[Ducati] NDC: Don't pass at the Gap

[ray tubach]

from one asshole to another, you're alright...

Ra2bach




>From: "Scott Cloninger" <scloninger at astecinc.com>
>Reply-To: Ducati Owners Group <ducati at ducati.net>
>To: "Ducati Owners Group" <ducati at ducati.net>
>Subject: RE: [Ducati] NDC: Don't pass at the Gap
>Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2006 10:34:41 -0400
>
>I've stayed out of this thread, until now, because I figured WTF...the guy 
>passed blind and beyond his ability and experience, the guy got what he 
>deserved when he wadded his junk in the Gap, the guy's pals helped him out, 
>'nuff said.  If the rider had been alone then I feel the cager should have 
>stopped to help, or not, as dictated by his conscience.  However, in this 
>situation where the "victim", and I use that term loosely since he's simply 
>sleeping in a self-made bed, has all of the assistance he might need I 
>think the cager is absolved of any moral responsibility to render 
>assistance.
>
>That said, I find the idea of legislating good will (good samaritan laws) 
>to be absolutely reprehensible.
>
>I'm an a$$hole.  I want to be an a$$hole and no one should be able to 
>legislate against my natural right to be an a$$hole, just like you 
>shouldn't (and really can't) legislate against the our hero's right to be 
>stupid (could have as easily been a guy on a Duc, so I'm not picking on HD 
>riders...I own one of those too, though mine was made in Italy).  In my 
>opinion the law should never be used to obligate people to make a choice 
>that has no real effect on the rest of society.  We should immediately 
>abolish laws addressing things like oral sex (in private...I'm for it but I 
>don't wanna see it!!), seatbelts (though I'd wear mine anyway), helmets 
>(same as seatbelts), blue laws (or any other laws that enforce religion 
>based mandates), and a number of other issues.  Additionally, torte reform 
>is in order so that our litigous society can get move toward one where 
>personal responsibility is more prevalent, along with stronger penalties 
>for filing frivolous suits to reduce the legal burden on business and in 
>turn the cost of goods and services purchased by society at large.
>
>I feel like many of these issues should be handled by contract rather than 
>by legislation.  For instance, your insurance company might stipulate that 
>whilst you're driving your car you must wear your seat belt, and that if 
>you don't you are personally responsible for your own medical care costs 
>resulting from any accident.  Ditto helmets.  The government must then 
>absolve itself of any responsibility by stating that it will bear the cost 
>of NOBODY's medical care regardless of the situation!!  (I know, I'm in the 
>minority be advocating that you pay your own way.....what a concept, huh?)  
>If you knew you might be financially ruined, or might simply die because 
>you can't afford care, wouldn't you wear your seat belt or proper DOT 
>approved helmet?  Isn't that a better incentive than a $30 ticket that has 
>no long term reprecussions?
>
>Dang...I've wandered far astray, huh.  If you don't like my thoughts, well, 
>you're entitled to your own opinion and I don't give a crap....I'm an 
>a$$hole, remember?
>
>Scott Cloninger
>Chattanooga, TN

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today - it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/