Conflict Resolotion 101 - Rebels style

Or perhaps some of the Big Blue Gang are complicit. Police Corruption
well we know it happens in Victoria but Queensland?

Capt. A. L.

 

Because you were clearly alluding to _something_ , but what was not
clear was what exactly you were alluding to. So I was left to guess.

Now you tell me I guessed wrong. Well, Cam, if you don't want to be
misunderstood, can I humbly suggest you write in an unambiguous
way?


=================

Onya bike

Gerry

 

For that yes. What would veterans feel about people who pretend to be
veterens, put medals on and marched in the ANZAC day marches?

Those uniforms and medals are 'just a clothing style' (your words).

Personally I'd think they'd be rightly pissed off.

Now imagine that those people when asked (politely) to cease and desist
told that people asking to "**** Off, we'll wear what we like!"

I think there would be some rightly pissed off vets and I wouldn't be
surprised if there were threats of violence against the people wearing
that 'clothing style' without the right to it.

Nb... there isn't any law saying one can't dress that way, it's just
that 'a gentleman wouldn't do that'.

I never said they did. I'm saying that I can understand them being
pissed off, I can also understand (without condoning it) why they might
makes threats about it.

I'm not excusing it, I'm saying I understand why it happened.

Not the issue.

Nope, I used to know some patch club members quite well when I was
younger. Yeah there were a few hard guys but most were like my mates.
The club came first but other than that they were just people.

Why what?

I strongly disagree with you here and this is probably why we disagree.

The morality of an action is partly defined by the reason for taking the
action.

eg-:

A police sniper shoots a gunman holding a hostage <-- moral

A paid killer shoots a person for money <-- immoral

They are the same act (shooting someone) but one if ok and one isn't.

Nope, see above.
For bullying to be the happening the violence needs to be unprovoked.

I'm not saying it excuses it, nor am I saying that if violence happened
(which it did not) that the police shouldn't charge people.

However as has been pointed out violence did not happen.

The very definition of a 'gentleman's agreement' is that it is an
informal agreement between men and is not part of the law!

If people wanted 'the rule of law' to deal with this then they should
have said so 25 years ago when the original old man patch was being
discussed.

I think it that had happened then the club constitution would have
included a reference similar to what has recently been added and all of
this would have been avoided.

I don't think I ever said they were consistent

I'm not saying I excuse them, I'm saying I understand why this happened.

This is where we disagree.

It's provocation (your words).

I don't disagree with that, I'm just saying that it's possible to deal
with this issue (without the agro) by not wearing the rockers and
colours on the old man.

That is the solution that avoids the problem.

I'm an outcome focused person, not a method focused person in case you
hadn't realized...

I don't care about that (honestly), in my book it's simply not relevant.

It's just another part of life, some people are difficult to get along
with others are easy.

Yes you've already said that (several times).

I've already answered that, you're repeating yourself.

That's wrong. Rockers and colours are their turf, they own the concept.

Rockers and colours are their 'turf'.

Repeating yourself doesn't really help your argument

I honestly don't have a problem with that. I just have a problem with
Ulysses club members wearing rockers and colouring in the old man patch.

Ahhh... so sort of like politicians then

You want to do that? That's fine, I don't mind.

I'd still work to stop people adding rockers or colours to the Ulysses
club old man patch though.

I'm still holding up my end of that agreement.

Not excusing them (see above).

You're wondering about something that isn't happening.


G-S

 

absolute bullshit


ffs, you should be able to wear what you want


maybe its about time that the government outlawed "outlawed bike gangs"

seize their clubhouses and burn them down

any caught wearing "colours" to be arrested and leathers burnt

 

That is an assumption. An interpretation.

And now you've inserted the word "provoked" into the debate. that
word's got a few whiskers on it...

e.g. Some Imams say that a woman wearing a mini skirt of flashing a
bit of cleavage is provoking rape.

The Iman said: "It was pointed out to them on several occasions.
If they choose to look alluring they should expect to be raped.
Not expecting to be raped, whether that is right or wrong
(subjective terms ) is naive."

