RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - General


Archive Home >> General(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 )


this guy musta really liked his bike(11 posts)

this guy musta really liked his bikeColnagoFE
Jul 16, 2002 9:44 AM
http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/bal-te.md.shooting12jul12.story?coll=bal%2Dpe%2Dasection
funny thing isstr8dum1
Jul 16, 2002 11:03 AM
do a search-- I have read alot of threads in the past where all these riders have talked total crap about shooting someone that messed their bikes.
Nice to see someone that isnt all talk. Poor kid though. Life is rough when you are ghetto.
Really sad....Brooks
Jul 16, 2002 1:36 PM
In reading the article, the kid lived in or near Hell's Kitchen (Baltimore) which is every bit as bad as it sounds, has a pit bull dog, and the unrealistic ambition of being a professional basketball player. Sounds like a he was on a road to nowhere (or being a local punk) which is the unfortunate life of many in places like Hell's Kitchen. From the article, the shooter apparently fixed bikes and let kids ride them. No reason to steal. Sad.
Good riddance. [nm]Ahimsa
Jul 16, 2002 3:27 PM
I second that!!wheelsucker
Jul 16, 2002 4:45 PM
Remain in what?djg
Jul 17, 2002 6:06 AM
Some nut blows an unarmed 15 year old kid apart from 10 feet away with a shotgun, calmly goes about his business, and you say "good riddance"?
I have always felt...Ahimsa
Jul 17, 2002 8:46 AM
...that those that see fit to take a risk should be prepared to accept all possible consequences.

I see a fundamental flaw in someone who would pull up, enter private property through a gate, and attempt to steal someone else's property. This demonstrates a flippant disregard for others.

The guy was a neighborhood "buddy" to those people, nuts or not.

The kid was a thief.

So, yes I say good riddance.

I never claimed to be tidy or polite in my views.

However, before you judge me bear in mind:

I do not murder, initiate violence outside of defense, rape, rob, intimidate with threats of harm, or order others to commit harm.

If one chooses to commit any of these offenses, then I find it satisfying when it becomes their path to demise.

A.
Well said, A. I agree with your statements. (nm)RhodyRider
Jul 17, 2002 9:49 AM
I don't know you and I have no authority to judge you. Asdjg
Jul 17, 2002 11:24 AM
for your comments: it seems to me that this set runs from moronic to disgusting. I don't know that politesse has a damn thing to do with it. Just my own opinion, and I gather not too politely expressed.

You publicly applaud what looks to be murder--a double-barrel, 12 gauge, shotgun blast, at a range of about 10 feet, into some kid's back. Why? Because there is a "fundamental flaw" in the thief I guess. And you say you find it satisfying when an offense (such as robbery) becomes the perpetrator's "path to demise." I gather you would likewise "find it satisfying" if the shooting would, in turn, lead to the demise of our shotgun-toting Vet. He did, after all, "initiate violence outside of defense" (certainly outside of defense of himself or any other human person) and possibly, if we might guess at a legal decision, "murder." How about a revenge killing? A drive-by? Would collateral damage (say, the additional death of an innocent bystander) ruin the party or merely constitute grounds for yet another incident of satisfaction.

Your statement that those who take a risk should be prepared to accept the consequences cannot mean much other than an expression of extreme fatalism: how much of a risk is supposed to justify how extreme (or unlikely) a consequence?

Yes, stealing is inconsiderate. It's also against the law. I'll toss in "immoral" for you. It's hardly a sign that the shooting victim was a "good kid." But if you're saying that the neighborhood "buddy" gets to do whatever the hell he wants to a bad kid ...shit, I just don't understand some folks.
Good griefAhimsa
Jul 17, 2002 3:15 PM
"As for your comments: it seems to me that this set runs from moronic to disgusting. I don't know that politesse has a damn thing to do with it. Just my own opinion, and I gather not too politely expressed."

Opinion indeed. Often when one finds another's opinion at odds with what we believe is "righteous" it is not uncommon to toss polite out the door. Let's just say I am being honest instead then.

"You publicly applaud what looks to be murder--a double-barrel, 12 gauge, shotgun blast, at a range of about 10 feet, into some kid's back."

Publicly? Yes. Applaud? I suppose. I merely consider it an obvious possible outcome of trying to steal someone's property. I find it to be one man's justice. Cruel? Probably. Too harsh for the offense? Probably. Justice nonetheless. The world is cruel. I'd prefer to see it rid of those who would carelessly seek to ignore basic "rules".

"I gather you would likewise "find it satisfying" if the shooting would, in turn, lead to the demise of our shotgun-toting Vet. He did, after all, "initiate violence outside of defense" (certainly outside of defense of himself or any other human person) and possibly, if we might guess at a legal decision, "murder." How about a revenge killing? A drive-by? Would collateral damage (say, the additional death of an innocent bystander) ruin the party or merely constitute grounds for yet another incident of satisfaction."

Hmmmm. That's an awful lot of conjecture and extrapolation. I suppose the shooter will be punished. That is one possible outcome for his action.

I think comparing a revenge killing (premeditated retribution in kind) and a drive-by (random usually) is a bit of a nonsequitor unless the drive-by is also a revenge killing. Besides, that's just further complicating the issue. As is adding in innocent bystander for "collateral damage". Let's stay on topic here and not make an emotional "what if" argument out of this.

My point is this:

Don't do anything that you are not prepared to pay the penalty for. Particulaly illegal acts. A theif was killed for theft. I find that satisfying on a basic level. I admit it.

"Your statement that those who take a risk should be prepared to accept the consequences cannot mean much other than an expression of extreme fatalism: how much of a risk is supposed to justify how extreme (or unlikely) a consequence?"

I am extremely fatalistic, and I recognize fatalisms possible hypocracies. I just wish that those like yourself that seem to believe in a fair universe would do the same. It is not fair to steal someones property. Where do i draw the line? I don't. i do not seek to quantify everything in fairness. At what level does the punishment begin to exceed the crime? I don't care. I argue that no punishement would be doled out if you did not take the risk in the first place.


"But if you're saying that the neighborhood "buddy" gets to do whatever the hell he wants to a bad kid"

Nope. I never even mentioned the shooter. I'm saying that a bad kid did a bad thing and got the worst possible forseeable outcome. Good riddance.

A. (I'm not lecturing on morality here, just posting my thoughts. My apologies if they do not mesh with your more moral and emotional view of the world and consequence. My opinion is just that.....mine.)
Good grief indeed.djg
Jul 18, 2002 6:48 AM
As in the movies, longer is not always better. I have no idea what you've been able to glean of my "moral and emotional view of the world and consequence" from my posts--heck, I'm not even sure what that means--but I'm not about to continue the mutual email analysis.

I was--perhaps needless to say--surprised and appalled by the reaction this story seemed to get. I stand by my post. But I don't think this muddle is getting any clearer, and I'm pretty sure it hasn't a thing to do with bikes, so I'm done.