Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Locksmith-Pitiful t1_jdc7y6c wrote

Has Smiley done anything yet aside from post pictures of himself at celebrations on social media and threaten to rip up our bikes lanes...?

Man seems full of false promises so far.

19

VerticalTwin t1_jdc8kzm wrote

People are going to get killed or seriously injured before anything happens. The fact that the police are scared of these gangs is ridiculous.

40

ilostthegamee t1_jdcarc3 wrote

Bunch of idiots. The motorcycle crash that left 2 dead last night happened right outside my window. I can only imagine these people will have the same fate

22

ilostthegamee t1_jdcb5cb wrote

The alternative would be to crack down and arrest those breaking laws…little known fact:the drivers of these vehicles are often armed with illegal firearms. I’ve had one pulled on me by them multiple times. Scumbags, lock em up

13

ananda_yogi t1_jdccdxy wrote

I love this city, but this here is one reason I'm happy to be moving in a week. After that woman was dragged from her car and beaten a couple summers ago after merely honking at them, I fear for my safety from these idiots in more ways than one.

27

ananda_yogi t1_jdcey2l wrote

I know, just saw a similar post in the Boston sub as well. So many aspects of cities in general that I love, but shit like this does come with the territory. I'm moving to a more suburban area of RI after 5 years here.

10

Ijustlookedthatup t1_jdcgc20 wrote

This why the second amendment exists. When government does not act it is up to the individual and community to protect themselves. A woman and with her kids were pulled and beaten and it’s not the first time. I know many don’t agree with me here, but how long is it going to be until somebody gets stabbed or killed because of the in action of the police department.

And no, I am not saying pull out a gun and the smallest, but someone feels their life is threatened, and they’re about to be pulled out of the car. They should be able to shoot. The individual was trying to drag them out. We have a right, and we have a right to defend ourselves.

−17

DeftApproximation t1_jdchtow wrote

The train of logic (illogic in this case) is truly bizarre.

We went from ATVs disrupting the peace -> A fatal accident with a dirt bike (makes sense) -> A woman being pulled out of a car -> Self defense -> Implying that we should shoot anyone that we feel threatened by

So if you circle that line back to the original sentence of your post: Idiots on ATVs -> Shoot them

2

Ijustlookedthatup t1_jdci02a wrote

Actually as a Paramedic, I devoted my life to helping people, and I have. So good try on the wanting to kill people part. Have you ever walked into a murder scene where the person couldn’t defend themselves?

Is it possible that I just see a different solution to a problem? I am all for stopping These events peacefully, however, when Police don’t act for the good of the people, it is up to the people to defend themselves. Also, for a different view, please go and check out r/liberalgunowners for a Liberal view of the second amendment.

−13

Ijustlookedthatup t1_jdciegk wrote

I actually ride motorcycles, and ATVs, so I’m not actually down for shooting people who do stupid things. What I am down for, is a woman defending herself from being beaten by a group of men on motorcycles.

It is not actually productive to be so hyperbolic.

8

DeftApproximation t1_jdcii2d wrote

I recently looked up some crime stats in a conversation recently and per capita, New England is doing fine. The scary areas currently are in the Midwest.

Cities have higher property crime; mostly theft, but the Midwest is leading in violent and deadly crimes per capita.

7

Lawrencewife t1_jdcp1ee wrote

Its a sad world where people think kids deserve to chased down and killed for riding a dirt bike

−22

Ijustlookedthatup t1_jdcrqtj wrote

No, it will not stop the ATV problem. But it may help stop people from being dragged out of their cars and beaten. Or at the very least give someone the chance to stop themselves from becoming a victim of violent crime.

5

dgroach27 t1_jdcu6q8 wrote

What makes you seem like a vigilante is there can be a very thin line between community self defense and a mob of vigilantes, especially when those who intend to do harm to an individual or the community are difficult to distinguish from those who don't intend to do harm.

