|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
THE CASE FOR A MANDATORY CYCLE HELMET LAW 
(IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA)
On Friday, September 7, 2018 at 2:26:02 PM UTC+1, AMuzi wrote:
Indeed, in a related issue the winning phrase was, "Let those who ride decide." That could be the motto of old-fashioned capital L liberals like me. s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sd-XHD_GuM -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 Andre Jute How those intolerant thugs can call themselves liberals is entirely beyond me |
Ads |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
THE CASE FOR A MANDATORY CYCLE HELMET LAW 
(IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA)
On 9/7/2018 10:54 AM, Andre Jute wrote:
On Friday, September 7, 2018 at 2:26:02 PM UTC+1, AMuzi wrote: Indeed, in a related issue the winning phrase was, "Let those who ride decide." That could be the motto of old-fashioned capital L liberals like me. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0sd-XHD_GuM Andre Jute How those intolerant thugs can call themselves liberals is entirely beyond me Intolerant thugs? Harley riders are more likely union welders, machinists or truck drivers than trailer trash. http://www.latimes.com/business/auto...825-story.html -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
THE CASE FOR A MANDATORY CYCLE HELMET LAW 
(IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA)
On Thursday, September 6, 2018 at 9:42:25 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/5/2018 3:41 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: Where I am there's virtually no talk about MANDATORY helmet laws. IIRC, you're somewhere in Ontario. There's virtually no talk about mandatory helmet laws there specifically because a group of cyclists - including one who used to post here - successfully argued against them. You should thank those cyclists for your freedom of choice. BTW, a few years ago my wife and I did a driving and camping trip to Cape Breton. While in a tiny town in New Brunswick, on a zero-traffic Sunday evening, we rode our bikes a few blocks to a restaurant and back. We were stopped on a residential street by a local cop and told that helmets were mandatory for all ages everywhere in Canada. She was wrong, of course. Yes, they are mandatory for all ages in NB and we knew that; but we didn't even bring them along. You'd be subject to the same nonsense if not for people you've argued against. -- - Frank Krygowski Please show me where I argued against peoplec opposed to mandatory laws. Cheers |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
THE CASE FOR A MANDATORY CYCLE HELMET LAW 
(IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA)
On 9/7/2018 3:42 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Thursday, September 6, 2018 at 9:42:25 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/5/2018 3:41 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: Where I am there's virtually no talk about MANDATORY helmet laws. IIRC, you're somewhere in Ontario. There's virtually no talk about mandatory helmet laws there specifically because a group of cyclists - including one who used to post here - successfully argued against them. You should thank those cyclists for your freedom of choice. BTW, a few years ago my wife and I did a driving and camping trip to Cape Breton. While in a tiny town in New Brunswick, on a zero-traffic Sunday evening, we rode our bikes a few blocks to a restaurant and back. We were stopped on a residential street by a local cop and told that helmets were mandatory for all ages everywhere in Canada. She was wrong, of course. Yes, they are mandatory for all ages in NB and we knew that; but we didn't even bring them along. You'd be subject to the same nonsense if not for people you've argued against. -- - Frank Krygowski Please show me where I argued against peoplec opposed to mandatory laws. OK, Sir. You've obviously argued against me. You resurrected one of your arguments just two days ago, starting with "Say that on this newsgroup and within a post or two our resident anti-helmet poster will attack you quite strongly." Was that not directed at me? If not me, it might have been Tom. Both Tom and I have argued against mandatory helmet laws, and we've given reasons why. You've argued against us and argued against our reasons. Therefore you you HAVE argued against people opposed to mandatory helmet laws. And I repeat: If not for the efforts of some of those same people, you'd be subject to a MHL right now, just like the cyclists in New Brunswick. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
THE CASE FOR A MANDATORY CYCLE HELMET LAW 
(IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA)
On Friday, September 7, 2018 at 8:42:29 PM UTC+1, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Thursday, September 6, 2018 at 9:42:25 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/5/2018 3:41 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: Where I am there's virtually no talk about MANDATORY helmet laws. IIRC, you're somewhere in Ontario. There's virtually no talk about mandatory helmet laws there specifically because a group of cyclists - including one who used to post here - successfully argued against them. You should thank those cyclists for your freedom of choice. BTW, a few years ago my wife and I did a driving and camping trip to Cape Breton. While in a tiny town in New Brunswick, on a zero-traffic Sunday evening, we rode our bikes a few blocks to a restaurant and back. We were stopped on a residential street by a local cop and told that helmets were mandatory for all ages everywhere in Canada. She was wrong, of course. Yes, they are mandatory for all ages in NB and we knew that; but we didn't even bring them along. You'd be subject to the same nonsense if not for people you've argued against. -- - Frank Krygowski Please show me where I argued against peoplec opposed to mandatory laws. Cheers Seems to me you're entitled to an apology the moment Krygowski fails to prove his lie that you are a cyclist sell-out to Big Helmet. Of course you won't get one, because Krygowski is far too smug (or more likely malicious) ever to admit he made a mistake. Andre Jute You can grow old waiting for Frank Krygowski to do the right thing |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
THE CASE FOR A MANDATORY CYCLE HELMET LAW 
(IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA)
On Saturday, September 8, 2018 at 1:01:00 AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/7/2018 3:42 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Thursday, September 6, 2018 at 9:42:25 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/5/2018 3:41 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: Where I am there's virtually no talk about MANDATORY helmet laws. IIRC, you're somewhere in Ontario. There's virtually no talk about mandatory helmet laws there specifically because a group of cyclists - including one who used to post here - successfully argued against them.. You should thank those cyclists for your freedom of choice. BTW, a few years ago my wife and I did a driving and camping trip to Cape Breton. While in a tiny town in New Brunswick, on a zero-traffic Sunday evening, we rode our bikes a few blocks to a restaurant and back. We were stopped on a residential street by a local cop and told that helmets were mandatory for all ages everywhere in Canada. She was wrong, of course. Yes, they are mandatory for all ages in NB and we knew that; but we didn't even bring them along. You'd be subject to the same nonsense if not for people you've argued against. -- - Frank Krygowski Please show me where I argued against peoplec opposed to mandatory laws.. OK, Sir. You've obviously argued against me. You resurrected one of your arguments just two days ago, starting with "Say that on this newsgroup and within a post or two our resident anti-helmet poster will attack you quite strongly." Was that not directed at me? If not me, it might have been Tom. Both Tom and I have argued against mandatory helmet laws, and we've given reasons why. You've argued against us and argued against our reasons. Therefore you you HAVE argued against people opposed to mandatory helmet laws. And I repeat: If not for the efforts of some of those same people, you'd be subject to a MHL right now, just like the cyclists in New Brunswick. -- - Frank Krygowski Seems to me, Ridealot, that you're entitled to an apology the moment Krygowski fails to prove his lie that you are a cyclist sell-out to Big Helmet -- as he has failed to prove his lie: he accused you of arguing against *Canadian* anti-helmet campaigners but, now that you've stood up to him and demanded proof of his lie, suddenly Krygowski and Tom are standing in for Canadians, and by a tenuous leap of poor faith at that. It's crap, and cheap, transparent crap at that, not even worthy of a junior school debate. Of course you won't get an apology, because Krygowski is far too smug (or more likely malicious) ever to admit he made a mistake. What you'll get is just more of the same ad hominem abuse from Krygowski. Andre Jute You can grow old waiting for Frank Krygowski to do the right thing |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
THE CASE FOR A MANDATORY CYCLE HELMET LAW 
(IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA)