Yep... I hear what you're saying, Captain...

Loud and clear, Captain...

When did you guys actually graduate from Imam school?

That is known as a straw man. Bzzzzzzzzzzt.

I said or implied nothing of the sort.

You're deliberately skewing the debate to a position from which you
think you can knock it off.. But you position is logically
fallacious.

I do not have to play by Outlaw rules if I am not an Outlaw club
member. Outlaw club rules only apply to Outlaw club members. Outlaw
clubs imposing their rules on the whole community is an unbelievable
outrage.

It is only _their_ idea that non-members should not dress in a way
which resembles the Outlaw uniform. Tthey cannot reasonably expect be
allowed to impose their "values" on the whole community. That's just
pure bullshit.

Adopting a particular "look" does not obligate you to anyone else's
rules in THIS society. Tthat's what's at stake here. Freedom of
(sartorial) expression.

And you're siding with a bunch of thugs who seek to oppress anyone
whose looks they object to. Another clear case of a moral compass
spinning crazily.

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr....

=================

Onya bike

Gerry

 

Yo dude !!

Viva la revolucion !!!

Reclaim our society !!!

Run the fuckers out of town and cattle-truck them to the Simpson
Desert. !!!

They wanna be outlaws? Let's chuck the fuckers right out of our
communnities. They can't have it both ways...

Simpson Desert's about right...

How DARE those hypocritical fuckers!!!

[sigh]

I feel a lot better now...

=================

Onya bike

Gerry

 

Yes, and Politicians should be honest.

And Police shouldn't break the law.

And no-one should go hungry or live in poverty.

Meanwhile, back in the real world...

 

">

No they were warned by Outlaws, they recieved advice from the head
committee, then a directive to remove the rockers from the head committee.
They were warned and knowingly continued. Thats provocation.

Many other Imams strongly dissagree

He believes it is right I don't. It's not really relevent to this
particular case.

I think most would accept that the dress code adopted by Outlaws is part of
the Outlaw culture

By dressing as Outlaws they are portraying themselves to be Outlaws. Others
seeing the patch with rockers would assume them to be Outlaws as it is the
accepted culture, maybe not by you but by most.and indeed by those who
consider themselves to be Outlaws

As I said there are much more important things to risk life and limb to try
to change
Wanting to look like an Outlaw without being one is not worth defending in
my book
I've only so much effort to devote to making the world rosey and I'd be
wasting defending these chaps

I'm calling it as I see it, I'm no Outlaw lover, just a rational thinker

 

[[[[ STRAW MAN ALERT !!! ]]]]

No one is pretending to be a member of a club to which they do not
belong.

No one is trying to ride with a club to which they do not belong.

Their patches and rockers clearly identify them as members of
ANOTHER club.

Outlaws have no IP rights (as far as I know) to the Outlaw "look".
And even if they did, it would not give them the right to break the
law or to take the law into their ownhands.

The comparison is ridiculous and logically unsound.

Good on you. But being pissed off does not give you the right to
break the law, or take the law into your own hands.

Gee, aren't people moral compasses spinning madly today...

Yep, and threatening violence or property is a crime. And you won't
stand up and say these fuckers are out of line. I'd say that's moral
piss-weakness...

From where I'm reading this, you sure look like you're implying (if
not actually saying) that what these fuckers are doing is fair enough
under the circunstances. Where I come from, that's the same as
excusing it.

None of that gives them leave to threaten, intimdate, or harm persons
or propery.

I think you've done another straw man on me..

I think you've taken the word "bullying" and magically transformed
into meaning whatever suits your purpose...

I would think that in the context of this debate that bullying
implies unreasonable threatening or violent stand-over tactics by a
bunch of out-of-control bike-riding thugs.

Nice looking straw man though... Very impressive... Ooops... I've
accidentally set fire to him... Burns brightly, eh?

I'd say with that compass spinning as it is, you wouldn't have a clue
where moral north was...

Hmmm... I think we'd better insert the word "reasonable" here...

