3 ms·

The parent post said "I wouldn't be opposed to motorcycles being outlawed". They didn't advocate for outlawing motorcycles. I think "Just because it doesn't aff

by gene91 5y ago

The parent post said "I wouldn't be opposed to motorcycles being outlawed". They didn't advocate for outlawing motorcycles. I think "Just because it doesn't affect you" is a fine reason to have a "no objection" position. I can see why you may feel offended, but I don't think the parent post deserves your anger.

shkkmo 5y ago
I think we all have an obligation to stand up for the rights of other people, even when the violation of those rights doesn't affect us directly. Stating a lack of opposition to the removal of those isn't just "not caring" is actively taking a stance that you believe those rights have no value. I think requesting justification for that stance is reasonable and not an expression of "anger".
- ClumsyPilot 5y ago
  "driving a dangerous contraption" may or may not be reasonable, but it is not really a right in the same way as freedom of speech and right to a fair trial
  - shkkmo 5y ago
    > The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
    - jjk166 5y ago
      Driving is explicitly not a right, it's a privilege. The constitution is not an exhaustive list of rights, but there are still loads of things you don't have the right to do.
onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago
I don't think OP was angry. It seemed like a fair question. I'll bite. When I was 16, I REALLY wanted to own a motorcycle. I thought they were the coolest. Luckily, I was pretty poor - so I wouldn't have money for any such thing until I moved from my small town to get a job in Boston. There, I made friends with someone whose father owned a business that put people back together after motorcycle accidents. In just a couple of minutes, he convinced me of how unsafe they actually are. Despite the fact that I think motorcycles are cool as shit - it's hard to argue they are "less safe" than cigarettes for 18 year-olds (or for anyone). Also, now that I'm older, I definitely wouldn't mind if they were banned on residential streets. At least the ones that are noisy as hell. So - it's a mix of: 1) It wouldn't be out of line for the Government. 2) It honestly seems in-line for the Government (even if I don't really agree it's what the Government should be doing). 3) It wouldn't affect me personally. 4) Personally, it would actually be a plus since I'm older now and I can't stand the noise. So as I said - I'm not going to vote to ban motorcycles - and I can't imagine it ever happening - but if it did - you won't see me out in the streets protesting.
- _carbyau_ 5y ago
  I ride. I still think they are cool. I think every human has their own risk management profile - mine allows me to ride. I am not going ice skating ever again though! But I don't expect everyone to feel as I do, clearly. :-) However regarding your points in turn: 1 & 2. I don't think nannying is what the government should be doing. I agree that seems to be the modern character of government though, at least where I live. 3. Obviously would affect me. :-P 4. I can't stand the noise either. I haven't modified my bike exhaust. Most affected I think though would be the "uberEats-alike" delivery services as they seem largely run on the back of scooters, although ebikes are becoming popular too, though no less risky really. Aside: if you still think motorcycles are cool, review what aspect of your risk profile precludes them. Maybe ride offroad, where traffic is much less a thing. If tarmac speed is the cool factor, you could go to a track. Modern MotoGP riders do both so you'd be in good company! Just don't try to emulate their speed capability! (By the time you are good enough to ignore this advice, you will know it...)

by gene91 5y ago

shkkmo 5y ago

I think we all have an obligation to stand up for the rights of other people, even when the violation of those rights doesn't affect us directly. Stating a lack of opposition to the removal of those isn't just "not caring" is actively taking a stance that you believe those rights have no value. I think requesting justification for that stance is reasonable and not an expression of "anger".

ClumsyPilot 5y ago
"driving a dangerous contraption" may or may not be reasonable, but it is not really a right in the same way as freedom of speech and right to a fair trial
- shkkmo 5y ago
  > The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
  - jjk166 5y ago
    Driving is explicitly not a right, it's a privilege. The constitution is not an exhaustive list of rights, but there are still loads of things you don't have the right to do.

onlyrealcuzzo 5y ago

I don't think OP was angry. It seemed like a fair question. I'll bite. When I was 16, I REALLY wanted to own a motorcycle. I thought they were the coolest. Luckily, I was pretty poor - so I wouldn't have money for any such thing until I moved from my small town to get a job in Boston. There, I made friends with someone whose father owned a business that put people back together after motorcycle accidents. In just a couple of minutes, he convinced me of how unsafe they actually are. Despite the fact that I think motorcycles are cool as shit - it's hard to argue they are "less safe" than cigarettes for 18 year-olds (or for anyone). Also, now that I'm older, I definitely wouldn't mind if they were banned on residential streets. At least the ones that are noisy as hell. So - it's a mix of: 1) It wouldn't be out of line for the Government. 2) It honestly seems in-line for the Government (even if I don't really agree it's what the Government should be doing). 3) It wouldn't affect me personally. 4) Personally, it would actually be a plus since I'm older now and I can't stand the noise. So as I said - I'm not going to vote to ban motorcycles - and I can't imagine it ever happening - but if it did - you won't see me out in the streets protesting.

_carbyau_ 5y ago
I ride. I still think they are cool. I think every human has their own risk management profile - mine allows me to ride. I am not going ice skating ever again though! But I don't expect everyone to feel as I do, clearly. :-) However regarding your points in turn: 1 & 2. I don't think nannying is what the government should be doing. I agree that seems to be the modern character of government though, at least where I live. 3. Obviously would affect me. :-P 4. I can't stand the noise either. I haven't modified my bike exhaust. Most affected I think though would be the "uberEats-alike" delivery services as they seem largely run on the back of scooters, although ebikes are becoming popular too, though no less risky really. Aside: if you still think motorcycles are cool, review what aspect of your risk profile precludes them. Maybe ride offroad, where traffic is much less a thing. If tarmac speed is the cool factor, you could go to a track. Modern MotoGP riders do both so you'd be in good company! Just don't try to emulate their speed capability! (By the time you are good enough to ignore this advice, you will know it...)