr at 4 am and we all did

 

[lukesdad]

[QUOTE 1513351"]
<voiceover from Dragon's Den>
An interesting development. Very unusually, a member pops up who is qualified enough to know what they're talking about. With an intelligent response Becs sweeps AFS off his feet. Will he be able to come back from this rebuke?...
</voiceover from Dragon's Den>
[/quote]


.....and you know this ?......How ?

 

[wiggydiggy]

By well cared for you mean apart from when they die because the meds had the wrong effect.

Use lifers instead. They have lost all human rights.

Really how? How have they lost all human rights?

What possible argument can anyone put across for this view, if I am to believe what you say is true about animal testing then to understand your stance correctly you condone the torture and caging of human beings for the benefit of others?

And why, because they have been found guilty of a crime and sentenced to life.

Got a another one for you, if the penalty for breaking into premises and releasing caged animals was 'life', would you be happy to be on the receiving of your view that lifers should replace animals being used for testing?

In all seriousness I normally find what you post to be a bit pedantic at times but generally sound and something I can agree with, this stance though I cannot.

I'm going to take anothers advice here and let the wookie win, although for all I know you could be a honey monster.

 

[apollo179]

Not to be pedantic, but seeing as (AGFS) loves pointing out where others sidestep questions that may cause difficulty......

So, why do you (AGFS) take the stance not to RLJ as it is wrong and against the law, but you are happy to break different laws to further your personal interest in preventing animal testing?

Actually, heres the deal breaker, you'll like this

You are on your way to rescue animals illegally from legal licensed premises yet you stop at each and every red light because it is illegal to run through them.

By the way I'm not looking to score points there, I'm just trying to squeeze some amusement from the latest RLJ saga, its like George Lucas pops up every so often to remake RLJ threads in a slightly different way to the last time.....

If saving the imprisoned animals takes a higher moral priority than stoping at red lights then logically (groan) you would rlj on your way to the animal rights activity.
Much in the same way that any normal person would rlj (safely) on route to freeing an imprisoned loved one.

 

[Wobbly Wheels]

I don't jump red lights in my car, so why would I think it was alright to do so on my bike?

Red lights are there for all road users, not just cars. Even pedestrians have to stop at red lights when on a level crossing. No, a red light, is a red light. You have to stop.

 

[Sittingduck]

Is that cat's face Photo-shopped?^ Looks weird...

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Really how? How have they lost all human rights?

What possible argument can anyone put across for this view, if I am to believe what you say is true about animal testing then to understand your stance correctly you condone the torture and caging of human beings for the benefit of others?

And why, because they have been found guilty of a crime and sentenced to life.

Got a another one for you, if the penalty for breaking into premises and releasing caged animals was 'life', would you be happy to be on the receiving of your view that lifers should replace animals being used for testing?

In all seriousness I normally find what you post to be a bit pedantic at times but generally sound and something I can agree with, this stance though I cannot.

I'm going to take anothers advice here and let the wookie win, although for all I know you could be a honey monster.

I was having a very bad day when I wrote this. Enough said.

 

[Angelfishsolo]

Got a another one for you, if the penalty for breaking into premises and releasing caged animals was 'life', would you be happy to be on the receiving of your view that lifers should replace animals being used for testing?

In answer to this question yes I would. If I can save one animal for pain and suffering I will.

 

[apollo179]

I was having a very bad day when I wrote this. Enough said.

You really should warn us when your having a bad day.

 

[wiggydiggy]

I was having a very bad day when I wrote this. Enough said.

Ok I will leave it at that