So tell me, Geoff, in the context of this debate, what constitutes
"reasonable provocation" justifying unlawful thuggery?

Moral compass spinning again...

Just _threatening_ to do harm to person or property is akin to Mafia
stand-over tactics.

Are you telling me that adopting a totally intimidating attitude and
making serious threats against persons and/or property is ok as long
as it doesn't actually come to pass?

Moral compass spinning again...

Because the threats and intimidation did the trick!

=================

Onya bike

Gerry

 

Oooops... I hit "send" by mistake.

Let's continue now, eh?

I think you seem to be missing my primary point in this whole
discussion.

It's not about the Ulysses club or what its rules or constitution say.

It's about whether any non-outlaw group (or even individual) should be
free to wear apparel which looks similar to outlaw garb but is in
actual fact quite clearly different and distinct (i.e. clearly not a
true copy.)

I'm talking about style and concepts like "patches" and "rockers".

If the Outlaws want to own these concepts, they need to apply for IP,
or TM, or copyright protection. As far as I know they have no
protection under such laws, ergo, they need to suck it up and bite
their bums.

So that's ok with you if they do that, is it?

I undesrand why it happend too. And I'm saying it is inexcusable,
wrong, and illegal.

And your weaseling is noted...

Fair enough. But as I said, getting offended does not justify taking
the law into your own hands.

Moral compass spinning again...

Nope. I never said that. All I'm saying here is that _they_ choose to
take offence at something which in our culture ins perfectly
acceptable.

Ergo, it's _their_ problem and rather than get threatening or violent,
they should seek counselling. Failing that, they should get arrested.

And that's caving in to threats and stand-over tactics. Being a bunch
of old farts, I guess they should just slink away and let the
intimidators win.

And none of that legitimises the Outlaw's position or behaviour.

That's how easily you turn a blind eye to thuggery.

Moral compass spinning again...

That's because you and others keep failing to get the hypocrisy and
downright moral wrongness of their ridiculous posture - and the fact
that for whatever reason, you won't speak out against this.

They own the IP rights? Under law? Duely registered? That's news to
me.

And even if they did, that doesn't justify Mafia methods.

Well that's an internal matter for the Ulysses club to sort out with
its members.

It's not relevant to the debate about the bigger issue of _any_ group
or idividual being free to mimic a particular "look" without some thug
getting heavy with them.

Apparently this issue is so magnetically charged it's set a whole
bunch of moral compasses spinning wildly. This could be OzMoto's very
own Bermuda Triangle... Wow..


=================

Onya bike

Gerry

 

Too right it is!

You have a right to think (and say) whatever you like. I will, however,
defend to the death my right to think (and say) that you're a fuckwit.


GB, with apologies to Voltaire.

 

"Oh, you... you... don't you worry about that..."


GB

 

Gods own country until the way to advance was eliminated.. grease does
help the wheels go around

 

I encourage you to wear a set of replica cut off colors to your local bikeie
gang watering hole, it is your right.

Please let us know when this is happening, as it would make a great Utube
video.

Boxer

 

In Queensland it is an artform.

Boxer

 

No it is *not* a Straw man argument and if you keep reading I'll explain
why.

Actually they are (keep reading).

Yes but... (keep reading).

True but... (keep reading).

Actually I gather that there actually is case law in the US (fairly
recent) that they do have IP to the 'colours/rockers' concept.

And I never said they had the 'right' to break the law or take it into
their hands, I just said that I understood why they might do so.

Ridiculous? I don't believe so. We are talking about peoples feelings
here. Can you honestly say that they don't feel as intensely about
their colours as some veterans do about their war regalia (and the
consequent right to wear it).

I remember speaking to a member of the Vietnam Veterans MCC once and it
was actually he who made this comparison to me.

Now he's both a vet and a member of a patch MCC so he's pretty much in a
position to be unbiased about the issue (unlike you or me).

You keep saying that (as if I'd said they did). Once more I'm not saying
that, I'm saying that I understand why they might get pissed off enough
to take the law into their own hands and used as an example a situation
closer to your own heart, so that you might perhaps get an insight into
their feelings about this issue.