On Friday, September 7, 2018 at 5:10:36 PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
On Saturday, September 8, 2018 at 1:01:00 AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/7/2018 3:42 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Thursday, September 6, 2018 at 9:42:25 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/5/2018 3:41 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: Where I am there's virtually no talk about MANDATORY helmet laws. IIRC, you're somewhere in Ontario. There's virtually no talk about mandatory helmet laws there specifically because a group of cyclists - including one who used to post here - successfully argued against them. You should thank those cyclists for your freedom of choice. BTW, a few years ago my wife and I did a driving and camping trip to Cape Breton. While in a tiny town in New Brunswick, on a zero-traffic Sunday evening, we rode our bikes a few blocks to a restaurant and back. We were stopped on a residential street by a local cop and told that helmets were mandatory for all ages everywhere in Canada. She was wrong, of course. Yes, they are mandatory for all ages in NB and we knew that; but we didn't even bring them along. You'd be subject to the same nonsense if not for people you've argued against. -- - Frank Krygowski Please show me where I argued against peoplec opposed to mandatory laws. OK, Sir. You've obviously argued against me. You resurrected one of your arguments just two days ago, starting with "Say that on this newsgroup and within a post or two our resident anti-helmet poster will attack you quite strongly." Was that not directed at me? If not me, it might have been Tom. Both Tom and I have argued against mandatory helmet laws, and we've given reasons why. You've argued against us and argued against our reasons. Therefore you you HAVE argued against people opposed to mandatory helmet laws. And I repeat: If not for the efforts of some of those same people, you'd be subject to a MHL right now, just like the cyclists in New Brunswick. -- - Frank Krygowski Seems to me, Ridealot, that you're entitled to an apology the moment Krygowski fails to prove his lie that you are a cyclist sell-out to Big Helmet -- as he has failed to prove his lie: he accused you of arguing against *Canadian* anti-helmet campaigners but, now that you've stood up to him and demanded proof of his lie, suddenly Krygowski and Tom are standing in for Canadians, and by a tenuous leap of poor faith at that. It's crap, and cheap, transparent crap at that, not even worthy of a junior school debate. Of course you won't get an apology, because Krygowski is far too smug (or more likely malicious) ever to admit he made a mistake. What you'll get is just more of the same ad hominem abuse from Krygowski. Damn you again BIG HELMET! Can't you see, Andre, that BIG HELMET is tearing us apart -- pitting brother against brother? Cast off BIG HELMET! Free your head. Free your mind. We must all join arms, bare headed, riding together as one . . . into a giant crash. Do'h. I hit my head. It's really hard to ride arm-in-arm, unless you're the Sky Team. https://i.eurosport.com/2016/07/24/1...70-640-360.jpg To listen to this drivel, you would think the Huns were massed on the border waiting to invade and enslave our heads. Wait until the electric scooters make it to Ohio, then Frank will have something real to complain about. -- Jay Beattie. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
THE CASE FOR A MANDATORY CYCLE HELMET LAW 
(IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA)
On Saturday, September 8, 2018 at 1:45:53 AM UTC+1, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, September 7, 2018 at 5:10:36 PM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote: On Saturday, September 8, 2018 at 1:01:00 AM UTC+1, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/7/2018 3:42 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Thursday, September 6, 2018 at 9:42:25 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/5/2018 3:41 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: Where I am there's virtually no talk about MANDATORY helmet laws. IIRC, you're somewhere in Ontario. There's virtually no talk about mandatory helmet laws there specifically because a group of cyclists - including one who used to post here - successfully argued against them. You should thank those cyclists for your freedom of choice. BTW, a few years ago my wife and I did a driving and camping trip to Cape Breton. While in a tiny town in New Brunswick, on a zero-traffic Sunday evening, we rode our bikes a few blocks to a restaurant and back. We were stopped on a residential street by a local cop and told that helmets were mandatory for