Here's a dick on a Brompton

Junkyard..

That is called moving the goalpost here is what you said

As said previously there is civil as well as criminal law. You compared a criminal act with a civil one. Hence the straw man.

there you go that is the principle i applied when watching them steal your bike- i am really not sure how a fabricated thought experiment is an insult BTW

The insult was an insult, the straw man a straw man. Read back your original post, see insult, recognise ad hominem.

my “straw man” showed it up for the pish it was as sometimes, at least, you should do something.

Yeah, because insulting someone is “doing something”. I’ll bet the red light jumper will never do it again and will have seen the error of his ways! Or rather he’ll away thinking ‘curd is a self righteous ass that needs his neck punched.

I made no comment on it at all beyond pointing out you were incorrect in your statement of the facts as heard on the video

I return to my earlier point about being clear in what you write.

Its only an ad hom if you are not an idiot

Um… no it isn’t. An ad hominem is argument directed at the person. I suggest you look it up (avoid wikipedia).

I originally questioned your values judgements – i never said you were an idiot – see point above about moving the goalposts.

Thank you.

you seem good at spinning a yarn so it seems it was not all wasted

And you seem to enjoy being disrespectful. Feel free to point out the yarns being spun though. Should be comedy gold.

Enjoy your night.

on 2nd thoughts, I am off to watch some porn……… 🙄

The guy on the brompton in the vid is an arrogant ill mannered idiot who risks giving us cyclists all a bad name – all the waffle about the law (or not) above misses the point

P8ddy, go and get some sex. You need it.

As any fule kno there’s civil as well as criminal law.

You know what they say about a little knowledge being a dangerous thing? The fools might know there is civil law, but it appears they don’t understand what it is.

He’s not a dick he’s a c bomb

You compared a criminal act with a civil one. Hence the straw man.

you said the law which encompasses both. I suggest you say what you mean next time.

The insult was an insult, the straw man a straw man

repeating the word is not an explanation – brilliant
was your masters Shakespeare was a great author because he was a great author 😕

I return to my earlier point about being clear in what you write.

could you highlight the part that i said that confused you – I said nothing about it apart from to correct your error
please do highlight the part as i said nothing at all about the video or the word idiot until i corrected you- its just false to say this.

ad hominem is argument directed at the person

Nearly right as it’s an irrelevant point directed at the person – many points are directed at the person. They are a journalist what do they know about climate change compared to an expert *.

* its only an appeal to authority if the expert is not an expert in that field to save you some google time.

you seem to enjoy being disrespectful.

Is that an ad hom or relevant 😉

ffs get me some more tissues……….. 🙄

ooooooooh Ton, you sapiosexual deviant you..! 😀

you said the law which encompasses both. I suggest you say what you mean next time.

I didn’t equate theft to red light jumping. That was you. I said exactly what I meant. It was, and remains a straw man.

repeating the word is not an explanation – brilliant
was your masters Shakespeare was a great author because he was a great author

No, I was being purposely droll. You appeared to associate one with the other. I was just setting the record straight in as tiresome a matter as possible.

could you highlight the part that i said that confused you – I said nothing about it apart from to correct your error

Maybe you could clarify my ‘error’ first. In English. And in a coherent readable manner.

Nearly right as it’s an irrelevant point directed at the person

No it’s a point that’s irrelevant to the argument but directed at the person, not an irrelevant point. A subtle but important distinction.

Ha ha ha…. fair play – good catch on the appeal to authority. 😉

Is that an ad hom or relevant

Acht… I got bored. I was just joining in.

What’s all this ‘the cameraman deserves a punch’?

If someone calls you a dick for breaking the law and you hit him, you’ve kindof proved him right. Hardly eye for an eye is it?

Finally, if the camera man tried the same stunt in Glasgow, I suspect he’d be a regular at A&E.

Commuted by bike daily for over three years in Glasgow and called plenty of taxi drivers,car drivers,van drivers,lorry drivers and cyclists a lot worse than idiot.Never got sent to A & E though.Perhaps they were scared by my English accent.

Donkey porn here too, how you doing Ton, changed hands at half time… ?

Maybe you could clarify my ‘error’ first. In English. And in a coherent readable manner.

How about liar, liar pants on fire ?
Clear enough for you?
There you go rebut that with the direct quote from my posting that led to your confusion.
You cannot, because I only mentioned it to correct your error hence you are left doing this.
i would look like an idiot now if you quoted it why resist – because its not true.

it’s a point that’s irrelevant to the argument but directed at the person

If it was relevant to the argument it would not be an ad hom would it. More words same thing. I note you opted to not defend your original definition 😆

Bickering and insults got this thread closed