What happened to decency?

[Pro Tour Punditry]

That's still your choice though. You don't have to sell your car on at all, and if you do you can choose to take less money for it.

As a bit of cross thread posting, you now seem to be in agreement with what I said in the amazon thread re choice. Well done.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

To be fair, many people are thoroughly píssed off if someone damages their bike.

That was my point!

Many cyclists, indeed I would say most, ensure they don't leave their bikes in public places unattended in order to ensure inconsiderate numpty nobbers are less able to damage them thobut.

 

[Pro Tour Punditry]

If that was the bit about people choosing whether to become victims of stress, then no I still do not agree with you.

You do, you just don't realise it

 

[screenman]

Tmn, what is it you do not agree with? You seemed to have lost me a bit.

 

[Pro Tour Punditry]

I suggest you go and read the thread in CA&D about Amazon, as I can't be bothered to rehash it here. Please don't patronise me @Marmion.

No need. On either count.

 

[Archie_tect]

[QUOTE 2818709, member: 1314"]It's only a tin box to rattle around in.

View attachment 34187 [/quote]
That sir, isn't just a tin box, it's a Beetle-shaped box..... + many happy days 34 years ago.

 

[User482]

Many cyclists, indeed I would say most, ensure they don't leave their bikes in public places unattended in order to ensure inconsiderate numpty nobbers are less able to damage them thobut.

So you've never left your bike unattended on a FNRttC?

 

[User482]

As has been said; hell is other people (and the consequences to us of the free choices they make.)

Yes, the consequence is that they restrict our choices.

 

[400bhp]

I used to be very very precious about my vehicles and would have been up in arms if someone had dinged another car.

I've had 2 very powerful and (relatively) expensive cars. I've had the wing ripped off on one from someone (probably) driving a towbar on a truck into it and driving off. I got dings on the other. On another car I had every single panel on the nearside replaced by a cereless car parker who only owned up because another person had seen her.

However I've changed a bit from that position now. In an ideal world people would own up to it, but we don't live in an ideal world. Car park spaces are too tight, people do things accidentally, peple have kids/old people in cars, people are in a rush.

Naturally many would feel a little hesitant about owning up due to the relatively expensive cost of what will generally be a bit of thoughtleness.

We all know this happens so when you buy a relatively expensive car in some form you accept the risk that going about your daily business stuff like this can happen. You can't control the risk of it happening (you can mitigate it) so don't get concerned about something you can't control.

I CBA these days and just drive around in a car I DGAF about if it gets scratched/dinged (which it has in 9 months of ownership). It's inevitable.

 

[400bhp]

I'm not sure what there is not to get?

For example, some relatively poor person carrying around a couple of kids to local supermarket-kid gets oit and dings a door of a relatively expensive car-i can understand why such a person might not want to own up.
Does it make that person bad, no morals etc?

Turn it on its head-why should the poor person be restricted to where they park because people much better off than them use the same space? Could one argue that the poor person should stop driving due to the risk of a sibling getting out and dinging a car they cannot affford to put right?

Just another of lifes moral dilemmas.

 

[slowmotion]

It doesn't matter if the vehicle was a complete wreck (like my wheels), or some kind of Bugatti driven by a Wirral footballer. If you damage somebody's stuff, it isn't unreasonable to own up . Do as you would be done by?

 

[asterix]

I'm not sure what there is not to get?

For example, some relatively poor person carrying around a couple of kids to local supermarket-kid gets oit and dings a door of a relatively expensive car-i can understand why such a person might not want to own up.
Does it make that person bad, no morals etc?

Turn it on its head-why should the poor person be restricted to where they park because people much better off than them use the same space? Could one argue that the poor person should stop driving due to the risk of a sibling getting out and dinging a car they cannot affford to put right?

Just another of lifes moral dilemmas.

It isn't a moral dilemma because morally the thing to do is own up. The dilemma is to decide if you are going to behave immorally or not.

There is a complication in that some people drive around in vehicles of ridiculous size and might park it so close to your own car that you can't get in without risk of damage.

Altho' I use a transit sized van, I have noticed that it is actually the width of an ordinary car and narrower than most 4x4 monstrosities. It is just longer and higher. Even so like most van users I do not park near the entrance to shops where parking density is highest.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Yes, the consequence is that they restrict our choices.

So do the laws of physics. Such is life.

 

[GrumpyGregry]

So you've never left your bike unattended on a FNRttC?

To a point. I try to leave it where I can see it. But there have been instances on group rides, inc FNRttC, and LonJOG where it has got scratched as a result. I don't expect the 'scratcher' to even notice necessarily or to fess up or pay up. Everything decays. It's a means of transport not a fetish object.

 

[asterix]

... Everything decays. It's a means of transport not a fetish object.

"Everything dies, baby, that's a fact, but maybe everything that dies someday comes back." With a bit of touch-up pain, obviously.