LA cyclist group event

[AMuzi]

Featuring a 'take the lane' exercise

https://ktla.com/news/local-news/video-captures-mob-of-bicyclists-beating-driver-in-downtown-los-angeles/
--
Andrew Muzi
<www.yellowjersey.org/>
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

[John B.]

On Sat, 20 May 2023 07:34:59 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>Featuring a 'take the lane' exercise
>
>https://ktla.com/news/local-news/video-captures-mob-of-bicyclists-beating-driver-in-downtown-los-angeles/

A group ride one assumes (:-)

But more to the point, yet another reason for someone to carry a gun.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[Catrike Rider]

On Sat, 20 May 2023 07:34:59 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

>Featuring a 'take the lane' exercise
>
>https://ktla.com/news/local-news/video-captures-mob-of-bicyclists-beating-driver-in-downtown-los-angeles/

There's always been thuggary, they've made movies about it..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wild_One

..but it seems to have become more rampant lately in the USA.
especially among young adults.

[Catrike Rider]

On Sat, 20 May 2023 20:11:24 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
wrote:

...and more and more people are doing it.

[Sir Ridesalot]

I tried taking the lane but the police said I had to put it back. ;<)

Cheers

[Frank Krygowski]

If they're cowardly enough.

Here we see a detrimental effect of the internet. One incredibly rare event half a world
away makes some people think "Oooh, that's likely to happen to me!!"

In real life, it happens to perhaps one in a billion people. But saying that doesn't sell
advertisements.

- Frank Krygowski

[Catrike Rider]

On Sat, 20 May 2023 15:03:12 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:13:21?AM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
>> On Sat, 20 May 2023 07:34:59 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>
>> >Featuring a 'take the lane' exercise
>> >
>> >https://ktla.com/news/local-news/video-captures-mob-of-bicyclists-beating-driver-in-downtown-los-angeles/
>> A group ride one assumes (:-)
>>
>> But more to the point, yet another reason for someone to carry a gun.
>
>If they're cowardly enough.

Suggesting that someone is cowardly implies that there's danger.

>Here we see a detrimental effect of the internet. One incredibly rare event half a world
>away makes some people think "Oooh, that's likely to happen to me!!"

Actually, the Internet is beneficial in that it provides the
information that there's dangerous people out there.

>In real life, it happens to perhaps one in a billion people. But saying that doesn't sell
>advertisements.

That some people want to carry a gun is none of your business, just
like it's nobody's business that you're afraid to fasten your shoes to
your bicycle pedals.

>- Frank Krygowski

[John B.]

On Sat, 20 May 2023 18:40:09 -0400, Catrike Rider
<sol...@drafting.not> wrote:

>On Sat, 20 May 2023 15:03:12 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
><frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:13:21?AM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
>>> On Sat, 20 May 2023 07:34:59 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> >Featuring a 'take the lane' exercise
>>> >
>>> >https://ktla.com/news/local-news/video-captures-mob-of-bicyclists-beating-driver-in-downtown-los-angeles/
>>> A group ride one assumes (:-)
>>>
>>> But more to the point, yet another reason for someone to carry a gun.
>>
>>If they're cowardly enough.
>
>Suggesting that someone is cowardly implies that there's danger.
>

I think you got that wrong. Cowardly actually means - "lacking
courage; ignobly timid and faint-hearted. You don't need to perceive a
danger to be a coward. Some People are terrified of Ghosts, for
example.

>>Here we see a detrimental effect of the internet. One incredibly rare event half a world
>>away makes some people think "Oooh, that's likely to happen to me!!"
>
>Actually, the Internet is beneficial in that it provides the
>information that there's dangerous people out there.

And again Frank distorts reality. Example: The Internet reports "Air
Crash in Afghanistan! 50 deaths!"

Does Frank really believe that hoards of USians suddenly start jumping
up and down, screaming, "Oooooo! That's gonna happen to me!"?

But on second thought, maybe Frank does just that. After all black
pickups terrify him.

>>In real life, it happens to perhaps one in a billion people. But saying that doesn't sell
>>advertisements.

But "advertisements" are a two way street aren't they. Your hopping up
and down and screaming about the terrifying AR type rifles, for
example, when reality is that more people are killed with hands and
feet then are killed with any sort of rifle. "False advertising" I
believe they call it.

