RLJ, why do I bother...

[Chuffy]

Nurse, the voices in my head. They've turned all....Scottish!

 

[magnatom]

Nurse, the voices in my head. They've turned all....Scottish!

Did you not notice who runs the country? First Cyclechat, then the UK, then we will take over the world.....

 

[Road Fiddler]

Did you not notice who runs the country? First Cyclechat, then the UK, then we will take over the world.....

Oh Nooo! LOL

 

[Tetedelacourse]

Fear not. It's only the deserters who know what's what. Most of us haven't got a scooby.

 

[trustysteed]

*yawn

if you want to rlj, rlj.

if you don't want to rlj, don't rlj. but stay off your high horse as well.

next week, the great helmet debate.

**** it, let's get it over with before another 10 pages of rubbish:

if you want to wear a helmet, wear one. but stay off your high horse.

if you don't want to wear a helmet, don't wear one.

 

[magnatom]

I'm sorry this bores you, trustysteed, but that is no reason not to have the debate. If it wasn't for debate how would we ever reach any sort of consensus.


I disagree with your live and let live attitude for things like RLJing. Would you like to debate this or are you off for a nap?

 

[Cab]

*yawn

if you want to rlj, rlj.

if you don't want to rlj, don't rlj. but stay off your high horse as well.

How about this for a counter proposal:

If you want to use the roads then obey the laws. There will be rare occasions where you have to do something outside of the rules to remain safe, but that is very much the exception rather than the rule. If you're caught out breaking the rules in anything other than truly exceptional circumstances, just accept that you're in the wrong. Because you are. And we would be a better society if each individual had the balls to stand up to law breakers.

 

[trustysteed]

problem is, it's never a debate about RLJing.

Every few weeks, someone starts a new RLJ thread (seriously, why do they keep doing it?) complaining about a RLJer that offended them by doing it in front of them. then half the people jump in and say, yeah, it annoys me too. then the other half jump in and say let them be.

why do people think that starting the squillionth thread on rljing is going to make the difference that the other squillionth -1 didn't?

as i said earlier:

*yawn.

 

[Cab]

as i said earlier:

*yawn.

Then don't read it. Seriously, its the easy way for you to avoid being bored by it.

I just don't get why people feel the need to post that they're bored by a discussion. Why the heck read it then?

 

[Jacomus-rides-Gen]

Well, its not 50/50 really, more like 85/15 in favour of anti-rlj.

All these constant threads do is highlight just quite how bl**ody irritating rlj-ing is... and we are cyclists ourselves! What about all the cagers who don't want bikes on the road in the first place?!

Its also not that people think that another thread will make a difference, because if people are arrogant/lazy/etc enough to rlj, they are not going to suddenly have a tweak of concience and realise that jumping lights is the cyclists equivalent of cars that must overtake a bike.

 

[col]

How about this for a counter proposal:

If you want to use the roads then obey the laws. There will be rare occasions where you have to do something outside of the rules to remain safe, but that is very much the exception rather than the rule. If you're caught out breaking the rules in anything other than truly exceptional circumstances, just accept that you're in the wrong. Because you are. And we would be a better society if each individual had the balls to stand up to law breakers.

Standing up to law breakers if they target you is one thing,but getting their attention because you think you have the right to, is just asking for a reaction that you might not like,and then saying "but its my right too",while on the recieving end of what they do in retaliation to your comments.while your at it,approach these antisocial lot who stand outside someones house shouting all night,it doesnt matter that its on the other side of town to you,after all you have the right dont you?If you have the balls for it that is?because after all,law breakers are law breakers,and you should obviously stand up to them,or are you going to be selective in your approach?oh and while we are all getting the balls to do it,why dont we set up a vigilanti group and go around sorting law breakers out,after all the world would be a better place wouldnt it?so you think taking the law into your own hands is the way to go eh? Im not so sure,like my exagerated bit above,how far does it go?And which law breakers do you have the balls to stand up to?Is it a select few that you feel more comfortable approaching?Or are you going to hint that people dont have the balls to do something,because they would rather not make things worse?would you have the balls to tell a brick wielding bunch of yobs ,busy smashing someones house up what you think of them? i think not.But if a cyclist does something unlawful like rlj,its "im within my rights to point it out to them" I bet you dont do that with something seriously dangerous to other people.
In fact your more than welcome to come to my town centre on a saturday dinner time,you would be able to sort out the cycling idiots on the roads,that weave in and out of everyone,and sit in the middle of the road talking while blocking traffic,and nearly knocking people over.Because like you said,the world would be a better place if we had the balls to stand up to them.

