Tuesday, June 5, 2007

when you dont play the game, you dont make rules!?

a bike freak and loves biking, am on roads with other vehicles and their riders/drivers since many years... dont remember, well from my first cycling days, that is! so, by now have a lot of sense of roads and its users!

am a member of a biking community, rather a website of Indian bikers. simple reason, me bike freak and a new owner of an awesome machine! (Pulsar 180DTSi UG3... fans call it Phantom, mine is Dragon!)

road sense, other than many things, includes responsibility of the vehicle and its rider. will share and explain this topic in deep. road sense also needs moral responsibility. now, few days back, we had a disscussion on this website about our moral responsibility on roads. and i shot a question, a satisfying answer for which, not yet received from any rookie or senior biker.

we were discussing an incident when a guy witnessed on a traffic signal that the signal suddenly turned red coz of which a mid-aged in his car suddenly braked. the youngs on the bike behind the car couldn't control and struck the car. though no major accident nor damage, still those guys came up shouting fowl words to the man in car, dragged him out and started beating him. all else around were just looking, including this guy who narrated the incident. he said he preferred staying out of others' matters more because of those mawali kinda guys. i think most of us will do the same!

now the question i asked... when we read such kind of news or watch it on tv, don't we always think, comfortably sitting on the sofa, about the onlookers "what these people are doing there just looking at the brawl? shameless! why is no one coming forward to stop the wrong or help? such insensitive public? no responsibility?" don't we?
and when 'we' are one of the 'onlookers' what do 'we' do other than staying off the matter? why then 'we' dont think that someone must be watching us on tv or even from the nearby building window and will be cursing 'us'? shameless irresponsibles are 'we'?

No comments: