Re: cyclists attack auto driver

On Wed, 14 Aug 2024 04:39:31 -0400, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 21:40:45 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>

On 8/13/2024 4:33 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:

On Tue, 13 Aug 2024 11:19:25 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
 

On 8/13/2024 4:00 AM, Catrike Ryder wrote:

On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 23:25:04 -0400, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>

On 8/12/2024 9:23 PM, John B. wrote:

On Mon, 12 Aug 2024 08:16:42 -0500, AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>

three minute video
https://ktla.com/news/local-news/mob-of-teens-violently-assault-man-break-his-leg-in-downtown-los-angeles/

>
Yet more justification for carrying a gun.

>
So, do you?

>
Why do you think that's any of your business?

It's a discussion group. Why does that fact baffle you so?

 
You have a habit of demanding personal information that goes beyond
the realm of discussion. Like I said, I know why you do it. You want
information about people so you can use it against them.

>
In this instance, "Use it against them" seems to be your code for
"pointing out that their own behavior is at odds with their fervently
stated opinions." I don't think that is unreasonable to note in a
_discussion_ group.

>
I comment on your behavior in this group. For instance, you ignorantly
argued that a person not owning a certain kind of firearm as a reason
it should be banned.
>

But the question remains, why do you think whether or not someone
carries a gun is your business?

>
Because John chose to post "yet more justification" on a public
_discussion_ group. Again, if he didn't want this matter discussed, he
should not have posted about it. Why is that point so confusing to you?

>
Apparently, you actually believe you have a right to demand personal
information. It's no wonder that you are not popular among your real
life peers. I wouldn't want you on any commitee I was associated with.
>

If a person doesn't want their practices, habits, opinions and quirks
discussed, they should stop typing.

 
The stated issue was about a reason for carrying a gun. It was an
opinion and I could understand someone asking to elaborate on the
opinion, but that's not what you did.
 

Which leads me to note that you frequently state your opinion on matters
that don't affect you in the least. The latest example was riders in
matching jerseys.

 
Did I ask anyone if they wore matching jerseys?  No, I simply made a
general comment about seeing people in matching jerseys..  much like
the comment above about a reason for carrying a gun.

>
Right, you didn't ask us about jersey wearing. You just made a snide
general comment about people who choose to wear matching jerseys, based
on your assumption about their motive, of which you disapprove.

>
Yes, I expressed my opinions about that. Note that I didn't demand to
know if you wear matching jerseys on your group rides, because that's
none of my business and I really don't care what kind of jersey you
wear. Why would I care? Why would you care if he sometimes carries a
gun?
>

I may comment on what I see other people do, or on things that they've
told me, but otherwise, I don't demand personal information from
others. I think that's a really sicko thing to do.
 

Why do you think what they wear is any of your business?

 
<LOL> It's not any of my business.
 
I think you're too deep into your obsessions to see the difference
between commenting on what someone sees, and demanding information
beyond what's seen.

>
Are you pretending you didn't demand information from me with your "why
do you ..." statements? Give me a break!

>
I comment on your narcissistic behavior in this newsgroup.  I've
commented on your undocumented bragging, which, I note, you seem to
have toned down quite a bit.
>

I think you're splitting hairs because John's behavior belies his
pro-gun arguments. And you (and he) detest any posts that point out the
problems inherent in your gun fetishes.

>
<EYEROLL> My Gawd, you actually believe you're scoring points... I
suspect quite the opposite is the case... that he's like me and gets a
kick out of triggering your repetitive, obsessive, anti-gun rants,
which I don't believe has convinced anyone to soften their stance on
the issue. In fact, we're planning a visit to Wisconsin soon and I'm
thinking of borrowing my daughter's AR15 and doing some target
shooting with it. I've never shot a pistol grip rifle and all the
hoopla about them has made me curious.
>
So, I'll put the popcorn on and let's see some of your obsessive
anti-gun rants.

Well, lets see here. As of July 2023 you can legally catty a gin in
the state of Florida so basically Frankie is waving his arms and
shrieking about something that is perfectly legal where you live.

In fact, as of June 2020 citizens of Ohio who can legally possess a
firearm may carry it concealed.
https://outsidethebadge.com/ohio-constitutional-carry/
So our boy is arguing against a perfectly legal act both the state
that you live in but also the state that he lives in.

And Ohio changed their law to allow carrying a gun a year before
Florida.

As someone put it, "Clean your own house before you tell me how to
clean mine"

--
Cheers,

John B.