Total Motorcycle Community Forums

During the Watts riots I was living in the suburbs around Portland, OR, wondering why all those people in LA destroyed their own neighborhoods, which had little of value, when there had to be richer fields to plunder within striking distance.
The year 1986 was merely an arbitrary choice--I actually gauge things more by my late wife's career path during her 23-year career as a police officer. I think about it in terms of when it became mandatory for her to wear a flak vest at all times on duty and how uncomfortable and physically restrictive it felt, and when the revolvers went away in favor of semi-auto 9mm sidearms, little things like that, plus listening to lots of other cops relating experiences and feelings about changes and additional restrictions in the way they have to work.
Of course there was violence prior to recent times, but I doubt there are any statistics supporting the view that there is less now than in the past. I don't remember any gangs with semi-automatic weapons doing drive-bys and dealing drugs to little kids in 1959 for example. I don't remember hearing every other day on the news about children being abducted, molested, or murdered.
As for Cleveland, I have never met anyone from there with kind words to say about it. My wife was born and raised in Cincinatti, and she was always told Cleveland was a pit.

I just know I'd be pissed off if I was buying a Honda Civic and found out they made a motorcyle with a bigger engine.

Bigger has always been better to most Americans. We watched cars grow into monstrosities with 400-500 cu in gas guzzling engines thru the 50's and 60's only to be regulated back toward more reasonable sizes in the 70's with corporate average gas milage reguirements. But most Americans refuse to be regulated and they went out in increasing numbers in the 80's and 90's and bought trucks to replace their cars. Pickups, vans, SUVs, etc. They weren't regulated and we could get back on the bigger is better bandwagon with a vegence.

Motorcycling is headed the same way and could be headed for the same sort of regulation one of these days. Self regulation is out of the question in this land of plenty, it ain't gonna happen. My personal opinion is that it is all a matter of IMAGE. Keeping up with the Jonses or preferably ahead of them is all important. Gotta have a bigger, better one than they do. I think $5 a gallon gasoline would be good for the American people.

Hugh chrome plated cruisers and plastic coated sport bikes dominate the US market. IMAGE machines. Someone above suggested people buy them because they are there. Not true. They are there because people buy them. As someone pointed out in another column, most of they rest of the world rides smaller, less powerful, more practical bikes. When I look at the UK and other Euro market sites of Honda, Kawasaki, Suzuki, and Yamaha I find many of the bikes that I would love to own. Sadly they are not offered here and most likely will not be.

Probably already said enough to get run over by a Meanie, so I won't even touch on my opinion of the subject of excessively loud pipes and their effect on motorcyclings future. I'll just say that it seems to me that those that scream the most about their rights have the least regard for the rights of others. This thread was about motorcycles in America wasn't it? Just my opinions on the subject.

gsJack wrote:Huge chrome plated cruisers and plastic coated sport bikes dominate the US market. IMAGE machines.

Probably already said enough to get run over by a Meanie

Once again I'm backed into a corner and expected to justify the bike I ride. Not gonna do it, Pops. This is America and we all enjoy luxuries over and above necessities every single day of our lives. And yeah, besides the fact that I do, in fact, put my truck and my "excessively large" motorcycle to good use, there certainly is something to be said about the image, too. I attend shows as often as I possibly can and I get great enjoyment from checking out other people's creations and having folks walk up and ask about mine. As with anything in life, it can be taken too far - but I live a very VERY modest lifestyle otherwise, so this bike is about as extravagant as I get.

And, no, I wouldn't run over ya, Brotha. On the contrary, I'd look down from atop my two-wheeled land yacht and give you a friendly biker wave!

Analog wrote: I am not going to apologize for being born in a country that has problems, but is still better than everyone elses.

It is this type of statement that justifies a lot of peoples opinions of Americans.

I have all the freedom I want. I live in a beautiful, clean, culturally diverse country that has every liberty that yours does.
The difference is my country does not have the ignorance, arrogance and the social problems that are a by-product of your self proclaimed superiority.
I have never had a need to bear arms for my or my families protection, nor will I regardless of where I go in the country.
I can buy a multi-litre chrome transporter and cruise around on roads without speed limits till the smile falls off my face.

On one hand you state that your country has problems, then on the other you state that it is the best country in the world. My country does not have those problems, does that make us better?

That's a point for mintbread. America is a great nation... but calling it the 'best' nation is kind of crass and pointless. We do have a lot of 'mosts' and 'biggests' and 'firsts' over here... but so do a lot of other nations.

