Thin edge of the wedge [Archive]

Mom

27th June 2010, 18:18

I see the illustrious John Judge is ruffling a few more feathers.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10654844

This is an interesting comment...

"So perhaps we should be levying them and give them rebates as they improve their performance."

So he throws this out to the doctors, why cant he apply the same to the bikers?

I reckon I would be in a credit situation if that were the case.

Are we sure that John Judge is not a loose cannon?

Katman

27th June 2010, 18:20

I see the illustrious John Judge is ruffling a few more feathers.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10654844

This is an interesting comment...

So he throws this out to the doctors, why cant he apply the same to the bikers?

I reckon I would be in a credit situation if that were the case.

Are we sure that John Judge is not a loose cannon?

Sounds fair to me.

Mom

27th June 2010, 18:24

Sounds fair to me.

Of course Myth's office has come out saying they know nothing about it and it wont happen, but the question now should be why not?

See this is sort of my point. There should be one rule applied over the entire organisation.

bogan

27th June 2010, 18:29

loose cannon, or deliberately creating discontent with ACC?

I don't understand why the other parties aren't going against it. If theres no opposition to what national is doing, then regardless of what the public do, ACC is fucked, labour has said some things at the protests, but thats about all I've heard from them.

Mom

27th June 2010, 18:38

I don't understand why the other parties aren't going against it.

Because they all actually agree in large parts with what is happening with and to ACC. Dont be fooled by protestations by any party to the contrary. This (the changes to ACC) is a fundamental erosion of one of the wonderful differences that NZ has to the rest of the world. We live in an increasingly litigious society, people are more and more ready to take civil action against others for reasons both legitimate and important, but increasingly for vexacious and vindictive reasons.

We gave up the right to sue on the promise of being taken care of.

Actually I want to change the title of this thread from the thin edge of the wedge to

Someone is taking a log splitter to ACC and we need to stop it!

bogan

27th June 2010, 18:46

Because they all actually agree in large parts with what is happening with and to ACC. Dont be fooled by protestations by any party to the contrary. This (the changes to ACC) is a fundamental erosion of one of the wonderful differences that NZ has to the rest of the world. We live in an increasingly litigious society, people are more and more ready to take civil action against others for reasons both legitimate and important, but increasingly for vexacious and vindictive reasons.

We gave up the right to sue on the promise of being taken care of.

Actually I want to change the title of this thread from the thin edge of the wedge to

Someone is taking a log splitter to ACC and we need to stop it!

Thats what I mean, if tptb and the potential ptb all agree on this course of action, what can we do against it? the public are apathetic sheep when things don't directly concern them, and more often than not even if things do they will just have a wee whinge then do as they are told.

Mom

27th June 2010, 18:48

Thats what I mean, if tptb and the potential ptb all agree on this course of action, what can we do against it? the public are apathetic sheep when things don't directly concern them, and more often than not even if things do they will just have a wee whinge then do as they are told.

Yepper, but I am not comfortable sitting back and taking this, and interestingly enough neither are many of my peers. This is biting on so many levels, and so many people are not happy in their own little sphere of reality. Imagine if we can bring a few of these groups together?

Katman

27th June 2010, 18:51

I'll happily stand up and say that I'm sick and fucking tired of paying for the repairs to fuckwits.

I'm sure I'm not the only one.

bogan

27th June 2010, 19:25

Yepper, but I am not comfortable sitting back and taking this, and interestingly enough neither are many of my peers. This is biting on so many levels, and so many people are not happy in their own little sphere of reality. Imagine if we can bring a few of these groups together?

I aint happy about this either, I spose what I'm getting at is that I don't want to waste time and get stressed over something if I don't think there is any reasonable chance of me making a difference.

In saying that, I think the idea of bringing all the groups together as one is a very good one, distribute the organising and maximising the turnout to any actions.

Ixion

27th June 2010, 19:38

Interestingly, there was (is?) provision within the act for a specific levy on doctors to cover the costs of medical mistakes (sort of , like we get levied for the cost of our mistakes. Actually, exactly like). But it was never implemented. The doctors were too powerful. Too many mates in high places.

