[Summit] Were the bikes locked up?

[Robert Mathiesen]

Please, Amanda, don't mistake my dispassionate explanation for sympathy.
--  Bob M

On Sat, Sep 13, 2014 at 6:24 PM, aw <awoodward7 at verizon.net> wrote:

> I get maybe not respecting the law, but I do not get not respecting one
> another. Period.
>
> Poor and rich alike have people in their midst who steal - maybe in
> different ways or of different value.  To discount this behavior to race
> and being poor is 1) insulting to the majority of those of that race or
> social standing who do not steal because they are ethically grounded and 2)
> turning a blind eye to those of comfortable means or are white who steal by
> 'white collar' crimes.
>
> I just cannot subscribe to the generalizations and excuses that are being
> stated in sympathetically for two teenage punks that took some kids bikes
> paid for by parents who worked hard to afford those bikes.
> ~ amanda
>
>
>   On Saturday, September 13, 2014 5:26 PM, Robert Mathiesen <
> rmath13 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> 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
> Sent: ‎9/‎13/‎2014 5:01 PM
> To: James Kelley
>
> Cc: <summit at sna.providence.ri.us>; Peter Gallant
> 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
> Sent: ‎9/‎13/‎2014 4:10 PM
> To: James Barfoot
> Cc: <summit at sna.providence.ri.us>; Peter Gallant
> 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/
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20140913/76b2f14d/attachment.htm>