 

[Cab]

Standing up to law breakers if they target you is one thing,but getting their attention because you think you have the right to, is just asking for a reaction that you might not like,and then saying "but its my right too",while on the recieving end of what they do in retaliation to your comments.

So what you're saying is that I should avoid telling people that what they're doing is antisocial, illegal and gets in my way because I might then face some retaliation?

Heres an alternative plan: I'll tell them and then deal with the consequences if they do try to do something stupid. Honestly, your approach is precisely what is wrong with the UK, people just aren't prepared to stand up and do the right thing. Shame on you.

while your at it,approach these antisocial lot who stand outside someones house shouting all night,it doesnt matter that its on the other side of town to you,after all you have the right dont you?

Heres a better idea. If I come across antisocial behaviour I'll make a judgement there and then about whether or not handling it is within my capability. I'll err on the side of beliving that it is, because my experience tells me that I can handle a range of situations. Yeah, maybe I'll get it wrong one day, but it hasn't happened yet.

And yes, if someone IS making a racket outside my home or causing damage there, I'll go out and stop them. If its a big crowd of louts (hasn't happened lately) then I'll stll stop them, or if in my judgement is that I can't do so I'll call the police. Whats your alternative, put up with it?

oh and while we are all getting the balls to do it,why dont we set up a vigilanti group and go around sorting law breakers out,after all the world would be a better place wouldnt it? so you think taking the law into your own hands is the way to go eh? Im not so sure,like my exagerated bit above,how far does it go?

It goes as far as taking action within the law to better the state of things for myself and everyone else; why on earth did you bring vigilantism into this? Do you seriously think I was about to clout the bloke? How is that even related to what I did?

And which law breakers do you have the balls to stand up to?Is it a select few that you feel more comfortable approaching?Or are you going to hint that people dont have the balls to do something,because they would rather not make things worse?would you have the balls to tell a brick wielding bunch of yobs ,busy smashing someones house up what you think of them? i think not.

Depends. If I think I can stop them then I absolutely will. I've certainly stepped in and prevented assaults, criminal damage and worse because its the right thing to do and because I know I can do so. If I don't believe I can handle it that doesn't mean walk away, it means handle the situation differently. I'm baffled that you seem willing to let things just deteriorate around you.

But if a cyclist does something unlawful like rlj,its "im within my rights to point it out to them" I bet you dont do that with something seriously dangerous to other people.

Then you bet wrong, and I hope you gain some courage and belief in you own ability to do the right thing yourself one day.

 

[col]

My alternative is call the police,i didnt say otherwise did i?And i always try to do the right thing as i said it was an exagerated thing to make a point
There are some curcumstances that require certain actions,and some dont,if im wrong in prefering to go down the road of not antagonising a situation if it can be helped,then so be it,but i would act, if at the time i thought i had to.As i said earlier,most of the scenarios will not change anything ,by voicing an opinion,or quoting rules and regs,except getting yourself into possibly more trouble,when you neednt.
And vigilantism doesnt mean hitting people,i dont think so anyway?

 

[Arch]

And vigilantism doesnt mean hitting people,i dont think so anyway?

Vigilantism means taking the law into your own hands and acting illegally to do so or threatening to do so - whether that be beating someone up, or firebombing their house, or as has happened recently in N. Ireland a return to the "good old fashioned tar and feathering". Simply challenging someone in the street is not vigilantism, provided you stay within the law yourself - it's responsible social behaviour, something that is sadly lacking in this country.

Trusty, if you are bored, bog off and read something else. People's attitudes do get changed, very slowly maybe, but there were plenty of people back on C+ who said "I used to rlj, but after reading those threads, I realised it was stupid and wrong."

 

[BentMikey]

Yup, I'm one person who got convinced not to RLJ any more. The threads were on urc rather than C+, but same principle.