Yepper, but I am not comfortable sitting back and taking this, and interestingly enough neither are many of my peers. This is biting on so many levels, and so many people are not happy in their own little sphere of reality. Imagine if we can bring a few of these groups together?

But, when they tried to do exactly that in Wellington, it totally flopped. The only people who turned out were the bikers.

I suspect that a lot of people aren't exactly happy about the way ACC is going. But, they are unhappy enough to be willing to do anything themselves . They'll politely acknowledge someone else doing or trying to do, something about it. But that's all.

Again, exactly like bikers at present. "Yeah, sucks , mate. Me, do something about it? Well, I'm a bit busy, but you go for it."

Oh well, Rome was not built in a day.

NighthawkNZ

27th June 2010, 19:46

Oh well, Rome was not built in a day.

its because I wasn't on that job...

Ixion

27th June 2010, 19:51

Yeah , but it didn't fall down the next day, either :lol:

Mom

27th June 2010, 20:37

But, when they tried to do exactly that in Wellington, it totally flopped. The only people who turned out were the bikers.

I suspect that a lot of people aren't exactly happy about the way ACC is going. But, they are unhappy enough to be willing to do anything themselves . They'll politely acknowledge someone else doing or trying to do, something about it. But that's all.

Well I am not giving up, call me fool if you will, but I think the reality is only beginning to bite for most bikers. The others that we speak of will take a lead from a dedicated and strong lobby/protest group. You must know by now that only a few stand up to be counted, some like yourself stand up for a long time, month after month and take a huge amount of shit at times, some come as a flash in the pan to support an action that affects them. Some of us are reborn to this protest thing for Bikers Rights, some of us have things that prevent us from really getting stuck in. There are some that eat what is happening, they will support a big UP YOU protest, but take the knocks and move on. They are NOT happy though, of that I assure you, it would not take much to inflame them back into action. I am one who considers myself a bit of a pilot light, who keeps things burning, but who has a hell of an incendiary device attached that has the ability to deliver one hell of a bang when the time is right.

bogan

27th June 2010, 21:23

Well I am not giving up, call me fool if you will, but I think the reality is only beginning to bite for most bikers. The others that we speak of will take a lead from a dedicated and strong lobby/protest group.

Well put me down as a follower, to welli that is, or possibly aucks if theres gonna be a huge action.

Ixion

27th June 2010, 21:52

Well I am not giving up, call me fool if you will, but I think the reality is only beginning to bite for most bikers. ..

I don't think anyone is talking about giving up (hell, you are talking to the countries walking billboard for not giving up, no matter how lost the cause - monarchist, communist, Christian, still not given up on any of them). But I am beginning to wonder if we're getting ahead of the marketplace . If, perhaps we need to be focusing more on education, until more people understand the why of the protests. Bikers as well as general public.

Brian d marge

27th June 2010, 22:54

Phreak

27th June 2010, 23:51

I bloody well knew ACC would target someone else after us. What happens if you are a doctor on a bike?

For f**k sake, its just getting ridiculous.

Someone book me a plane ticket outta here. Obviously TPTB are on 'mental leave'...

swbarnett

28th June 2010, 02:25

I'll happily stand up and say that I'm sick and fucking tired of paying for the repairs to fuckwits.

I'm sure I'm not the only one.
You're completely missing the whole point of ACC. The road down which you would have us travel leads inexorably to a society full of brainwashed couch potatoes who believe any movement beyond breathing and eating is just too dangerous to contemplate.

Your sensible biker is some cagers fuckwit.

NighthawkNZ

28th June 2010, 07:08

The road down which you would have us travel leads inexorably to a society full of brainwashed couch potatoes who believe any movement beyond breathing and eating is just too dangerous to contemplate.

We are there now...