−2

FIFAFanboy2023 t1_jdcyflb wrote

Can't they just use a helicopter to track these assholes? I know it's expensive, but what the fuck, someone is going to get hurt. I'm in Worcester and we have the same problem, just the other day someone whipped around me when traffic was stopped to allow an elderly couple to cross the road and the dickhead missed them by less than a foot; I'm pretty sure they would have died as they were both vey frail looking.

I understand not chasing them around in cars and even to go after one person, but they can easily track a group of them. Or how about offering up a reward to rat them out, obviously these shitheads have a storage spot. I'm sure some neighbor would love to snitch for a cash reward.

5

FIFAFanboy2023 t1_jdcylyc wrote

They aren't scared of the gangs, they're scared of them driving even more erratically and smashing into someone while being chased. As it is now, they mostly stay on the roads or close by, but you can be guaranteed they would cut through parks and shit much more frequently to get away.

12

FIFAFanboy2023 t1_jdcyu8z wrote

Them dying will actually probably be what slows it down some. I know they have their adrenaline seeking issues, but a couple of their homies checking out because they were doing dickhead things can absolutely unravel their cockiness.

8

FIFAFanboy2023 t1_jdcz73g wrote

It's not racist at all. The cost benefit analysis is that there would be a higher risk of property damage and loss of life to chase around vehicles that can almost literally go anywhere. The problem is that they don't track them down to their source. As I said before, they aren't keeping these things under their bed. There a couple of them I see in Worcester doing illegal shit that I also see parked plain as day on busy roads.

6

FIFAFanboy2023 t1_jdd07vl wrote

So you think they should be able to freely ride around like this? They should be allowed to not just break laws, but fucking laugh at them as they do it? Guarantee you won't be so laissez faire when its your property they destroy or people you know is killed by them. If they were joyriding to get from where they store it to a spot in the woods and wanted to fuck around that way, I'm sure we wouldn't care nearly as much, but these assholes are living with complete disregard for safety, law and societal norms. Hell, I've seen these assholes riding on fucking sidewalks and the bike trails... yknow places where people are leisurely walking, sometimes with headphones on. What do you think would happen to that person when they are hit by a 300 lb dirt bike going 30+?

10

Proof-Variation7005 t1_jdd1t0t wrote

Specifically about ATVs? His campaign policy was a pretty simple continuation / expansion of what the city was already doing and continuing to accept help from the state police.

There's no such thing as a municipal problem this widespread that is going to be solved in a day.

2

Proof-Variation7005 t1_jdd6a5q wrote

The police seize and destroy a few hundred dirt bikes and ATVs every single year, save for the one hilarious time that a bunch of seized vehicles got stolen out of the city's storage before they could crush them.

It's obviosuly still a problem but if you have the impression that nothing's being done at all, I might suggest paying the slightest bit of attention.

Trying to shamelessly shit on the current mayor over this when we're not even a week into Spring just because you're still all worked up over a bike lane answer you've willfully misinterpreted is a weird look.

0

Locksmith-Pitiful t1_jddgxzh wrote

>It's obviosuly still a problem but if you have the impression that nothing's being done at all, I might suggest paying the slightest bit of attention.

Crushing a few ATVs is doing... "something." I also guess I'm an avid book reader since I read a book a few years ago.

>Trying to shamelessly shit on the current mayor over this when we're not even a week into Spring just because you're still all worked up over a bike lane answer you've willfully misinterpreted is a weird look.

A week into spring and his only proposal so far is to start the destruction of progress. He had a boner for the police and so far, his social media is just flexing with them in a heightened state of police fear and corruption, nothing about policy.

And misinterpreting? I'm just able to read between the lines. Everyone with a brain knows he's in bed with real estate and business fucks in Providence and what do ya know, those fucks despise walking and biking infrastructure because "muh parkin'."

Weird for you to defend someone who doesn't give a flying fuck about this city.

3

Ijustlookedthatup t1_jddl7yx wrote

I specifically brought up the recent case of a woman and then a man being dragged out from the car and beaten. Is this something you Consider vigilantism to stop the person or persons attacking you? I didn’t speak of vigilantism, that was brought up by you. I believe in adequate self-defense.

