RLJ-ing: A Minority Pastime?

[martint235]

I guess I don't see things as black and white as you.

As I have said, I am generally against RLJing. But it's ludicrous to suggest that there is a moral equivalence between a cyclist RLJing and someone driving a car after 3 pints.

Why? The majority of the results are exactly the same. Both protagonists will say that what they are doing is absolutely fine. Both will say "what's the problem, no one will get hurt". The only difference is that one has supporters on here and the other doesn't

 

[martint235]

This is really really silly. Really silly.

People need to understand the difference between sensible debate and argument.

To compare a car with a chatty cathy on the phone, and a cyclist breezing along a clear road with nothing but a red light for company... it's silly.

Were whites that treated black people with respect pre 1840(?) criminals?
Were gay couples wearing wedding rings criminals pre 2000ish?

I'm not comparing basic human rights to RLJ'ing, but it's a pretty clear indication of how thick you are if you rely on the laws of the land at any given moment to govern your own common sense and ideals of what's right and wrong.

I can jump a red light and stop at the next junction to stop someone stealing a car. The thief doesn't get a pass because 'Us criminals stick together'.

Ooh I like being called thick. Please come out on a ride soon.

 

[Scruffmonster]

Ooh I like being called thick. Please come out on a ride soon.

Sorry, that read very badly. I didn't aim 'thick' at you as an individual, though it reads 100% like that.

Though if anyone relies on a government to tell them what's right and wrong, yes, they're thick.

If your job forced you to move to Saudi Arabia, would you start to treat women as second clas citizens? Of course not.

 

[martint235]

Sorry, that read very badly. I didn't aim 'thick' at you as an individual, though it reads 100% like that.

Though if anyone relies on a government to tell them what's right and wrong, yes, they're thick.

If your job forced you to move to Saudi Arabia, would you start to treat women as second clas citizens? Of course not.

It's not about right or wrong. Obeying the law does not put me in a moral predicament. It doesn't inconvenience me. It doesn't cost anything. So why not just obey it?

 

[Davidsw8]

There's a popular adage that common sense ain't all that common. Unfortunately, for a lot of people, it takes legislation to stop people drink driving, make them wear their seat belts and not run red lights and we can't pick or choose which of those laws we abide by.

These are laws concerning safety, laws concerning behaviour & 'morality' are a whole other matter and should be discussed separately.

 

[Scruffmonster]

It's not about right or wrong. Obeying the law does not put me in a moral predicament. It doesn't inconvenience me. It doesn't cost anything. So why not just obey it?

THAT'S the point. We are all responsible for our own morality and our own actions.

Disobeying that law doesn't put me in a moral predicament. It doesn't cost anything to disobey it, it doesn't inconvenience me to disobey it.

If you feel it's wrong, that's ok. You be happy being you, I'll be fine being me. We'll both continue to shake our heads at the idiots creeping across major junctions and gambling on being faster than cars.

 

[benb]

Why? The majority of the results are exactly the same. Both protagonists will say that what they are doing is absolutely fine. Both will say "what's the problem, no one will get hurt". The only difference is that one has supporters on here and the other doesn't

Because drink driving and driving whilst on the phone is always extremely dangerous, and not just to yourself, whereas a cyclist RLJing usually isn't. Consequences, or rather potential consequences.

 

[Scruffmonster]

Do you know what's really wrong? There are people here that would willingly berate a low level RLJer but stand by and not risk a smack in the face if they saw a guy treating a woman badly in the street.

I think that fuels a lot of how I feel about things. You cannot rely on the police and the government to always be on hand. You know what's right and what's wrong. You don't need a rule book. Just act like a good person and don't screw anyone over. Apologise if you fcuk up and try to do the right thing. That's how I live.

 

[martint235]

Do you know what's really wrong? There are people here that would willingly berate a low level RLJer but stand by and not risk a smack in the face if they saw a guy treating a woman badly in the street.

I think that fuels a lot of how I feel about things. You cannot rely on the police and the government to always be on hand. You know what's right and what's wrong. You don't need a rule book. Just act like a good person and don't screw anyone over. Apologise if you fcuk up and try to do the right thing. That's how I live.

I will do both. And in both cases, give me lip and I hope you're very quick (particularly as I've not forgotten you called me thick)

Now I'm pretty sure there's a law around here somewhere that's against me hitting people that call me thick however it wouldn't cost me anything to disobey it. It wouldn't put me in a moral predicament of any kind and it certainly wouldn't inconvenience me.

 

[Scruffmonster]

I will do both. And in both cases, give me lip and I hope you're very quick (particularly as I've not forgotten you called me thick)

Now I'm pretty sure there's a law around here somewhere that's against me hitting people that call me thick however it wouldn't cost me anything to disobey it. It wouldn't put me in a moral predicament of any kind and it certainly wouldn't inconvenience me.

God dammit, I've found the toughest guy in the world hiding in some hidden backwater of the internet....

For what it's worth, I fully explained that I wasn't labelling you as an individual to be thick.

I now do though. That last post is practically a dunces hat to put on your head. I'm sure you're a really nice guy but you're increasingly sounding like an oxygen thief.

 

[Dan B]

If a cyclist judges that he/she is fine to disobey the law on red lights, what authority do they have to criticise the driver who thinks he/she is fine to drive after 3 pints?

This very morning I disobeyed the law by entering an ASZ other than by the feeder Lane. Are you seriously suggesting that makes me no better than someone who is driving after three pints?

 

[martint235]

God dammit, I've found the toughest guy in the world hiding in some hidden backwater of the internet....

For what it's worth, I fully explained that I wasn't labelling you as an individual to be thick.

I now do though. That last post is practically a dunces hat to put on your head. I'm sure you're a really nice guy but you're increasingly sounding like an oxygen thief.

You don't get it do you? Rljing isn't some victimless crime. Peds get scared (or worse hurt) and yet this is ok. Me ignoring one law that inconveniences one person is not ok? Surely it's my right to use my moral judgement to decide which laws I pay attention to because I shouldn't rely on the Govt to tell me what's right or wrong.

 

[martint235]

This very morning I disobeyed the law by entering an ASZ other than by the feeder Lane. Are you seriously suggesting that makes me no better than someone who is driving after three pints?

You've both broken the law. I don't know (or care) whether you're a better person or not cos that's irrelevant. Is the driver who has had 3 pints better than the selfless doctor who has worked in Africa for 25 years but then murders his wife?

 

[dodd82]

You've both broken the law. I don't know (or care) whether you're a better person or not cos that's irrelevant. Is the driver who has had 3 pints better than the selfless doctor who has worked in Africa for 25 years but then murders his wife?

This is why we have degrees of punishment.

Perhaps ask yourself what a police officer would do after witnessing each event, and then you have your answer as to whether grouping it all under the 'you've broken the law' comment is relevant or sensible.

 

[Scruffmonster]

You don't get it do you? Rljing isn't some victimless crime. Peds get scared (or worse hurt) and yet this is ok. Me ignoring one law that inconveniences one person is not ok? Surely it's my right to use my moral judgement to decide which laws I pay attention to because I shouldn't rely on the Govt to tell me what's right or wrong.

I do get it.

Some RLJing is a victimless crime. I don't even deem it a crime. You do, and that's ok.