[*BCM*] dbl parked

[John Hays]

I tend to agree that people trot out "two wrongs don't make a right" in 
situations where it basically amounts to a non-sequitur, largely on the 
basis that it's relevance assumes something being contested (that some 
action in question is in fact a wrong). I will say that it's not 
particularly clear to me that riding through an intersection under those 
circumstances is, in any meaningful sense, a wrong. It may very well be 
that it's _against the law_ to do that, but that's just another 
non-sequitur, since the fact that something is against the law is not 
evidence of it being wrong. I shudder to think how many people (even on 
this list) actually believe that "zee rules are zee rules" is a 
sufficient justification for the deliberate infliction of suffering upon 
or deprivation of material assets from a person.

- John



Jym Dyer wrote:
>>>> 2 wrongs don't make a right.
>>>>         
>>> =v= Ain't it wonderful how this particular topic always
>>> brings out fresh, invigorating new insights?
>>>       
>> And just what are your fresh insights?
>>     
>
> =v= Here's a tip:  When you find yourself regurgitating the
> world's most obvious clichés for the umpteenth time, as if
> the person you're responding to is a blithering idiot, you
> are wasting your time (and the time of everyone else who
> might be wearing of a cliché-filled inbox).  Perhaps the
> person really is a blithering idiot, in which case your
> words are useless; but what's more likely is that you're
> not attempting to understand what the person is getting
> at, in which case your communication is pointless.
>     <_Jym_>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Boston Critical Mass mailing list
> list at bostoncriticalmass.org
> http://bostoncriticalmass.org/list
> To unsubscribe email list-unsubscribe at bostoncriticalmass.org