Re: Most significant advance in bike technology for speed?

On Tue, 04 Feb 2025 19:17:56 +0700, John B. <slocombjb@gmail.com>
wrote:

On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 05:11:44 -0500, zen cycle
<funkmasterxx@hotmail.com> wrote:
>

On 2/4/2025 12:48 AM, John B. wrote:

On Mon, 3 Feb 2025 21:18:05 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@gXXmail.com> wrote:
 

On 2/3/2025 9:04 PM, AMuzi wrote:

On 2/3/2025 7:55 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 2/3/2025 12:55 PM, cyclintom wrote:

>
>
Noone "wins" an argument about opinions. Is that what you think
you're doing by arguing that Catrike shouldn't be carrying a gun
despite a Constitutional Amendment giving him the right to do so?
Your opinion appears to be counter to the Constitution and you
believe that you're winning something? Murder rates tend to be lowest
in areas with the most highly rural populations so zsparate people
and you don't have violent confrontations. Gun laws make little to no
diffrence.

>
I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns do so
because they are afraid. In nearly all cases, they are afraid of
things that never happen. That's phobia.
>
And I'm aware I'm violating my resolution to stop responding to, um, a
certain type of person. I'll try to do better.
>

>
I post enough current successful defensive use videos to show that risks
are real (although situationally more or less) and that preparation and
training may well be dispositive /in extremis/.
>
Fear? OK, perhaps. Rational risk assessment is another equally valid term.

>
Or is it irrational risk assessment? Hey, let's see what the NRA says!
>
https://www.mediamatters.org/national-rifle-association/nra-commentary-admits-odds-needing-gun-defend-yourself-are-infinitesimal

 
Wet another Tommy Trick... changing the subject.
 
Or does your latest post explain fear and loathing among those who
elect to carrying a gun - a perfectly legal act in most? <many)?
States today.

>
FFS...
Andrew mentioned he posted numerous examples of guns being used for self
defense, Frank responded by posting a link showing the odds for needing
a gun for self defense are "infinitesimal".
>
It wasn't a change of subject, asshat.

>
>
Well, the discussion was centered on Frank's statement that people
that carried a gun are cowards
"I'm just pointing out that almost all people who carry guns do so
because they are afraid" 
>
and suddenly he changes the subject to "infinitesimal".
>
That's not a change   of subject?

There's lots of teeth gnashing about carrying a gun, but the only
reason the gnashers can present for not carrying a gun is that it may
not be needed.

That seems to me to be a poor reason for not doing something. For
instance, I admit that in addition to salt, I don't need to also shake
garlic and pepper on my omelet yet I just did.

Ymm!

Also:
Perhaps Junior should look up the meaning of "infinitesimal." Mr Muzi
has shown that needing a gun for self defense is not infinitesimal.

--
C'est bon
Soloman