| Author |
Message |
    
Crusty
| | Posted on Saturday, January 27, 2007 - 05:14 am: | 
|
LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME! |
Rocketman
| | Posted on Saturday, January 27, 2007 - 08:34 am: |
|
If I were not interested in looking fandabidozey cool as ten on a motorcycle I'd have bought a run of the mill Honda and saved myself a truck load of grieferooney and cashbuckaroo's, and be a boring current to boot.
But I'm glad I didn't buy the Honda because my Buell looks so much better than a Honda when I've got it on the back wheel after every red light through town. Only when it's busy though, otherwise there's no point.
Troy Freakabout  |
Crusty
| | Posted on Saturday, January 27, 2007 - 08:36 am: |
|
I rest my case. |
Rainman
| | Posted on Saturday, January 27, 2007 - 12:09 pm: |
|
LOOK AT ME! LOOK AT ME!.....
A bright orange safety vest can accomplish that without any practice. Of course, a bright orange safety vest on a guy doing a wheelie down Main Street will do it better. |
Rick_a
| | Posted on Saturday, January 27, 2007 - 12:38 pm: |
|
Too each their own. If it was confined to a closed course there wouldn't be many practice opportunities. Still, the stuff in heavy traffic and without gear is fairly senseless. |
Rocketman
| | Posted on Saturday, January 27, 2007 - 05:13 pm: |
|
Crusty, you don't have a case. Just an argumentative tone as usual.
Do you really think I give two shits what you think about me or anyone else popping wheelies on the street. No that's not a question.
I don't ride on a closed course. I ride the street, so if I want to pop a wheelie I'll use my vast experience on two wheels, and road craft, to decide whether I should or not.
The politically correct should not be riding motorcycles. They are dangerous by virtue of having only two wheels. Even in the wrong hands a motorcycle can get out of control, and they do, and be a killer machine not only to the rider but the innocent road user or pedestrian. If one wheel is so dangerous I figure two wheels isn't that much safer either. Happy now?
Next thing you know all production bikes will be fitted with wheelie bars because of reactionary jerks like Crusty.
Rocket |
Crusty
| | Posted on Saturday, January 27, 2007 - 07:03 pm: |
|
I'm a reactionary jerk? Because I have a problem with ignorant morons losing control of machines weighing over 1/4 ton in an area where innocent bystanders can easily be injured?
Blow it out your ass, Howard.
P.S., Rocket, have you ever considered getting a BMW? Your personality seems taylor made for owning one.
(Message edited by Crusty on January 27, 2007) |
Rocketman
| | Posted on Saturday, January 27, 2007 - 08:06 pm: |
|
No matter what thread it is you're always trying to provoke an argument with me. Get a life you f*cking loser.
Rocket |
Samiam
| | Posted on Saturday, January 27, 2007 - 08:09 pm: |
|
Sounds like a couple of people need to just get out on their bikes and cool off... |
Rocketman
| | Posted on Saturday, January 27, 2007 - 09:33 pm: |
|
I'd thank you to mind your own business.
Rocket |
Crusty
| | Posted on Saturday, January 27, 2007 - 10:32 pm: |
|
Funny; this is a thread about Stunters, titled "Bunch of dumbasses". When I give my opinion about meatheads who have a dangerous and pathological need to attract attention to themselves regardless of the danger to the public, I'm labeled a "reactionary jerk" and a "f*cking loser".
Being a man of few words, all I'll say is:  |
Cochise
| | Posted on Saturday, January 27, 2007 - 11:40 pm: |
|
If it wasn't other people's business it would have been a private message, not on the message board. |
Rocketman
| | Posted on Sunday, January 28, 2007 - 09:07 am: |
|
When you give your opinion, no problem. It's the content of your opinion that is.
meatheads who have a dangerous and pathological need to attract attention to themselves regardless of the danger to the public
When bikers are dumb enough to make public comments like this all it does is fuel the fire of big brother. It brands the biker as exactly what you describe just because so and so politician saw a biker pop a wheelie after a stop light.
The reality is, 99% of bikers who do pop the occasional wheelie are not meatheads who have a dangerous and pathological need to attract attention to themselves regardless of the danger to the public. They are for the most part riders who offer a level of skill garnered from experience that allows them to get the front wheel up, and when they do it's for a little bit of fun for the most part that lasts a matter of seconds out of a whole ride. If it were anything more then we'd hear about other road users and pedestrians been injured or killed by wheelying bikers all over the 6 o/c news, and government would legislate against bikes in an instant. As you and your reactionary attitude goes though, government might legislate anyway and take away our two wheeled freedoms because of your over the top comments and big mouth.