>
>That some people want to carry a gun is none of your business, just
>like it's nobody's business that you're afraid to fasten your shoes to
>your bicycle pedals.

--
Cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Sun, 21 May 2023 08:19:25 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>

And yes, I do know I did misspelled "hoard" in this case... but I
wanted something for Frank to complain about besides his usual "I
din't Say that!"
--
Cheers,

John B.

[Frank Krygowski]

On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:20:59 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
> On Sat, 20 May 2023 18:40:09 -0400, Catrike Rider
> <sol...@drafting.not> wrote:
>
> >Suggesting that someone is cowardly implies that there's danger.
> >
> I think you got that wrong. Cowardly actually means - "lacking
> courage; ignobly timid and faint-hearted. You don't need to perceive a
> danger to be a coward. Some People are terrified of Ghosts, for
> example.

Good example.

> >>Here we see a detrimental effect of the internet. One incredibly rare event half a world
> >>away makes some people think "Oooh, that's likely to happen to me!!"
> >

> And again Frank distorts reality. Example: The Internet reports "Air
> Crash in Afghanistan! 50 deaths!"
>
> Does Frank really believe that hoards of USians suddenly start jumping
> up and down, screaming, "Oooooo! That's gonna happen to me!"?

Yes, although I don't think of it as a sudden jumping. I think the news coverage of
those rare events contributes to the rather common fear of flying. See
https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/22431-aerophobia-fear-of-flying

"What causes aerophobia? ... Specific triggers might include: News stories about
terrorism, crashes or violence on airplanes."

> But on second thought, maybe Frank does just that. After all black
> pickups terrify him.

John, you're emulating Tom again - claiming I said something I never did. I complained
about the rudeness of some pickup drivers. I talked about being rudely tailgated by
a jacked-up pickup, and by another that purposely glared his light bar at me. I linked to
episodes of pickup drivers "rolling coal" on cyclists and other drivers. I never
said anything about fear, let alone terror. I'm no more afraid of those assholes than
I am of Tom. Irritated, yes; afraid, no.

Be careful about emulating Tom. It makes you look as bad as him.

- Frank Krygowski

[Frank Krygowski]

Stop being dishonest about what I said. You're looking like Tommy. You
should be embarassed by that.

- Frank Krygowski

[Catrike Rider]

On Sun, 21 May 2023 08:19:25 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>

wrote:

>On Sat, 20 May 2023 18:40:09 -0400, Catrike Rider
><sol...@drafting.not> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 20 May 2023 15:03:12 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
>><frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:13:21?AM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
>>>> On Sat, 20 May 2023 07:34:59 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >Featuring a 'take the lane' exercise
>>>> >
>>>> >https://ktla.com/news/local-news/video-captures-mob-of-bicyclists-beating-driver-in-downtown-los-angeles/
>>>> A group ride one assumes (:-)
>>>>
>>>> But more to the point, yet another reason for someone to carry a gun.
>>>
>>>If they're cowardly enough.
>>
>>Suggesting that someone is cowardly implies that there's danger.
>>
>I think you got that wrong. Cowardly actually means - "lacking
>courage; ignobly timid and faint-hearted. You don't need to perceive a
>danger to be a coward. Some People are terrified of Ghosts, for
>example.

Doesn't being afraid of something (ghosts) mean that they perceive a
danger?

[Catrike Rider]

On Sat, 20 May 2023 20:42:44 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
<frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:20:59?PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
>> On Sat, 20 May 2023 18:40:09 -0400, Catrike Rider
>> <sol...@drafting.not> wrote:
>>
>> >Suggesting that someone is cowardly implies that there's danger.
>> >
>> I think you got that wrong. Cowardly actually means - "lacking
>> courage; ignobly timid and faint-hearted. You don't need to perceive a
>> danger to be a coward. Some People are terrified of Ghosts, for
>> example.
>
>Good example.

coward
"One who shows ignoble fear in the face of *danger* or pain.One who
lacks courage to meet *danger*"

