[Summit] Were the bikes locked up?

[Robert Mathiesen]

James, you're right.  The sarcasm was in James Barfoot's reply, and in my
haste I missed the different surnames.  I apologize for my mistake.

As for the rest, there are people out there, often poor people, who are
very, very angry about the gap in wealth between rich and poor, and who
still remember the radical arguments form the '60s and '70s to the effect
that "no great wealth is gotten without great crime," and that the poor
have no hope of justice, and therefore no reason to respect the law.

And it does matter, on a practical level, how skilled those thieves are.
The more skilled they are, the more secure our locks need to be.

Bob M

On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 5:10 PM, James Kelley <crunniuc at live.com> wrote:

>  Bob,
> I don't understand how my remarks could be construed to be sarcastic. I
> simply think that if someone steals from someone else it is wrong and I
> question how those thieves could have the mindset    that it was ok.
>
> Thank you,
> Jim Kelley
>  ------------------------------
> From: Robert Mathiesen <rmath13 at gmail.com>
> Sent: ‎9/‎13/‎2014 5:01 PM
> To: James Kelley <crunniuc at live.com>
>
> Cc: <summit at sna.providence.ri.us> <summit at sna.providence.ri.us>; Peter
> Gallant <Pete1188 at cox.net>
> Subject: Re: [Summit] Were the bikes locked up?
>
>  I was responding to your sarcastic remark.  As for the ethics of it, you
> know very well that there is no consensus among Americans today as to
> whether the law is a valuable prop of a praiseworthy social order, or a
> force of oppression mustered against oppressed people (usually peoples of
> color).  No pronouncement about ethics will ever settle that controversy in
> favor of one side or the other.  We will never again have any national
> unity about ethics or morality or law.  The divisions in the United States
> run too deep, and have become too entrenched by now.  -- Bob M
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 4:13 PM, James Kelley <crunniuc at live.com> wrote:
>
>  It's irrelevant if they had the means to cut a lock. They took something
> that did not belong to them. They had NO ethical conscience.
>
> Thank you,
> Jim Kelley
>  ------------------------------
> From: Robert Mathiesen <rmath13 at gmail.com>
> Sent: ‎9/‎13/‎2014 4:10 PM
> To: James Barfoot <barfootjim at gmail.com>
> Cc: <summit at sna.providence.ri.us> <summit at sna.providence.ri.us>; Peter
> Gallant <Pete1188 at cox.net>
> Subject: Re: [Summit] Were the bikes locked up?
>
>   No, James.  It's worth knowing whether those two thieves had means to
> overcome a bicycle lock.  Many don;t, some do.  Bob M
>
>
> On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 6:39 AM, James Barfoot <barfootjim at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Then, it's obviously the victims' fault!  [sarcasm]
>
> On Sep 12, 2014, at 6:01 PM, Tony Adams <aa44ee at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > No. The kids had just dropped their bikes and ran to the neighbor's
> house for a few. They returned to find their bikes gone.
> >
> > Sent from my iPhone
> >
> >> On Sep 12, 2014, at 17:40, "Peter Gallant" <Pete1188 at cox.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> Just curious.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
> Summit mailing list
> Summit at sna.providence.ri.us
> http://sna.providence.ri.us/mailman/listinfo/summit_sna.providence.ri.us
> SNA Website: http://sna.providence.ri.us/
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sna.providence.ri.us/pipermail/summit_sna.providence.ri.us/attachments/20140913/c87e31b9/attachment.htm>