3

Ijustlookedthatup t1_jddlgkm wrote

Nope it was the point that why if I wanted to kill people would I not join the military or police? Kinda odd place for someone to work if they wanna kill. Also my point was about self defense of your life. Not really what I would consider being a bad person.

I love how everyone immediately goes to call me a psycho because I believe a woman who is dragged from her car and beaten has the right to self defense.

4

Proof-Variation7005 t1_jddlyrp wrote

>Crushing a few ATVs is doing... "something." I also guess I'm an avid book reader since I read a book a few years ago.

There's not a lot of great solutions here but the city and state police have been working on this for a while. You being smarmy about an incoming mayor because you're grumpy over one completely unrelated issue is disingenuous.

If your opinion of the guy is this hopelessly biased based on one completely unrelated issue, it's hard to take it seriously. Anytime the opportunity has come up, you go out of your way to take a shot at him over this hyper fixation on whatever you think you read between the lines. If the guy was all about ripping up bike lanes, they'd be gone already. It's easy to get rid of them in January and February because nobody's fucking using them anyway.

Let it go.

2

Ijustlookedthatup t1_jddm4lx wrote

How bout this as proof “vtach code defibrillated to course vfib with bilateral 18g and 1mg/kg lido on board. eat tube is 7.5 22 at the lip and etco2 43.”

Either I’m a fantastic creative writer or I spent 15 years on a rig, you can choose which to believe.

2

dgroach27 t1_jddn6xe wrote

Love the condescending question, of course that's not vigilantism. You also talked about community self defense.

>When government does not act it is up to the individual and community to protect themselves.

I was providing input on why someone called you a vigilante. Literally no one is saying people shouldn't defend themselves but when you say stuff like "When government does not act it is up to the individual and community to protect themselves." after saying "This why the second amendment exists" it isn't out of the realm of reality for someone to interpret that as you wanting more than 'individuals using "adequate self-defense"'. It is especially not out of the realm of reality considering the country we live in.

1

Hash_Is_Good_For_You t1_jddqinr wrote

It's one of the worst subcultures going. It would be one thing if they didn't just go around harassing people, but nope.

5

Hash_Is_Good_For_You t1_jddr080 wrote

Logical but still sad, they are not mutually exclusive. I can't stand the ATV's and dirt bikes but I hate to see anyone lose their life, especially doing something so reckless and dumb. I'd love nothing more than to see them go away, but yes it is still sad lives were lost.

2

Ruum_Hamm t1_jddwwr6 wrote

Why can't we just play bumper cars with them? Win win

5

Locksmith-Pitiful t1_jddxsof wrote

> There's not a lot of great solutions here but the city and state police have been working on this for a while.

If this was any other incident, whether it be a riot, multiple cars, whatever, you bet your ass police would absolutely use force and other methods if need be to stop them. We also have their routes and exact times they plan this, at the very least, there's preventative measures.

>Anytime the opportunity has come up, you go out of your way to take a shot at him over this hyper fixation

Holy shit, the guy has been mayor for several months and the only thing his office has released is a proposal to strip a bike lane and multiple photos of him posing with police. There's literally only two things to "fixate" on lmao

Your adamant defense of him is making me question your sanity. How long should we wait until he does something productive or even releases a positive statement on fucking anything?

1

Narples82 t1_jdeds8r wrote

Work on Dyer and they are just now starting to clean up all the shattered dirtbike plastics that have been laying around all winter. These expendable idiots eat shit all the time at low speed and just ride away, no one cares.

One day someone “important” will get injured and that’s when change will begin.

3

Ijustlookedthatup t1_jdel7m2 wrote

I can see how what I said could be seen that way but that is absolutely not at all what I mean. If someone went out and created trouble for those riding the ATVs I would say they should be charge for assault with a deadly weapon. I merely say that anyone who get aggressed by these groups should have the right to defend themselves.