>> >>Here we see a detrimental effect of the internet. One incredibly rare event half a world
>> >>away makes some people think "Oooh, that's likely to happen to me!!"
>> >
>> And again Frank distorts reality. Example: The Internet reports "Air
>> Crash in Afghanistan! 50 deaths!"
>>
>> Does Frank really believe that hoards of USians suddenly start jumping
>> up and down, screaming, "Oooooo! That's gonna happen to me!"?
>
>Yes, although I don't think of it as a sudden jumping. I think the news coverage of
>those rare events contributes to the rather common fear of flying. See
>https://my.clevelandclinic.org/health/diseases/22431-aerophobia-fear-of-flying
>
>"What causes aerophobia? ... Specific triggers might include: News stories about
>terrorism, crashes or violence on airplanes."
>
>> But on second thought, maybe Frank does just that. After all black
>> pickups terrify him.
>
>John, you're emulating Tom again - claiming I said something I never did. I complained
>about the rudeness of some pickup drivers. I talked about being rudely tailgated by
>a jacked-up pickup, and by another that purposely glared his light bar at me. I linked to
>episodes of pickup drivers "rolling coal" on cyclists and other drivers. I never
>said anything about fear, let alone terror. I'm no more afraid of those assholes than
>I am of Tom. Irritated, yes; afraid, no.

So, Krygowski agrees that taking action to avoid irritation is not
cowardly.

>Be careful about emulating Tom. It makes you look as bad as him.
>
>- Frank Krygowski

I suggest that most people who carry a gun are not fearful of thugs,
either.

[John B.]

On Sun, 21 May 2023 04:54:01 -0400, Catrike Rider

<sol...@drafting.not> wrote:

>On Sun, 21 May 2023 08:19:25 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 20 May 2023 18:40:09 -0400, Catrike Rider
>><sol...@drafting.not> wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 20 May 2023 15:03:12 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
>>><frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:13:21?AM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 20 May 2023 07:34:59 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> >Featuring a 'take the lane' exercise
>>>>> >
>>>>> >https://ktla.com/news/local-news/video-captures-mob-of-bicyclists-beating-driver-in-downtown-los-angeles/
>>>>> A group ride one assumes (:-)
>>>>>
>>>>> But more to the point, yet another reason for someone to carry a gun.
>>>>
>>>>If they're cowardly enough.
>>>
>>>Suggesting that someone is cowardly implies that there's danger.
>>>
>>I think you got that wrong. Cowardly actually means - "lacking
>>courage; ignobly timid and faint-hearted. You don't need to perceive a
>>danger to be a coward. Some People are terrified of Ghosts, for
>>example.
>
>Doesn't being afraid of something (ghosts) mean that they perceive a
>danger?

Well, yes, they do fear something... but is it a danger? Really?

But admittedly the fear of ghosts could, in certain circumstances,
prove to be dangerious.

I was working night shift and came home, about midnight, to find my
wife sitting on the front steps of the house. She saw a ghost in the
house, she tells me. But as big, bad, hubby, is home she bravely
decides to go back in the house and checks all the rooms carefully and
apparently the Ghost was frighten by my coming home and left.

Now then, whether the ghost would have attacked her is problematic but
sitting outside the house in a rather remote part of the town, in the
middle of the night, could, if a evildoer were to walk by, prove to be
very dangerious.

>>
>>>>Here we see a detrimental effect of the internet. One incredibly rare event half a world
>>>>away makes some people think "Oooh, that's likely to happen to me!!"
>>>
>>>Actually, the Internet is beneficial in that it provides the
>>>information that there's dangerous people out there.
>>
>>And again Frank distorts reality. Example: The Internet reports "Air
>>Crash in Afghanistan! 50 deaths!"
>>
>>Does Frank really believe that hoards of USians suddenly start jumping
>>up and down, screaming, "Oooooo! That's gonna happen to me!"?
>>
>>But on second thought, maybe Frank does just that. After all black
>>pickups terrify him.
>>
>>>>In real life, it happens to perhaps one in a billion people. But saying that doesn't sell
>>>>advertisements.
>>
>>But "advertisements" are a two way street aren't they. Your hopping up
>>and down and screaming about the terrifying AR type rifles, for
>>example, when reality is that more people are killed with hands and
>>feet then are killed with any sort of rifle. "False advertising" I
>>believe they call it.
>>
>>>
>>>That some people want to carry a gun is none of your business, just
>>>like it's nobody's business that you're afraid to fasten your shoes to
>>>your bicycle pedals.

