Who's seen it?
New Honda Pilot with 2 mountain bikes on top rolls down old railroad grade, crossing bridge then is stopped by a low tunnel in which they can't get the bikes through. The Pilot then backs up and just goes overland over roadless slopes and ends up around the tunnel.

Basically, the announcer, Richard Dreyfuss, then says something to the effect that the Pilot will get you around an obstacle even without roads. "Invent your shortcut" Richard Dreyfuss says.

I've seen it three times in the last hour and I'm steaming. Honda, WTF?

First of all, who would buy this piece of crap and actually take it off road?

Second, the SUV auto makers are painting images on the tube that are destroying all the work that the Pirates, blue ribbon,etc. have done to keep trails open. I have seen ads from many auto makers glorifying destroying the land and it just gives the greenies more ammo against us.

Am I off-base here or does anybody else think this is major problem?

C104

One of the only right-wing wackos in the Bay Area.

Originally posted by c104
Who's seen it?
New Honda Pilot with 2 mountain bikes on top rolls down old railroad grade, crossing bridge then is stopped by a low tunnel in which they can't get the bikes through. The Pilot then backs up and just goes overland over roadless slopes and ends up around the tunnel.

Basically, the announcer, Richard Dreyfuss, then says something to the effect that the Pilot will get you around an obstacle even without roads. "Invent your shortcut" Richard Dreyfuss says.

I've seen it three times in the last hour and I'm steaming. Honda, WTF?

First of all, who would buy this piece of crap and actually take it off road?

Second, the SUV auto makers are painting images on the tube that are destroying all the work that the Pirates, blue ribbon,etc. have done to keep trails open. I have seen ads from many auto makers glorifying destroying the land and it just gives the greenies more ammo against us.

Am I off-base here or does anybody else think this is major problem?

C104

One of the only right-wing wackos in the Bay Area.

I agree, it is sad to see those pathetic adds.

And I am the other Bay Area Right Wing Wacko
Listen to Leykis ever?

Bottom line is the auto manufacurers will do any thing to sell the "image" of their vehicles. It's all about making money. I will agree, that kind of advertising does not help our cause one bit.

http://www.hondacars.com/info/customer_relations.asp

chit chat chit chat...

Originally posted by waverider
chit chat chit chat...

Fawk off!!!!:flipoff: :mad3:

This TV ad definitly needs our attention.
Thanks to Paul, we can get a hold of Honda and let them know how we feel. Everybody should call AND write them, demanding they take this ad off the air!

Originally posted by waverider
chit chat chit chat... Chit chat for sure!! There is nothung tech. about a comercial ad.?? Go rant and vent over there.:flipoff2:

.....and the newbies think they are the keeper of the board :rolleyes:



Haven't seen/noticed the Pilot ad but have you ever seen ANY Nissan truck ad? Everyone is tearing up gras yada yada

Originally posted by Joe_W
.....and the newbies think they are the keeper of the board :rolleyes:



:laughing: :laughing: :laughing:

Yet again - we are reduced to bickering among ourselves about ONE commercial of ONE guy tear up a little grass an some underbrush :shaking:

Do you KNOW it was not private property?
Do you KNOW they did not have permission to drive there?


I'll say it yet AGAIN... as long as we have this attitude ( "oh, he dwove owver a poor wittle twee!") we already lost.

Originally posted by DRM
Yet again - we are reduced to bickering among ourselves about ONE commercial of ONE guy tear up a little grass an some underbrush :shaking:

Do you KNOW it was not private property?
Do you KNOW they did not have permission to drive there?


I'll say it yet AGAIN... as long as we have this attitude ( "oh, he dwove owver a poor wittle twee!") we already lost.

How do we know it is private property? "Professional driver on closed course" means nothing to me. Just means the car company has enough cash to pay the city/county so they'lll close the road/property to the public during filming.

PRivate proerty ornot, it is the impression that we are cutting new trails as we see fit. The average viewer does not read that fine print or even care if it is private property, they just see an SUV going off trail.

