On 2018-08-20, Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein wrote:
In uk.politics.misc Incubus wrote:
On 2018-08-20, Yitzhak Isaac Goldstein wrote:
In uk.politics.misc Incubus wrote:
On 2018-08-20, Bruce 'Not Glug' Lee wrote:
In uk.rec.cycling Incubus wrote:
On 18/08/18 12:47, TMS320 wrote:

How high is "very high"? Let's take a cyclist and a driver that each
go through a red traffic light 100 times. How many bodies will each
leave behind?

It's irrelevant. You seem to think that specific laws against
dangerous cycling shouldn't be introduced because a bicycle is less
likely to kill someone than a car. That's like saying it shouldn't
be illegal to carry a dagger because it is far less likely to cause
grievous injury than a rifle.

What a splendid false dichotomy. In fact, it is like having over
thirty people killed every week by rifle-wielding thugs and telling
the police to ignore it... and then, on the one occasion where
someone holding a dagger kills someone, declare it a national
emergency and demand that 'public enemy number 1' be brought to
justice.

It really isn't.

Erm, yes it is.

What utter rot.

Yeah, the bit three lines up.

Such a witty rejoinder takes me back to my school days where one might hear a
fierce rebuttal expressed in terms of 'I know you are!'

'That's like saying it shouldn't be illegal to carry a dagger because it
is far less likely to cause grievous injury than a rifle'.

That is known as an analogy.

No, it would be a simile and not an analogy.

Wrong. A simile is used for descriptive purposes. The above is an analogy
intended for purposes of comparison.

But it is neither, because it
is a false dichotomy, i.e. an 'either or' presented as the only two
options.

And as I said, the false dichotomy is not mine but rather that which has been
presented as the main objection within this thread to a law on Death By
Dangerous Cycling: that car drivers cause far more harm than cyclists, the
implication being that cyclists should be left alone.

If you want a good example of a false dichotomy, one need look no further
than the suggestion that no further laws are needed to deal with cylists
because cars present a more significant danger.

*phew!*

Just as well no one has suggested this, then.

In fact, they have.