Frank's crusade against advertisement is foolish. How else does one
learn anything about a product before buying it. I see, for example,
descriptions of, for example, a Ford pickup. Quite informative and
certainly advertisement for the product (:-)
https://www.ford.co.th/en/showroom/future-vehicle/next-generation-everest/wildtrak
--
Cheers,

John B.

[Catrike Rider]

On Sun, 21 May 2023 17:57:32 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>

wrote:

>On Sun, 21 May 2023 04:54:01 -0400, Catrike Rider
><sol...@drafting.not> wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 21 May 2023 08:19:25 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 20 May 2023 18:40:09 -0400, Catrike Rider
>>><sol...@drafting.not> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sat, 20 May 2023 15:03:12 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
>>>><frkr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Saturday, May 20, 2023 at 9:13:21?AM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 20 May 2023 07:34:59 -0500, AMuzi <a...@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> >Featuring a 'take the lane' exercise
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >https://ktla.com/news/local-news/video-captures-mob-of-bicyclists-beating-driver-in-downtown-los-angeles/
>>>>>> A group ride one assumes (:-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But more to the point, yet another reason for someone to carry a gun.
>>>>>
>>>>>If they're cowardly enough.
>>>>
>>>>Suggesting that someone is cowardly implies that there's danger.
>>>>
>>>I think you got that wrong. Cowardly actually means - "lacking
>>>courage; ignobly timid and faint-hearted. You don't need to perceive a
>>>danger to be a coward. Some People are terrified of Ghosts, for
>>>example.
>>
>>Doesn't being afraid of something (ghosts) mean that they perceive a
>>danger?
>
>Well, yes, they do fear something... but is it a danger? Really?

Fear is a subjective experience. Krygowski suggests that it's
dangerous to have a gun in their home and thus, everyone, I assume
including himself, should be fearful of doing that, but many,
including myself, laugh at his fear.

[John B.]

rOn Sun, 21 May 2023 07:45:56 -0400, Catrike Rider

It's sort of playing with numbers and good advertisement for the anti
gunners. If you are murdered in a house where firearms are available
then, yes, you are more likely to be murdered with a gun. But even a
casual look at the upper New England State show that simply having a
gun in the house does not guarantee that a murder will occur in that
house.

--
Cheers,

John B.

[Tom Kunich]

The only way that Slocomb could have come up with an example like that is if he is afraid of the ghosts in his past. So now we know what drives a non cyclist to post on a cycling group - he is trying to make up for his past sins and cannot.

[Frank Krygowski]

On 5/21/2023 6:57 AM, John B. wrote:
>
> Frank's crusade against advertisement is foolish. How else does one
> learn anything about a product before buying it.

Certainly advertisements are one way of learning about a product; but
product advertisements are propaganda intended to sell the product. They
are biased by definition and should be approached with some skepticism.

I'm not a fan of deceptive advertisements, or for psychologically
manipulative ones. Examples abound:

For decades "cowboy" themed ads equated smoking a cigarette with being
a real man, with freedom on the open range. What was _that_ all about?
Yet it convinced millions of middle-aged office workers to inhale
carcinogens.

Today, replace that horse and cigarette with a big pickup truck. The
office drone dreams about towing a trailer full of livestock or
splashing through a river, as in the ads. But in real life he sits
idling in a miles-long traffic jam in the city, and complains about the
price of gas for his gas hog.

Then there's the toothpaste that makes you 27% sexier; this year's new
smart phone that does the same things last year's phone did; the gear
train that shifts gears one hundredth of a second quicker; and of
_course_ the guns that every red blooded American needs because all the
other guys have, you know, guns. And because the world is so, so, so SCARY!

How to learn anything about a product before buying it? The internet is
full of product rating articles, if there's something you really need.
Publications like Consumer Reports or Which? or Wirecutter provide more
objective information.

Or just sit and ask yourself: Do I _really_ need this? Haven't I gotten
along fine without it for years? Is this really going to bring a
significant improvement to my life?

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Catrike Rider]

I buy many things that I don't "really_ need." I just bought a fresh
bottle of Remy Martin, this morning.

>Haven't I gotten
>along fine without it for years? Is this really going to bring a
>significant improvement to my life?

One thing I don't need is advice from an ignorant, narcissistic Geek
like you, Krygowski.

[John B.]