Katman

28th June 2010, 09:19

You're completely missing the whole point of ACC. The road down which you would have us travel leads inexorably to a society full of brainwashed couch potatoes who believe any movement beyond breathing and eating is just too dangerous to contemplate.

Your sensible biker is some cagers fuckwit.

Don't be ridiculous.

The road down which I would have us travel leads to people taking responsibility for their own actions.

If someone wishes to act like a fuckwit and injures themselves in the process why the fuck should I have to pay to fix them up?

Bass

28th June 2010, 09:35

Don't be ridiculous.

The road down which I would have us travel leads to people taking responsibility for their own actions.

If someone wishes to act like a fuckwit and injures themselves in the process why the fuck should I have to pay to fix them up?

You ask a fair question, but at the same time I don't think that he's being ridiculous.
The definition of "acting like a fuckwit" depends so very much on the individual.
You and I are likely to be fairly closely aligned on it, but even then I'll bet that there are finer points that we won't agree on.
The consequence of that is a definition that suits the majority. It would be such a nanny one that you wouldn't even have cover for blisters on your knob during your honeymoon.

Personally, I think that the problem for us in all this, is the way that ACC was set up in the first place, despite what everyone says about getting back to the original concept.
To put it simply, ACC costs were (and mostly are) covered by employers and motorists.
The logic that is being applied to us now is that, " since employers have long been levied according to the risk that they generate, then the same should apply to motorists". It's actually not an entirely unreasonable point of view, but only if we accept the original premise that motorists and employers should pay to cover everybody.
That premise is the unreasonable part of the whole deal and I think that it was set up that way because it's relatively easy to do and easy to administer.
My problem is that I have no idea about how to attack it or what to suggest as a reasonable alternative.

mashman

28th June 2010, 10:04

sounds like Judge is preparing a statement just in case there's a backlash in regards to how many cases are being turned down, at ACC, because you can't be tried for the same crime twice... i mean can't get ACC cover for the same injury twice... What better way to do it than to put FINANCIAL pressure on a Dr... you did half a job the first time, you can pay for the next round of treatment... in all honesty Doctors would have be the last group of people i'd want to be under such pressure... It's insanity to even consider such a proposal...

Katman

28th June 2010, 10:05

The definition of "acting like a fuckwit" depends so very much on the individual.

So we are then faced with having to either define 'acting like a fuckwit' or we could simply set about reducing the prevalence of the 'fuckwit' behaviour that is costing us all dearly.

mashman

28th June 2010, 10:13

I'll happily stand up and say that I'm sick and fucking tired of paying for the repairs to fuckwits.

I'm sure I'm not the only one.

Of course you're not... but that attitude is a HUGE part of the problem... you seem to be missing the fact that whether people are covered by ACC or whether people have their own insurance, you still won't stop them from fucking things up, crashing cars, bikes, smoking etc... primarily because they're insured for it :rofl: and they've CHOSEN to be a five minute fuckwit... i'm kinda surprised you still don't understand that yet... you're as ignorant as the government here, any entity that thinks financial penalties are the way to "control" peoples behaviours is out of their fuckin mind...

Katman

28th June 2010, 10:16

you're as ignorant as the government here, any entity that thinks financial penalties are the way to "control" peoples behaviours is out of their fuckin mind...

Really? Financial immunity sure as hell isn't working.

Bass

28th June 2010, 10:38

So we are then faced with having to either define 'acting like a fuckwit' or we could simply set about reducing the prevalence of the 'fuckwit' behaviour that is costing us all dearly.

I don't think that I have seen anyone in here who does not think that reducing the carnage is a worthy aim, although they have many different reasons for their agreement.
So, by definition then, we are all on the same team as regards the overall aim. What we are arguing about is the methods employed to achieve that aim.
You suggest that we could "simply set about reducing the prevalence", but 10 minutes reading proves that it's anything but simple.

Katman

28th June 2010, 10:40

You suggest that we could "simply set about reducing the prevalence", but 10 minutes reading proves that it's anything but simple.