What about that Subaru commercial where the couple is quietly watching a deer drink from a stream and the big 'ole SUV comes bashing out from the trees/bushes scaring away the deer? THen the stupid looking driver whispers "What are you looking at?" That one ticks me off as well... Not just showing driving off trial, but shows us all as "Scaring off wildlife" and shiat like that.

Originally posted by Joe_W
.....and the newbies think they are the keeper of the board :rolleyes:





At least he has enough sense to know what is chit chat. He could have created a post saying he "lost his password".

Originally posted by DRM
Yet again - we are reduced to bickering among ourselves about ONE commercial of ONE guy tear up a little grass an some underbrush :shaking:

Do you KNOW it was not private property?
Do you KNOW they did not have permission to drive there?


I'll say it yet AGAIN... as long as we have this attitude ( "oh, he dwove owver a poor wittle twee!") we already lost.

david, it doesnt matter if they had permission or if it was private property, c'mon dude, its the impression it gives the public in regards to 4wheeling in general...

how many trails have they closed in the south east lately?? sux huh! one poor wittle twee at a time!

Wasn't it Honda that recently aired commercials depicting people getting injured doing extreme sports or driving 4x4s in precarious ways - and the Honda drivers scratched their heads and said, "What was he thinking?"

I guess they're now trying to "toughen" their on TV image with the success of the Jeep type commercials. Quite humorous actually. Maybe the greenies will all get upset and yell at Honda - and then they'll start filming their "suv's" in parking lots again - or go back to showing girls with laundry in a basket tied on the top, or....;)

Honda ad: 1st time I saw it I commented to the wife that it was a typical yuppie POS commercial/thinking and they could have taken the bikes off in 5 minutes, rode them through the tunnel, put them back on the vehicle and continued on. Need a commercial of the honda gettting smacked by a train when it tried to cross the tracks

Subaru ad: Can't even remember the make of car because the bubba part of the ad pisses me off so much.

Whatever guys...


Just keep bending over backwards for the greenies... it is working JUST GREAT so far... I mean come on - you are getting new trails all the time, right? And no more trails are getting closed, right?


If this was a war - your strategy so far is defined as RETREAT.

Um...someones taking things a little too far, dont ya think?

I saw the ad last night and it tells honda pilot buyers to blaze there own trail or make your own trail bla bla bla... Could care less about the the ad I see but what I hear to go along with it...

Mike-

Originally posted by Jason R
Um...someones taking things a little too far, dont ya think?

Who? Honda, me, or someone else here? :p



I used to get worked up about this stuff too - then I realized I was playing DEFENSE 24 hours a day, and STILL losing ground at every turn :(


So I came to the realization that if we ever intend to win and advance towards our common goal (yes, I think most all of us here have the same common goal) then we are gonna have to stop playing by THEIR rules every time.

Originally posted by DRM

Do you KNOW it was not private property?
Do you KNOW they did not have permission to drive there?


Do you know that they DID have permission? Will the average viewer (you know, the ones that VOTE) assume that they had permission? Clearly you don't care about image, because you have a shitty one :flipoff2: , but some wheelers DO care about what people think.


I'll say it yet AGAIN... as long as we have this attitude ( "oh, he dwove owver a poor wittle twee!") we already lost.

Actually David, I am the one that loses every time you drive over a "poor wittle twee" because the next time I go to that wheeling spot the tree won't be there. Then the next guy runs one over, and the next... you get the idea.

Conservation does not mean that we already lost. If you are fighting to blaze new trails wherever you want, then YOU are the one who has already lost.

Originally posted by Dirty Harry
Do you know that they DID have permission?

Isn't this an absurd reply to my question?

Will the average viewer (you know, the ones that VOTE) assume that they had permission?

Can you answer that question yourself? Maybe I give the average public a *little* more credit than you do - I am quite sure that John Q. Public does not assume a Honda filming crew just pulled off some dirt road and started filming.. Is that what you think the average public thinks?