I'm not so sure that Frank's assertions are accurate or even true. I
smoked for a considerable number of years and I don't believe that
the cowboy ads were even in use when I started smoking. In fact the
first cigarette ads I remember was "Lucky Strike Green Goes to War",
which was certainly not a "macho" sort of advertisement..

And, I lived, for some years, in parts of the South, noticeably N.W.
Louisiana where pickups were quite popular and I don't believe that
(one example) a bloke who owns two off shore oil,drilling rigs (big
money) drove a pickup because he had some dream of hauling a trailer.

In short, as usual, Frank exaggerates to the point of actually telling
lies, to prove his point. Or perhaps it is senile dementia and he
believes what he posts.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[AMuzi]

ohferchrissake.

Without Bianchi riders in dramatic finish line photo posters
all over the shop (and 125 years of similar puffery) , we
would sell a lot fewer basic model Bianchis.

Your argument has no limiting factor except ads for products
you do not like are 'bad'.

[Frank Krygowski]

Let's try again, since you seem to have misunderstood.

John's stated the benefit of ads is learning about the product.

I said to be careful of deception; and of ads inducing inducing purchase
of roughly useless goods. And that there are less biased ways of
learning about products.

Your example just confirmed that, didn't it? The photos of elite
athletes winning on Bianchis caused people to buy Bianchis - IOW the
images worked for you and for Bianchi. Maybe some customers thought "A
Bianchi will make me faster than my buddy." Maybe some thought "This
must be a really reliable bike." Whatever! The buyer's psychological
association with a completely irrelevant image triggered a sale.

It's a lot different than a rational examination of needs and desires,
and choice of an appropriate device.

And BTW, I think this advertisement strategy increases sales for all
sorts of products, not just the ones I don't like. If it didn't work, I
don't think companies would spend money on advertisement.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Catrike Rider]

On Mon, 22 May 2023 00:38:42 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>

Krygowski always needs lots of other people around him.

To go off solo on a sailboat for several months as I did, or go solo
hiking, and sometimes camping up in Yellowstone or Glacier parks is
most likely not his thing. I understand that he once did a big long
ride across the USA, but not solo, he took his family with him.

..and yes, I had a gun when I was up in the high country of
Yellowstone or Glacier, but back then it was a .357 revolver. I also
carried bear spray.

[Catrike Rider]

Well, after all, he is a well known expert on what others should do.

[Catrike Rider]

Like I said elsewhere, here's Krygowski dispensing some fear.. be
careful," he says.

>Your example just confirmed that, didn't it? The photos of elite
>athletes winning on Bianchis caused people to buy Bianchis - IOW the
>images worked for you and for Bianchi. Maybe some customers thought "A
>Bianchi will make me faster than my buddy." Maybe some thought "This
>must be a really reliable bike." Whatever! The buyer's psychological
>association with a completely irrelevant image triggered a sale.
>
>It's a lot different than a rational examination of needs and desires,
>and choice of an appropriate device.

<EYEROLL> "Let me tell you what to do," say's Krygowski.

[John B.]

Have you noticed how similar Frank's and Tommy's posts are. Tom raves
about politics and Frank raves about guns, adverts and pickup trucks.
If anything Tommy's ranting seems to be a little more rational then
Frank's complaints.

Using Frank's arguments that advertisements causes people to buy
cigarette and tooth paste doesn't Frank's owning a motorcycle indicate
that he sees himself as some sort of "Hell's Angel? Roaring down the
road, leading the pack, wearing his "Harley Jacket"?

Just think how big and brave that must make him feel!
--
Cheers,

John B.

[Catrike Rider]

On Mon, 22 May 2023 06:05:34 +0700, John B. <sloc...@gmail.com>

He probably doesn't ride it much. Motocycling doesn't provide much
social contact, and when he's alone, he has to face his
self-deceptions.

>Just think how big and brave that must make him feel!

Did he "really need" that motorcycle? Did it really bring a
significant improvement to his life?

[John B.]

Roughly useless... Ayup, like the guy that owns a car, a motorcycle
and a bicycle.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[Frank Krygowski]

On 5/21/2023 7:05 PM, John B. wrote:
>
> Have you noticed how similar Frank's and Tommy's posts are. Tom raves
> about politics and Frank raves about guns, adverts and pickup trucks.
> If anything Tommy's ranting seems to be a little more rational then
> Frank's complaints.