Rocket |
Crusty
| | Posted on Sunday, January 28, 2007 - 09:53 am: |
|
I apologise to the Badweb for my original post
(Message edited by Crusty on January 28, 2007)
(Message edited by Crusty on January 28, 2007) |
Rainman
| | Posted on Sunday, January 28, 2007 - 10:33 am: |
|
Gawd, I love this board! |
Blake
| | Posted on Sunday, January 28, 2007 - 10:42 am: |
|
Time out.  |
Tramp
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 - 06:32 am: |
|
Geeeez- I emigrate to the Carpathian Mountains for a few months, and all "H-E-Double Hockey Sticks" beaks loose......
Snow has been phenomenal..... Hope all's good at home in the states...
Jay |
Mikexlr650
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 - 07:46 am: |
|
jay,
hopefully your return is in time to join us! a spot has been saved for you. |
Tramp
| | Posted on Wednesday, January 31, 2007 - 07:55 am: |
|
Thanks, Mike- will do.
I intend to bring a dol along, so i can show the authorities where, exactly, (on the doll) you guys touched me.
best,
Jay |
Swampy
| | Posted on Friday, February 02, 2007 - 12:14 pm: |
|
I finally got a chance to view these.(I have dial-up at home)
The thing that makes this old man think is, here is this happy-go-lucky-kid stunting along everything fine as frogs hair one second, then the next, probably suffering some long term or permanent injury.
It probably never crossed into the kids head what the possible outcome of a miscalculation would be. And the activity was not even equatable to being a hero if they succeeded.
It almost makes you want to give it up and live in a cave. |
Swampy
| | Posted on Friday, February 02, 2007 - 12:28 pm: |
|
Gosh Tramp, good to see you back, I almost missed it. A Dol Huh? |
Swampy
| | Posted on Friday, February 02, 2007 - 12:30 pm: |
|
I have some Carpathian Walnuts growing in the back yard. |
Rick_a
| | Posted on Friday, February 02, 2007 - 12:35 pm: |
|
There's inherent risks in so many things we do on a daily basis. Some people would rather take those risks on their own terms. There are any number of activities that are potentially dangerous. I see what these stunters do as no different. Some of them actually make a pretty good career out of it, too. |
Yohinan
| | Posted on Friday, February 02, 2007 - 02:50 pm: |
|
The reality is, 99% of bikers who do pop the occasional wheelie are not meatheads who have a dangerous and pathological need to attract attention to themselves regardless of the danger to the public. They are for the most part riders who offer a level of skill garnered from experience that allows them to get the front wheel up, and when they do it's for a little bit of fun for the most part that lasts a matter of seconds out of a whole ride. If it were anything more then we'd hear about other road users and pedestrians been injured or killed by wheelying bikers all over the 6 o/c news, and government would legislate against bikes in an instant. As you and your reactionary attitude goes though, government might legislate anyway and take away our two wheeled freedoms because of your over the top comments and big mouth.
Rocket
I am sure your goign to take this the wrong way but I am going to type it anyway. That statement can't be correct. If it were that means your saying that you personally know 100 percent of bikers that have done or do wheelies. Things that make you go hmmmmmm.
Anyone doing this on public streets is an ATTENTION ••••• in my book!!!!!!!!! I use to think only chicks had that label but I guess guys are wanting this label now also. |
Rocketman
| | Posted on Saturday, February 03, 2007 - 08:54 am: |
|
Well, just yesterday my friend was saying he fancies buying another GSXR thou just for the stonking wheelies his last one did.
100% might be a little high, but yeah, close enough.
Think of it like this. Do you know anyone that has NEVER fractured a speed limit? Funny how we've been told forever that speed kills. I guess wheelies do to - every time!
Rocket |
Tramp
| | Posted on Saturday, February 03, 2007 - 11:33 am: |
|
Hi, Rock!