all ages everywhere in Canada. She was wrong, of course. Yes, they are mandatory for all ages in NB and we knew that; but we didn't even bring them along. You'd be subject to the same nonsense if not for people you've argued against. -- - Frank Krygowski Please show me where I argued against peoplec opposed to mandatory laws. OK, Sir. You've obviously argued against me. You resurrected one of your arguments just two days ago, starting with "Say that on this newsgroup and within a post or two our resident anti-helmet poster will attack you quite strongly." Was that not directed at me? If not me, it might have been Tom. Both Tom and I have argued against mandatory helmet laws, and we've given reasons why. You've argued against us and argued against our reasons. Therefore you you HAVE argued against people opposed to mandatory helmet laws. And I repeat: If not for the efforts of some of those same people, you'd be subject to a MHL right now, just like the cyclists in New Brunswick. -- - Frank Krygowski Seems to me, Ridealot, that you're entitled to an apology the moment Krygowski fails to prove his lie that you are a cyclist sell-out to Big Helmet -- as he has failed to prove his lie: he accused you of arguing against *Canadian* anti-helmet campaigners but, now that you've stood up to him and demanded proof of his lie, suddenly Krygowski and Tom are standing in for Canadians, and by a tenuous leap of poor faith at that. It's crap, and cheap, transparent crap at that, not even worthy of a junior school debate. Of course you won't get an apology, because Krygowski is far too smug (or more likely malicious) ever to admit he made a mistake. What you'll get is just more of the same ad hominem abuse from Krygowski. Damn you again BIG HELMET! Can't you see, Andre, that BIG HELMET is tearing us apart -- pitting brother against brother? Cast off BIG HELMET! Free your head. Free your mind. We must all join arms, bare headed, riding together as one . . . into a giant crash. Do'h. I hit my head. It's really hard to ride arm-in-arm, unless you're the Sky Team. https://i.eurosport.com/2016/07/24/1...70-640-360.jpg To listen to this drivel, you would think the Huns were massed on the border waiting to invade and enslave our heads. Wait until the electric scooters make it to Ohio, then Frank will have something real to complain about. -- Jay Beattie. My head is big enough for BIG HELMET, with space left over for all the money BIG HELMET is paying me to BETRAY y'all ROADIES. In my NEW UTOPIA, there will be NO ROADIES, only recreational and utility cyclists, and MOUNTAIN LIONS will be permitted, indeed encouraged, to FEED ON MOUNTAIN BIKERS. Advance the revolution, my brothers! Andre Jute Channeling Leon Trotsky PS Oh, not to forget, for historical veracity, in my New Utopia we'll have a single MOTON (thank you, Liddell Tommi Sherman!), condemned for eternity to run after his runaway Range Rover, and we'll turn all the SOCCER MOMS into HANDMAIDENS who in this Paradise will of course not be permitted to drive. |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
THE CASE FOR A MANDATORY CYCLE HELMET LAW 
(IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA)
On Friday, September 7, 2018 at 8:01:00 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 9/7/2018 3:42 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Thursday, September 6, 2018 at 9:42:25 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/5/2018 3:41 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: Where I am there's virtually no talk about MANDATORY helmet laws. IIRC, you're somewhere in Ontario. There's virtually no talk about mandatory helmet laws there specifically because a group of cyclists - including one who used to post here - successfully argued against them.. You should thank those cyclists for your freedom of choice. BTW, a few years ago my wife and I did a driving and camping trip to Cape Breton. While in a tiny town in New Brunswick, on a zero-traffic Sunday evening, we rode our bikes a few blocks to a restaurant and back. We were stopped on a residential street by a local cop and told that helmets were mandatory for all ages everywhere in Canada. She was wrong, of course. Yes, they are mandatory for all ages in NB and we knew that; but we didn't even bring them along. You'd be subject to the same nonsense if not for people you've argued against. -- - Frank Krygowski Please show me where I argued against peoplec opposed to mandatory laws.. OK, Sir. You've obviously argued against me. You resurrected one of your arguments just two days ago, starting with "Say that on this newsgroup and within a post or two our resident anti-helmet poster will attack you quite strongly." Was