You're reaching, John. You're feeling embarrassed about me pointing out
_your_ similarity to Tom.

> Using Frank's arguments that advertisements causes people to buy
> cigarette and tooth paste doesn't Frank's owning a motorcycle indicate
> that he sees himself as some sort of "Hell's Angel? Roaring down the
> road, leading the pack, wearing his "Harley Jacket"?

Hell's Angels don't ride antique BMWs. And antique BMWs don't roar.
That's part of what I like about this motorcycle.

--
- Frank Krygowski

[Radey Shouman]

A Flying Pigeon ought to be more than enough for anyone. How many even
really need a bicycle?

[Tom Kunich]

I don't believe that Frank ever said that he had a Harley-Davidson. So exactly what additional lunacy from Slocomb is showing his dementia in full roar? Furthermore, Harley's are in pretty large demand world wide without anyone thinking they want to be a Hell's Angel.

The actual Hell's Angels were founded in Oakland by Sonny Barger. Far from an outlaw, Sonny was an author and a movie actor. Most of the other "gang members" were hard working middle class people that had to pay their way just like everyone else. Perhaps there were SOME that used drugs but some people in EVERY social group use drugs. Or haven't you noticed Coke-head Hunter Biden?

I spent several years racing motorcycles - Kawasaki. Does that make me an outlaw gang member? Then I became the safety director for the racing organization. What is that supposed to mean to demented Slocomb who believes that a Grand Jury is an actual court of law and its findings have legal bearing on anything?

I am hardly a friend of Krygowski's and disagree with him on almost every point he attempts to make but I have to admit that Slocomb makes Frank look completely normal.

[Tom Kunich]

I am assuming that you mean the largest manufactured Chinese bicycle and not a bird.

[John B.]

Well, why not a Flying Pigeon? Growing up (many) years ago we rode
U.S. made bikes very similar to the Pigeons - double top tube so you
could easily carry your mate on your bike, Nice fat tires to give a
good ride (which the Gravel guys have rediscovered), not terribly
expensive - my first bike cost my Father $3.00, used.

Single speed for sure but after all does one "NEED" more? The first
guy to ride across the U.S. (and circled the globe) rode a single
speed "penny-farthing" bike.
--
Cheers,

John B.

[John B.]

On Sun, 21 May 2023 18:03:02 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cycl...@gmail.com> wrote:

No, I believe that Frank has said that he owns a German made
motorcycle but I didn't accuse Frank of owning a Harley. Did I?

>The actual Hell's Angels were founded in Oakland by Sonny Barger. Far from an outlaw, Sonny was an author and a movie actor. Most of the other "gang members" were hard working middle class people that had to pay their way just like everyone else. Perhaps there were SOME that used drugs but some people in EVERY social group use drugs. Or haven't you noticed Coke-head Hunter Biden?

Errr Tommy! The Hells Angles were formed in 1948, when you were 4
years old. Sonny Barger didn't come along until 1957 (he would have
been 10 years old in 1948 :-) As for being a "good guy" his first
arrest was in 1963 when he was about 25 years old, for possession of
marijuana. He was arrested again on the same charge the following
year, and for assault with a deadly weapon in 1965 and 1966. He was
convicted for Possession of narcotics with intent to distribute
(1973), Conspiracy to transport and receive explosives in interstate
commerce with intent to kill and damage buildings (1988). Aggravated
assault (2003)

And was sentenced to 10 years-to-life imprisonment (1973)
and 4 years imprisonment (1989)

>
>I spent several years racing motorcycles - Kawasaki. Does that make me an outlaw gang member? Then I became the safety director for the racing organization. What is that supposed to mean to demented Slocomb who believes that a Grand Jury is an actual court of law and its findings have legal bearing on anything?

You were the Safety director for the AMA? (American Motorcyclist
Association)

And yet another skill discovered. Funny, you never mentioned any of
this before, isn't it? Faulty memory? Just remembered?

Tommy, you really, truly, are a piece of work.

>I am hardly a friend of Krygowski's and disagree with him on almost every point he attempts to make but I have to admit that Slocomb makes Frank look completely normal.

--
Cheers,

John B.

[Radey Shouman]

And people lived for millenia without missing bicycles at all.