I didn't see you standing up and defending people pretending to be vets
when they were threatened.

Did you actually do so?

Or did you just say something like...
"Stupid fuckers! Serves 'em right for being such gobshites!"

I'm not saying it's fair enough. I'm saying it's stupid to put your
head into a lions mouth (even if you're a lion trainer), but doing it as
a visitor to a zoo (and then complaining you got chomped) is stupidity.

For about the 15th time I've never said it does.

I don't believe so.

No, I think you're confusing the term 'ruffian' with 'bully'.

thug = modern term for ruffian.

Nope

My moral compass is quite steady, it just doesn't point exactly the same
direction as yours.

I can live with "reasonable" inserted.

How about "Something so far beyond the pale that the community won't
stand for it"? Will that do?

How so? I don't believe I've changed my position in this discussion.

I never said it wasn't, I just said violence didn't happen and that the
'threatening' could have (and should have) been avoided if an ounce of
common sense had been shown by that minority in the Ulysses club who
refused to remove their rockers/colour.

It depends upon the type of threat. If it's a threat of taking an
action that is legal then sure, if not then it's not.

Nope I've still got the same attitude towards this.

True, but why did threats and intimidation happen?

Wasn't it after all because some people were brainless cretins who put
rockers on their gear and then refused to take it off when asked.

That's the putting head in lions mouth thing.

What you're complaining about is the lion growling, lions do that you know.

 

Excuse me that's was an art form . atm they are all quitting faster than
the corruption can spread .

 

Yep, that's exactly the primary point of the discussion.

Going off on a tangent eh

They have done so in the US I gather.

It doesn't matter if it's OK with me or not, I'm not the one complaining
about the rockers/colours nor am I wearing them.

I think it was illegal and morally questionable.

It's not weaseling, it's a realization that sometimes things come in
shades of grey.

16th time again, I've never claimed that it does.

Nope, still pointing firmly at 'grey area'.

Now that I disagree with. I don't approve of people pretending to
awards or distinctions they aren't entitled to.

It doesn't matter to me if it's people pretending to have uni degrees,
or be in a patch club, or be a vet when they aren't.

All are wrong (and before you go again I'm not saying violence is ok to
solve the problem).

Just the bikers or everyone who pretends to be something they aren't?

You don't understand. I'm saying that the people in the Ulysses club
should have taken the patches/colours off WHEN ASKED BY THE ULYSSES CLUB
before the patch clubs even got involved.

At that point there was no intimidation.

I'm not turning a 'blind eye' to it. I'm aware it exists, it's just not
very high on my list of priorities.

The sea shephard ship rammed the japan whaling ship, that's also against
the law but to be honest I don't care about that much either.

It's pretty hard to care 'heaps' about everything, most people make
lists and tend to prioritize.

What are you turning a blind eye to at the moment?

Nope, still pointing the same way.

What do you want me to say? That the patch clubs should have threatened
people? I've already said that.

I've also said that Ulysses club members shouldn't have put
rockers/patches on there gear.

I haven't seen you say the second thing at all yet.

I'd say that places me in the middle of the spread of views and you off
the one extreme...

In the US I gather.

Umm is this 17 times or 18 times?

I've never said it does.

It's already been sorted

Yes it is because it's the underlying cause of the problem.

Nope my compass is still pointing to grey area.


G-S

 

I made a statement that I didn't understand a situation.

I then asked a question........ the wee hooky thingie at the end is a
dead give away....

I wasn't implying or alluding or any other thing..... statement then
question.

Fer fucksake! I'm about the nearest to actually agreeing with some of
your rant, and you want to piss me off too! <shrug>

regards,
CrazyCam

 

Capt.about_lunchtime wrote:

Something about wolves in sheep's clothing being hoist on their own
whatsits?

.... and time, don't forget time.

Personally, there are so many shitty things in the world that need
fixing, but I figure, why should I waste my time on them.

regards,
CrazyCam

PS...go on them apostrophe police, you sort out "sheep's" ;-)