that not directed at me? If not me, it might have been Tom. Both Tom and I have argued against mandatory helmet laws, and we've given reasons why. You've argued against us and argued against our reasons. Therefore you you HAVE argued against people opposed to mandatory helmet laws. And I repeat: If not for the efforts of some of those same people, you'd be subject to a MHL right now, just like the cyclists in New Brunswick. -- - Frank Krygowski BULL****! No where and at no t ime have I EVER stated that I am PRO mandatory helmet lawas. You are so anti-helmet that you can't even read a post about a helmet without you immediately foaming at the mouth and spouting that anyone wanting to wear a helmet has to be pro-mandatory helmet laws. Cheers |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
THE CASE FOR A MANDATORY CYCLE HELMET LAW 
(IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA)
On 9/7/2018 11:24 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Friday, September 7, 2018 at 8:01:00 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/7/2018 3:42 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Thursday, September 6, 2018 at 9:42:25 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 9/5/2018 3:41 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: Where I am there's virtually no talk about MANDATORY helmet laws. IIRC, you're somewhere in Ontario. There's virtually no talk about mandatory helmet laws there specifically because a group of cyclists - including one who used to post here - successfully argued against them. You should thank those cyclists for your freedom of choice. BTW, a few years ago my wife and I did a driving and camping trip to Cape Breton. While in a tiny town in New Brunswick, on a zero-traffic Sunday evening, we rode our bikes a few blocks to a restaurant and back. We were stopped on a residential street by a local cop and told that helmets were mandatory for all ages everywhere in Canada. She was wrong, of course. Yes, they are mandatory for all ages in NB and we knew that; but we didn't even bring them along. You'd be subject to the same nonsense if not for people you've argued against. -- - Frank Krygowski Please show me where I argued against peoplec opposed to mandatory laws. OK, Sir. You've obviously argued against me. You resurrected one of your arguments just two days ago, starting with "Say that on this newsgroup and within a post or two our resident anti-helmet poster will attack you quite strongly." Was that not directed at me? If not me, it might have been Tom. Both Tom and I have argued against mandatory helmet laws, and we've given reasons why. You've argued against us and argued against our reasons. Therefore you you HAVE argued against people opposed to mandatory helmet laws. And I repeat: If not for the efforts of some of those same people, you'd be subject to a MHL right now, just like the cyclists in New Brunswick. -- - Frank Krygowski BULL****! No where and at no t ime have I EVER stated that I am PRO mandatory helmet lawas. You are so anti-helmet that you can't even read a post about a helmet without you immediately foaming at the mouth and spouting that anyone wanting to wear a helmet has to be pro-mandatory helmet laws. sigh Let's try again. You said "Please show me where I argued against peoplec [sic] opposed to mandatory laws." I showed where you argued against me, and I'm against mandatory helmet laws. Therefore you DID argue against a person opposed to mandatory helmet laws. And you have argued against others as well - including, IIRC, a person who used to post here and who is largely responsible for free choice of hat style in your own province. Note, I didn't say you argued in favor of mandatory helmet laws. It wasn't necessary to say that, because of your own phrasing of your "show me" demand. -- - Frank Krygowski |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
THE CASE FOR A MANDATORY CYCLE HELMET LAW 
(IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA) | Andre Jute[_2_] | Techniques | 100 | July 4th 20 07:50 PM |
THE CASE FOR A MANDATORY CYCLE HELMET LAW (IN THE UNITED STATES OFAMERICA) by Andre Jute | Andre Jute[_2_] | Techniques | 76 | May 21st 13 03:35 AM |
Reprised: THE CASE FOR A MANDATORY CYCLE HELMET LAW (IN THE UNITEDSTATES OF AMERICA) by Andre Jute | Andre Jute[_2_] | Techniques | 0 | September 4th 10 10:32 PM |
For the Record, the Final Report: THE CASE FOR A MANDATORY CYCLEHELMET LAW (IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA) by Andre Jute | Andre Jute[_2_] | General | 15 | August 31st 10 01:09 AM |
THE CASE FOR A MANDATORY CYCLE HELMET LAW (IN THE UNITED STATESOF AMERICA) by Andre Jute | dbrower | Rides | 1 | August 28th 10 06:41 AM |