2

Ijustlookedthatup t1_jdelg7w wrote

If you DM me yours I’ll DM you mine. And what if I’m from a non national state?!?!

Yeah they can google it, but it’s not about the information, it’s the shorthand vernacular that gives me away. Others too, like reading a run report.

2

Ijustlookedthatup t1_jdelxhv wrote

You don’t know the outcome, anything can happen when a group attacks an individual. I would absolutely prefer the bday guy be in a morgue than an innocent woman get beaten by a group. It’s remarkable to me but it seems people have more empathy for the criminal than the innocent, I’m curious why that is

6

Ijustlookedthatup t1_jden94i wrote

You’re a troll and no one cares, sadly for you I’m not one of those fucks that has to prove myself to an internet stranger. If you don’t know by how I wrote that I know what’s up then you’re not important enough for me to share my numbers, then you’ll have my name and based on the nature of how you deny obvious information leads me to believe you aren’t sound of in the head. Which is another reason not to dox myself. Have a great day non medic from a fake medic!!

3

werewolfmanjack t1_jdes3qc wrote

Are you sad when a free climber / parkour person falls? The consequences of excessive and willful personal risk doesn’t garner much sympathy imo. I’m sad for the family - I’m sad for the people they’ve now hurt - not sad for them. I’ve seen people on dirt bikes on sidewalks, weaving against traffic and blowing through stops, the fact that they only hurt themselves this time is a miracle.

2

JuciestDingleBerry t1_jdesdw4 wrote

Actually yes I am, it is sad even if it isn't surprising. The fact that you asked your question like that was some sort of "gotcha" question is kind of scary. It's called empathy, it usually isn't circumstantial. I'm sorry that you seem to lack that

1

Ijustlookedthatup t1_jdeykuy wrote

It’s true! I was curious if my encounter was a “one-off” but it seems you really do like to be mean to people. I thought initially you were a troll, but nope, just an unkind person. Honestly, this is far down the line no one else will read this. I hope you find happiness.

2

Proof-Variation7005 t1_jdf1ct5 wrote

>You don’t know the outcome

Considering we're talking about a single incident 2 years ago, I kinda do know the outcome. We all do. That's just the nature of linear time. I'm going to need to have more than 1 incident in the last decade in the city before we can start pretending it is even sorta probable.

And, without remotely trying to say, she deserved it or the attack was warranted, I have trouble believing that her version of the build-up where the group was just sitting through multiple light cycles before she politely honked and then was attacked. I've seen plenty of aggressive behavior towards other motorists from the ATV and Dirt Bike crowd but her version of events failed the smell test. Hell, just the idea of them camping at an intersection and refusing to move runs against every one of the hundreds of other times people have seen these groups.

2

VinylGator t1_jdfz1s6 wrote

So you’re a woman with kids and your forcibly being grabbed out of your car that has your children too, and that’s not a reasonable enough situation to use force?

That’s just an excuse to want to be a “vigilante”?

Fuck me. I hate guns but this doesn’t stand the most basic of reasoning.

3

VinylGator t1_jdfzikh wrote

Again, I’d like to point out the the user painted the picture of being forcefully grabbed out of a car that also contained her children as the scenario in which force would and should be reasonable. Any court of law will uphold that reason. You’re just trying to antagonize for the sake of antagonizing.

3

VinylGator t1_jdg1ipb wrote

Right. A women being accosted from her car with children is difficult to distinguish from a group of people in the act of accosting her

I like how the woman, with her children, suddenly became a “mob”.

1

VinylGator t1_jdg365n wrote

I’ve followed this thread quite closely.

> Literally no one is saying people shouldn’t defend themselves

That seems to be precisely what your argument has been?

> government does not act it is up to the individual and community to protect themselves.”

I mean, I fucking hate guns, but can you reasonably explain to me why the right to carry a gun is not justified here? Like actually reasonable?

Is this woman, who is violently being grabbed from her car, that also has her children in it, supposed to say: “nah, nah, nah, nah, aboo, boo, I call time out! I’m going to call the police. Things are in time out until they arrive!”