Believe me, I'll well aware that it's anything but simple. :msn-wink:

(This is Katman you're talking to).

mashman

28th June 2010, 10:41

Really? Financial immunity sure as hell isn't working.

I must have blacked out for a decade or two there, when did we have financial immunity? We pay our rego (always have), we pay our earners levy (always have)... sorry i don't see your point.

Katman

28th June 2010, 10:43

I don't think that I have seen anyone in here who does not think that reducing the carnage is a worthy aim, although they have many different reasons for their agreement.

And unfortunately, I think that there are a number on here who see the carnage is an acceptable cost for them to be able to ride in whatever manner they choose.

MSTRS

28th June 2010, 10:52

I don't know about 'seeing carnage as acceptable'...but there is no doubt some who accept that there is an inherent risk to riding, which is part of the attraction.

Katman

28th June 2010, 10:52

I must have blacked out for a decade or two there, when did we have financial immunity? We pay our rego (always have), we pay our earners levy (always have)... sorry i don't see your point.

Hey, it doesn't matter how badly you fuck yourself up, or for that matter, how often you do it, (even, for that matter, how stupid you were being when you did it) - we'll put you back as good as new, and we'll do it for free (apart from the little bit you pay for with your levy). And hey, we're not going to penalise you for coming in as often as you do to be fixed up for the mistakes that your stupidity has resulted in. See you next time.

That's the point i was trying to make.

MSTRS

28th June 2010, 10:55

You're not suggesting that those who gear up and ride sensibly etc get a reduction in their levies, are you? Oh the shame....

mashman

28th June 2010, 10:59

Hey, it doesn't matter how badly you fuck yourself up, or for that matter, how often you do it, we'll put you back as good as new - and we'll do it for free (apart from the little bit you pay for with your levy).

That's the point i was trying to make.

But you're not put back good as new for free... as you say you've already paid... whethere it be ACC levies or private insurance cover... the resultant, not so free, treatment will be the same... especially if you have a recurrence on an injury... at least under ACC (no fault system) all you need to do is cover the costs for the year... insurance companies need to return a profit on top of that... but everyone has their own opinions... irrespective of how wrong yours is :shifty: :)

Katman

28th June 2010, 11:00

You're not suggesting that those who gear up and ride sensibly etc get a reduction in their levies, are you? Oh the shame....

Well I'm struggling to come to terms with the fact that someone who hasn't claimed off ACC for 20 years can be expected to pay the same amount as someone who has claimed off ACC 20 times in the space of a year.

Katman

28th June 2010, 11:12

But you're not put back good as new for free... as you say you've already paid... whethere it be ACC levies or private insurance cover... the resultant, not so free, treatment will be the same... especially if you have a recurrence on an injury... at least under ACC (no fault system) all you need to do is cover the costs for the year... insurance companies need to return a profit on top of that... but everyone has their own opinions... irrespective of how wrong yours is :shifty: :)

I've edited my post to hopefully make it a little clearer for you.

bogan

28th June 2010, 11:15

Hey, it doesn't matter how badly you fuck yourself up, or for that matter, how often you do it, (even, for that matter, how stupid you were being when you did it) - we'll put you back as good as new, and we'll do it for free (apart from the little bit you pay for with your levy). And hey, we're not going to penalise you for coming in as often as you do to be fixed up for the mistakes that your stupidity has resulted in. See you next time.

That's the point i was trying to make.

You forgot to mention how much it fucking hurts to fuck yourself up, I don't see how money will deter people when that doesn't. Also, what is the proportion of repeat fuck-ups to single ones?

MSTRS

28th June 2010, 11:16

Well I'm struggling to come to terms with the fact that someone who hasn't claimed off ACC for 20 years can be expected to pay the same amount as someone who has claimed off ACC 20 times in the space of a year.

Don't get me wrong. I do too. And am in the same position, basically. Just as I resent paying a higher premium on my car/bike/house/contents because others have suffered loss.

Katman

28th June 2010, 11:17

You forgot to mention how much it fucking hurts to fuck yourself up, I don't see how money will deter people when that doesn't.