Good to read ya
Jay |
Liquorwhere
| | Posted on Saturday, February 03, 2007 - 01:28 pm: |
|
Rocket my friend..what the hell does "stonking" mean bro? I know you all invented the language so you must've held out and not exported the ENTIRE language over here to us.. |
Aesquire
| | Posted on Saturday, February 03, 2007 - 05:28 pm: |
|
No, we don't speak English here, just 'murican.
Mostly, I agree with Rocket.
Like Bungee jumping, a sport I will NOT do, and have my reasons, ( #2 is "rubber bands break" ) I still say, let people do it. The nanny state, wrap everyone in swaddling clothes, don't allow risk culture, is sick. Pathological. People being dangerous jerks is one thing, but forbid wheelies? No way. Lighten up safety fans.
My judgment tells me to wear protective clothing, but you will see me in jeans. I try not to lose control of my bike in traffic. I sometimes pop the front wheel off the ground. If I'm a hypocrite for looking down on stunters in traffic, while the above is also true, well, so be it. |
Rocketman
| | Posted on Saturday, February 03, 2007 - 06:18 pm: |
|
STONKING
[Q] From Peter Weinrich: “From time to time The Economist likes to indulge in a little verbal slumming, and does so this week (May 12–18). On p59 it refers to the prime minister who ‘may have a stonking lead in the polls’. The only meaning I ever knew for being stonked was being stoned, sloshed or otherwise drunk — does The Economist mean his lead is enough to get drunk on, or make him drunk with success? Either way it seems a new twist to an older word.”
[A] The Economist isn’t actually slumming, but using an informal word in moderately common use in Britain. Stonk and its relatives are an interesting bunch: with all those strong consonants they’re thudding, active, strongly masculine words. And there may be two separate origins involved.
According to the Macquarie Dictionary, stonkered in Australia can mean drunk, which is presumably the sense you know, though it also has associated ideas of being defeated, exhausted, done in, or lethargic, as after a large meal. This comes from the verb stonker, which at one time could mean to kill, but is now the action of outwitting or defeating somebody. It is generally said that this in turn comes from an old Scots term stonk, originally and oddly the stake in a game of marbles. According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the first recorded use of it was in John Jamieson’s Etymological Dictionary of the Scottish Language in 1841, in which he said that stunk was “the stake put in by boys in a game, especially in that of marbles”. According to the Concise Scots Dictionary, this is now only local Scots dialect, and it suggests the Scots got it from local English dialect (do try to keep up), which might have originated in stock, a store, presumably the bag or other container the marbles or money were kept in. The Australian use seems to have come out of soldiering — at least, the first examples in the Australian National Dictionary (hang on a minute while I move some of these books out of the way) are from military publications at the end of the First World War, in 1918.
That, you will probably feel, comprehensively deals with one sense of the word, but as yet it doesn’t help with the way that it turns up in The Economist piece. That meaning is well known in Britain, as I said earlier, where a stonker is something which is large or impressive of its kind. Hence stonking, a word of vague positive emphasis: “That’s a stonking good idea”, what Tony Thorne described in his Dictionary of Contemporary Slang as “an all-purpose intensifying adjective”. It seems to have been especially in vogue around the end of the 1980s.
The word was popularised widely in 1991 when the annual BBC charity telethon, Comic Relief, used the word in its catch phrase; there was even a song produced, The Stonk, by Hale and Pace and the Stonkers, which briefly reached the top of the UK charts (“Good evening, here is the six o’clock stonk, over the nation there’s a brand new craze, You see it going on wherever music plays, It’s funky and it’s punky and it’s impolite, You can do it by day but it’s better at night”; the word stonker has since become a slang term for an erection; to what extent the lyric of this song had anything to do with it is uncertain).
Now it could well be that this sense of stonking came from the other — after all, there was plenty of opportunity for British and Australian soldiers to exchange slang during two world wars. But it seems more probable that the British sense comes from military jargon, in which a stonk is an intensive artillery bombardment. The OED has examples dating from 1944. It is sometimes said that the word in this sense is a mangled version of the formal description, Standard Regimental Concentration, which seems a terrible stretch. But the word was certainly in wide use among soldiers post-war and seems to have spread out from there.
Rocket |
Rocketman
| | Posted on Saturday, February 03, 2007 - 06:20 pm: |
|
Hi Tramp
Rocket |
Liquorwhere
| | Posted on Saturday, February 03, 2007 - 08:41 pm: |
|
Thanks Man...I am now educated in the "stonk"...just sounds fun to me.. |
|