Clearly you don't care about image, because you have a shitty one :flipoff2: , but some wheelers DO care about what people think.

Nice... way to keep a discussion on topic :rolleyes:



Actually David, I am the one that loses every time you drive over a "poor wittle twee" because the next time I go to that wheeling spot the tree won't be there. Then the next guy runs one over, and the next... you get the idea.

Sadly, here is where you take up an egocentric approach - ASSUMING that you have the right, priveledge, or permission to access that same piece of land. I have found over the last 10 years I have been involved with this sport that people from out west fail to see it from any other viewpoint. Sure - I could fall into the same thinking over here - as we have very little public land to ride on and therefore are faced with the exact opposite situation... but I at least recognize that one way is ont the ONLY way to approach the situation.

But on to that little tree. Trees die every day - lighting, burns, disease, insects, wind, etc. I guess I have a more open approach and don't find the demise of a tree here and there to be a cardinal sin.

So I ask - do *you* find the death of that "wittle twee" to be a cardinal sin, of the utmost importance? Or, as I said all along - you are FORCED to take that stand because you are playing DEFENSE against the greenies? I am only asking you to evaluate your own motivation for the stand you take, don't take it out on me ;)

Conservation does not mean that we already lost.

You are correct - it does not. But conservation where the motivation is playing defense against the attacks of those who would have ALL land shut down DOES mean we are LOSING.

If you are fighting to blaze new trails wherever you want, then YOU are the one who has already lost.

Let me modify that statement slightly:

I am fighting to blaze NEW TRAILS wherever I CAN.

And to that I say HELL YES!


Sadly, I see too many fellow 4 wheeler having a hard enough time just trying to hold on to what we have, having already given up on gaining ground. And part of the reason they are having such a hard time, is they are wasting valuable time and resource in issues EXACTLY this this petty Honda commercial.

Now I understand not everyone feels this same way. That's fine if you think Tread Lightly and other crippled organizations are ont he right track. I happen to think that they are missing the point, but until you and others see what I am saying - we will continue to be forced to waste time and resources to whine, bitch, and moan about things as sickeningly irrelevant as a TV commercial :(

At the risk of exposing myself to the ire of everyone on the board, I agree with DRM 100%.

Did these problems exist 50 (or even 30) years ago? No. Not because people didn't drive off-road, but because people had more important shit to worry about.

Are the forests still there? Yessiree. Right where they've always been.

The fact of the matter is, the world ecosystem is a dynamic, ever-changing enigma that is so far beyond the control of humanity that it's pure hubris to think that we could irrevocably damage it (short of nuclear winter, and some species would certainly survive even that).

Nature isn't some frail, ephemeral, metastasis teetering on the edge of existence. Nature is a ravaging, devouring monster that knows no master. Nature is a nimble, self-sustaining cycle refined over billions of years that has proven itself able to surmount and overcome geological and celestial forces so great that the worst humanity could muster would be a mere pin-prick by comparison.

The fact of the matter is, mother nature was here looong before we ever showed up and she'll be here loooooong after we're gone.

My$.02 USD,
Jake Harsha

Whether we are on offense or defense, we MUST protect our image. We can not have the public believing that four wheelers are out tearing up new trails as they see fit. That is what the Honda commercial portrays.

As a side note, I do believe this topic belongs right where it is, General 4x4 Discussion. This affects all of us that use public lands for four wheeling purposes. I see nothing that demands that every thing on this board be tech related. If that were the case, then we should get the "2002 Rubicon Cleanup" thread moved over to Chit Chat.:rolleyes:

Originally posted by Robert
Whether we are on offense or defense, we MUST protect our image. We can not have the public believing that four wheelers are out tearing up new trails as they see fit. That is what the Honda commercial portrays.

Exactly my point - we are now reduced to "reacting" and "protecting our image".

No matter how you call it - when you are playing that game, you are playing by THEIR rules.

THEY have determined what image we are to hold - and some of you are content to take that image and play along.


Well I for one am tired of playing by their rules. I want to DO WHAT IS RIGHT - and that is NOT always "protecting our image".