No, only an ounce of intelligence will deter people from finding out how much it fucking hurts to fuck yourself up.

bogan

28th June 2010, 11:25

No, only an ounce of intelligence will deter people from finding out how much it fucking hurts to fuck yourself up.

yet having to pay more will deter those without any intelligence whatsoever? :confused:

Katman

28th June 2010, 11:27

yet having to pay more will deter those without any intelligence whatsoever? :confused:

I believe so.

MSTRS

28th June 2010, 11:34

Mom's wedge has been firmly ensconced in ACC for many years.
We started off with a scheme that treated all NZers the same. A levy on their wages as part of PAYE. Medical cover and income replacement without favour. Regardless of any individual's activities.
The wedge began when pollies started to introduce extra levies for certain activities. And split the fund into different end uses.
At that point, the inequities began. Because some people seem more injury-prone than others, for the same activities.
Yet more inequitable is the fact that many 'risky' activities are not seperately levied today. Which makes a mockery of the reasons for increasing levies on m/c regos.
Not falling off may be a good idea. But really, why all the angst about this when Mr Base Jumper is covered by his $1.40/$100 earned. And so are we, by the same amount when we ride a dirt bike. As is George in his weekly tiddlywinks game. Etc.

mashman

28th June 2010, 11:40

Hey, it doesn't matter how badly you fuck yourself up, or for that matter, how often you do it, (even, for that matter, how stupid you were being when you did it) - we'll put you back as good as new, and we'll do it for free (apart from the little bit you pay for with your levy). And hey, we're not going to penalise you for coming in as often as you do to be fixed up for the mistakes that your stupidity has resulted in. See you next time.

That's the point i was trying to make.

Sounds more like you should lose your license if you keep returning in such a fashion... but as we've seen that doesn't work either (especially as you don't need one for off-road riding)... financially penalising Doctors is just another idiotic comment from a group of people who don't want to provide a service, but moreover just want the numbers to look good... in my eyes they should be sacked if that's the way they're thinking...

avgas

28th June 2010, 13:01

Its reasons like this - that I feel that we should have a choice AWAY from ACC. If ACC want to play with the big boys of the insurance industry, and use the big boy terms - they should feel what it feels like to compete with them on a level playing field.

avgas

28th June 2010, 13:04

Winston001

28th June 2010, 13:09

Well I'm struggling to come to terms with the fact that someone who hasn't claimed off ACC for 20 years can be expected to pay the same amount as someone who has claimed off ACC 20 times in the space of a year.

Understood and the answer is ACC is a type of social contract. Its a mix of social welfare and insurance.

One solution is to do away with employers levies and motorist levies by simply imposing an additional tax on every person. Say 10 cents in the dollar rather than the current 2 cents.

MSTRS

28th June 2010, 14:46

Understood and the answer is ACC is a type of social contract. Its a mix of social welfare and insurance.

One solution is to do away with employers levies and motorist levies by simply imposing an additional tax on every person. Say 10 cents in the dollar rather than the current 2 cents.

You know that extra 2.5% just added to GST? That would be enough to replace ALL other forms/sources of levies.

Winston001

28th June 2010, 19:38

You know that extra 2.5% just added to GST? That would be enough to replace ALL other forms/sources of levies.

Quite right. Actually GST should probably be increased to 30% and personal income tax reduced to a flat 20%. Universal income tax is quite a modern idea: until 1900 governments raised money through stamp duties (essentially a sales tax), taxes on property, tariffs and tolls. There is no reason why we can't return to the simplicity of a sales tax.

sinned

28th June 2010, 20:03

yet having to pay more will deter those without any intelligence whatsoever? :confused:
Even those with low IQ understand what a dollar is worth to them

Not falling off may be a good idea. But really, why all the angst about this when Mr Base Jumper is covered by his $1.40/$100 earned.

Fortunately for the rest of us when a base jumper has an accident it is a pine box ACC pay for rather than years of recuperation.

Understood and the answer is ACC is a type of social contract. Its a mix of social welfare and insurance.

One solution is to do away with employers levies and motorist levies by simply imposing an additional tax on every person. Say 10 cents in the dollar rather than the current 2 cents. How will that work - bigger ACC, fatter ACC salaries, sounds like a good place to get a job.

How about another idea: Ask private insurers to carry the risk - oh sorry has that already been thought of?

swbarnett

29th June 2010, 22:35

So we are then faced with having to either define 'acting like a fuckwit' or we could simply set about reducing the prevalence of the 'fuckwit' behaviour that is costing us all dearly.
Or we could simply accept that ACC is supposed to be a "NO BLAME" system and stop trying to define 'acting like a fuckwit'. i.e You get hurt and the country fixes you up, no matter how you got hurt.

What you propose is to remove the humanity from humans.

You have no more right to enforce your definition of fuckwit on me than I have on you.

swbarnett

29th June 2010, 22:37

Katman

29th June 2010, 23:07

Simple - "NO FAULT".

Bullshit. It's more like "Let's allow fuckwits to believe that there's no such thing as consequences to their actions".

swbarnett

30th June 2010, 00:04

Bullshit. It's more like "Let's allow fuckwits to believe that there's no such thing as consequences to their actions".
You're still missing the point.

I think it would be a fair bet to say that you don't think simply being a motorcyclist makes you a fuckwit? Well, there are those in society who do. Imagine for a moment if these people managed ACC and a car runs a red light and flattens you and your bike. Sorry, no cover for you. That's why ACC is supposed to be no fault. It means that noone can play god an enforce their opinion on anyone else. I don't like paying for fuckwits any more than you do. I am, however, willing to pay to fix up the fuckwits in order to retain a free society and not have all the life taken out of living.

I don't want motorcycle haters having the power to take away my passion. The only way to stop this is to accept that nobody's opinion has any more validity than any other's, agree to differ and live and let live.

Katman

30th June 2010, 08:43

I don't want motorcycle haters having the power to take away my passion.

Then I suggest you start conveying that sentiment to the fuckwits out there who are intent on riding their motorcycles in any manner they so desire - regardless of how it affects you and me. It's them who are playing straight into the hands of the 'motorcycle haters'.

Until we're prepared to address the issue of why we're falling off so often we will be pushing shit uphill with our battle against ACC.

Katman

30th June 2010, 10:32

The only way to stop this is to accept that nobody's opinion has any more validity than any other's, agree to differ and live and let live.

Here's two differing opinions......

1. I should be allowed to ride however I like regardless of whether my actions adversely impact upon your motorcycling freedom.

2. We should understand and respect the fact that our actions as individuals affect our freedom as a collective.

Are you telling me that those two opinions have equal validity?

NighthawkNZ

30th June 2010, 10:42

Understood and the answer is ACC is a type of social contract. Its a mix of social welfare and insurance.

When did I sign this contract???

MSTRS

30th June 2010, 10:59

When did I sign this contract???

Big Norm decided on your behalf. You wouldn't speak ill of the dead, would you?

Katman

30th June 2010, 11:07

And it was a contract formulated back in the days when society was nowhere near as self-centred as it's become today.

Once upon a time New Zealand had a social welfare system that was the envy of the world. Through the systematic (and rapidly increasing) abuse that it has suffered at the hands of New Zealand society it has more likely become the laughing stock of the world.

ACC has suffered the same abuse.

NighthawkNZ

30th June 2010, 11:53

MSTRS

30th June 2010, 13:11

:innocent: Lets face it... Its all because the love of money... that they say we need to have all this in the first place... why because the more money you have the more power and control and manipulation you have... (but thats a whole other thread...) :blink::shit:

Funny you should say that. My resonse to this (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/showthread.php/123822-Wear-and-tear-excuse-to-decline-cover?p=1129777344#post1129777344) letter ended with..."ACC should be a place where the Golden Rule has no place."

bogan

30th June 2010, 13:22

Here's two differing opinions......