What more could a right to self defense exist of?

> it isn’t out of the realm of reality for someone to interpret that as you wanting more than ‘individuals using “adequate self-defense”’. It is especially not out of the realm of reality considering the country we live in.

This is your projection to attempt to self validate your ridiculous interpretation. Nothing more, nothing less.

1

VinylGator t1_jdg445r wrote

You must be quite literally inept to not understand that no sound person would divulge that information publicly on a forum such as reddit.

That’s not the “gotcha” you desperately want it to be.

Seems to me the user offered to pm you further information. Did you take them up on that offer?

1

VinylGator t1_jdg5fxv wrote

Enjoy every second of it mate. Enjoy that contentment, you deserve it, and thanks for your public service.

More importantly, thanks for standing ip to the fact that anybody deserves the right to defend themselves from being violently attacked.

2

VinylGator t1_jdg6dd5 wrote

It’s quite astounding you literally said, yourself:

> A woman being pulled out of a car

(while omitting her children where in the car and that this has happened previously.)

To:

> Implying that we should shoot anyone that we feel threatened by

I might have missed this part. When was that exactly inferred or implied?

Perhaps her stance should be: “Nah, nah, naboo, boo! I’m calling the cops. You can’t do anything until they arrive!”

I’ll give in: Women in their car, with their children, must submit, less they be “murderers”.

Honestly, are you people even listening to yourselves?

3

dgroach27 t1_jdgfgjh wrote

I’m pretty sure I never said people shouldn’t defend themselves buuuuut you have been following this thread quite closely so you’re probably right. Whatever you say big guy.

1

DeftApproximation t1_jdgzghn wrote

The disconnect is the jump from riding recklessly to self defense.

Yes you have the right to defend yourself, even with a firearm. Why self defense and ATVs are in the same scenario is the logic problem. This the the problem with “whataboutism” arguments, when topics jump around things get conflated. If you keep them separate, things make sense.

Reckless riding on ATVs -> Cops should do more about them

Woman being assaulted -> Yea, she should be able to defend herself

The post that started with: Reckless riding on ATVs -> Then the immediate response of “This is why we need the 2nd amendment” (There’s the jump that is not helpful)

When you argue/debate, you can’t do those abrupt whataboutism turns to effectively change the subject. You need clear break points in the conversation line and context to set them up. Otherwise you get hyperbolic results like “Kids on ATVs -> Shoot them”

1

degggendorf t1_jdh9vu3 wrote

>I strongly disapprove of their behavior, but I don't want them to die.

I completely agree too. The callousness in these threads is shocking. Of course the riders are completely wrong in several ways, but that doesn't mean their death should be enjoyed.

2

Ijustlookedthatup t1_jdijpan wrote

I was referencing the article that had a list of incidents relating to these groups attacking people. That is why I said what I said. No one in their right mind thinks shooting these children and adults is okay for just riding and having fun

1

DeftApproximation t1_jdipm24 wrote

And that’s where you need to have clear breaks in the conversation because the logic line you presented makes it sound like you wanted to shoot kids on ATVs because the police *weren’t doing enough.

Putting some blame on GoLocalProv though because the way they structured that article immediately leads people into this line of thinking. (And why they’re mainly considered a muckraking shill of a newspaper)

A bunch of the quick little snippets were of police or the mayor saying they won’t do anything about ATV gangs. Which is not true.

Police are instructed not to chase them through the city because there is a much higher risk of damage, injury and death (to the police, gang member or especially bystanders) when it comes to a full sized police cruiser vs a smaller let nimbler ATV or a Bike. Police have to work to apprehend them in other ways.

It’s not a good answer but it’s all they’ve got atm.

Which is why it sounds insane when the logic line jumps from ATV riders to firearms in self defense. Should a woman be able to shoot in self defense when under physical assault? Yea, I would concede on that. Is that an equivalency I would bring into a discussion on reckless riding? No.

1