Firsts, biggests, mosts....hmmmm
We were the first to use atomic weapons in war, killing about 300,000 civilians in the process. Late-breaking news says Japan may have surrendered anyway within a month of when we dropped the bomb, making the bombing unneccessary.
We have more fuel-consuming vehicles per capita than any other country on earth.
We have more racist and hate groups, such as the Clan, the Order, et al than any other counry on earth. [Muslims don't count]
We have more inferior remakes of old movies and movies made of old TV shows, than any other country. Original thought is dead in Hollywood.
We have more fat or overweight people for our total population than any other country. We also have more diet plans to take it off.
Our government is so convinced our form of democracy is best it is willing to go to any length to shove it down any country's throat. It is important the country we decide to democratize have valuable natural resources or other political cache'.
I know there have to be many more, but I can't think of them right now. I also won't swear to absolute accuracy, so fuggedabout yelling at me about that. I agree we have absolutely no reason to be so damned arrogant, though.

oldnslo wrote:We were the first to use atomic weapons in war, killing about 300,000 civilians in the process. Late-breaking news says Japan may have surrendered anyway within a month of when we dropped the bomb, making the bombing unneccessary.

You mean "unnecessary" like the attack on Pearl Harbor?

oldnslo wrote: We have more fuel-consuming vehicles per capita than any other country on earth.

An indication of our economic prosperity and folks exercising freedom.

oldnslo wrote: We have more racist and hate groups, such as the Clan, the Order, et al than any other counry on earth. [Muslims don't count]

Like to see your source for this info. Even if remotely accurate, check it against our overall population as well.

And since when do Muslim hate groups get excused from the statistics?

oldnslo wrote: We have more inferior remakes of old movies and movies made of old TV shows, than any other country. Original thought is dead in Hollywood.

Nostalgia is in right now. I don't necessarily understand it, but I enjoyed Charlie and the Chocolate Factory immensely, despite the fact that a Paris-loving Bush hater starred in it.

Besides, this argument alone is rediculous. I'm not even sure why you bothered to bring it up, unless it was just to make your post look longer and full of more "rock-solid" points.

oldnslo wrote: We have more fat or overweight people for our total population than any other country. We also have more diet plans to take it off.

Again, just a reflection of our prosperity. And let's not forget that Americans are by far some of the most productive people on earth. American productivity numbers rank among the highest in the world. Not bad for a bunch of overweight, brain-dead hicks from the red states.

oldnslo wrote: Our government is so convinced our form of democracy is best it is willing to go to any length to shove it down any country's throat.

Ask all the women of Iraq that are now attending school and joining the workforce if we shoved those freedoms down their throats. Even if we did (and we didn't) I'm sure it went down a whole lot better than their husbands' fists or the end of a gun barrel.

oldnslo wrote: It is important the country we decide to democratize have valuable natural resources or other political cache'.

Ahhhh, so that's why we've sent billions of dollars to Africa! So we can rape them of all their "valuable natural resources" (i.e. groin cloths and nose jewelry).

oldnslo wrote: we have absolutely no reason to be so damned arrogant

Arrogant? No. We are blessed as a nation, so the credit is not our own - therefore arrogance would be wrong. Pride, however, is perfectly appropriate. And non-apologetic for our culture, our government, our freedoms, or our way of life. If those are things you can't muster, might I interest you in a one-way ticket to the "superior" nation of your choice?

ZooTech wrote:

oldnslo wrote:We were the first to use atomic weapons in war, killing about 300,000 civilians in the process. Late-breaking news says Japan may have surrendered anyway within a month of when we dropped the bomb, making the bombing unneccessary.

You mean "unnecessary" like the attack on Pearl Harbor?

So the Japanese just decided to randomly attack the US?

It was the arrogance of the US to believe after years of goading the Japanese that they would not bother responding. And to attack the entire Pacific fleet at anchor in one location! They must have thought all of their christmases had come at once.

But now we are waaay off topic.

Mintbread wrote: It was the arrogance of the US to believe after years of goading the Japanese that they would not bother responding. And to attack the entire Pacific fleet at anchor in one location! They must have thought all of their christmases had come at once.

It was the belief of the Japanese government (and Germany, for that matter) that an attack on American soil would have all of us too terrified to enter the war.

They were wrong.

America - 1
Japan - 0