1. I should be allowed to ride however I like regardless of whether my actions adversely impact upon your motorcycling freedom.

2. We should understand and respect the fact that our actions as individuals affect our freedom as a collective.

Are you telling me that those two opinions have equal validity?

Interesting question, and perhaps the crux of your campaign. Yes they have equal validity, freedom is being able to ride in the manner of your choosing, so if you change you riding style to take up the second option, you have lost freedom. If you pick the first option then you may adversly effect other's freedom.
Or if you don't ride like an idiot anyway you get to pick both, and that is the point, you and me already choose to ride in a sensible way, so we give up nothing in taking the second option (obviously the one you think everyone should take). Others do have to give up some freedom to take option 2, I know I don't have the right to ask them to give up something which I have not, do you?

MSTRS

30th June 2010, 13:34

Expect nothing you are not prepared to do yourself....

Katman

30th June 2010, 13:55

Interesting question, and perhaps the crux of your campaign. Yes they have equal validity, freedom is being able to ride in the manner of your choosing, so if you change you riding style to take up the second option, you have lost freedom. If you pick the first option then you may adversly effect other's freedom.

And the irony of it all is that those who choose to proclaim their freedom by riding in a manner that adversely affects others will ultimately loose that freedom when it is taken from us all by the powers that be.

bogan

30th June 2010, 14:07

And the irony of it all is that those who choose to proclaim their freedom by riding in a manner that adversely affects others will ultimately loose that freedom when it is taken from us all by the powers that be.

which is to say they were riding in a way which adversly affects themselves, which is different to the question you asked.

Katman

30th June 2010, 14:15

which is to say they were riding in a way which adversly affects themselves

And the funny thing is that they're too stupid to even realise it.

bogan

30th June 2010, 14:46

And the funny thing is that they're too stupid to even realise it.

but how do you educate them of the fact? your proof that they are riding stupidly is when they fall off, just as thier proof they are riding safely is that they don't.

Winston001

30th June 2010, 20:59

.... freedom is being able to ride in the manner of your choosing, so if you change you riding style to take up the second option, you have lost freedom....

Agreed but it is an anarchist perspective. Every single one of us give up freedoms when we elect to stay living in society. That's what laws are about. Reasonable constraints on absolute freedom. We aren't allowed to thieve, drive on the right, or commit manslaughter. People who do are punished by society.

It then comes down to a dynamic debate which goes on all the time as to how much our freedoms should be limited. Individual rights against the rights of a civil society.

swbarnett

1st July 2010, 01:15

Until we're prepared to address the issue of why we're falling off so often we will be pushing shit uphill with our battle against ACC.
Ah, but it's only opinion, not fact, that we're falling off more often than is reasonable given the inherent risks associated with our chosen activity. As such it is not relevant to the ACC campaign. The fight is for fair levies and services regardless of the risk profile of whatever group we choose to belong to.

Brian d marge

1st July 2010, 01:18

but how do you educate them of the fact? your proof that they are riding stupidly is when they fall off, just as thier proof they are riding safely is that they don't.

Should Education be apart of the popos job

Sonny ur riding like a twat , please try and do it this way one more of these and its to riding school u go

Just a thought

Stephen

swbarnett

1st July 2010, 01:24

Katman

1st July 2010, 08:57

It is also an opinion that no amount of "fuckwit riding" can possibly affect my personal motorcycling freedom (apart from actually trying to run in to me).

Well it's a rather retarded opinion.

"Fuckwit riding" is already affecting the personal motorcycling freedom of the rest of us.

swbarnett

3rd July 2010, 00:45

Well it's a rather retarded opinion.
And you are perfectly entitled to this opinion also. I certainly don't agree with it but I wholeheartedly believe in your right to hold it.

"Fuckwit riding" is already affecting the personal motorcycling freedom of the rest of us.
Once more you fail to see my point. The riding of which you speak is only the excuse used by those who revel in poking their noses where they don't belong.