My DOING WHAT IS RIGHT could mean driving a Honda Pilot over PRIVATE PROTERTY and crushing a small shrub or other underbrush.


Anyway, I could argue this forever - but the poitn remains. As long as we play THEIR GAME by THEIR RULES - we can never win, and will ALWAYS be backpedaling ourselves until we have nowhere left to go but HOME :(

More likely than not, they were not on private property. I have actually seen a couple of car commercials being filmed near the Rubicon, on Ice House Road(Volvo) and Granite Springs(Subaru). They had full police escort and the roads were locally closed around the actual filming. These are definitly not private property roads.

So DRM, what do you recommend? How should we go on the offense, what should we do to protect what few right of ways we have now? If you want to blaze trails when ever, where ever, the greenies will stop closing trails, and just start closing massive tracts of land instead.
Should we portray ourselves as throttle happy, small animal & daisy killin', trail blazin', maniacs that will drive though any piece of land we see fit?
We are the ones being attacked by the greenies. And until we can better group together, and improve our public image, the greenies will conitue to win, continue to close trails all across the nation. We will continue to be on defense until our public image improves. A few public victories would help us move from reactive to proactive, even if they are so small as getting Honda to pull this ad.

:beer: :beer: :beer: :beer:

Originally posted by DRM


Exactly my point - we are now reduced to "reacting" and "protecting our image".

No matter how you call it - when you are playing that game, you are playing by THEIR rules.

THEY have determined what image we are to hold - and some of you are content to take that image and play along.


Well I for one am tired of playing by their rules. I want to DO WHAT IS RIGHT - and that is NOT always "protecting our image".


My DOING WHAT IS RIGHT could mean driving a Honda Pilot over PRIVATE PROTERTY and crushing a small shrub or other underbrush.


Anyway, I could argue this forever - but the poitn remains. As long as we play THEIR GAME by THEIR RULES - we can never win, and will ALWAYS be backpedaling ourselves until we have nowhere left to go but HOME :(

Sometimes I wonder if you even think about what it is you are arguing or if you just like to hear your egocentric self sound like a self-righteous know it all.

Every good team has an offense and defense. You DO have to react, and you DO have to do "the right thing". Could you imagine a football team playing without a defense? THEY WOULD NEVER WIN!

Originally posted by Robert
More likely than not, they were not on private property. I have actually seen a couple of car commercials being filmed near the Rubicon, on Ice House Road(Volvo) and Granite Springs(Subaru). They had full police escort and the roads were locally closed around the actual filming. These are definitly not private property roads.

If you feel confident to say they were *not* on private property - I would love to see your basis for that...

So DRM, what do you recommend? How should we go on the offense, what should we do to protect what few right of ways we have now?

I cannot honestly sit down and write how to change the entire legal and social mindset in this thread, nor do I think you want such a broad topic discussed here... Maybe later :)


If you want to blaze trails when ever, where ever, the greenies will stop closing trails, and just start closing massive tracts of land instead.

Several things here...

Where did I ever say anything about blazing trails "when ever, where ever"? Don't read things into my words that I did not say. I said - and meant - we should be actively expressing our RIGHTS in the form of exploring and expanding on trail creatiing and building options.



I see no reason to reply to such a nonsensical portrayal of my comments.

[quote]We are the ones being attacked by the greenies. And until we can better group together, and improve our public image, the greenies will conitue to win, continue to close trails all across the nation. We will continue to be on defense until our public image improves. A few public victories would help us move from reactive to proactive, even if they are so small as getting Honda to pull this ad.

So as you state it - the goal is to "improve our image"? Again - you are REACTING...

When was the last time anyone got ANYWHERE by simply reacting all of the time?

Originally posted by DRM
I am fighting to blaze NEW TRAILS wherever I CAN.


Hell yeah! I hadnt really thought about it in this light but that really makes a lot of sense.

Originally posted by JoshC
Sometimes I wonder if you even think about what it is you are arguing or if you just like to hear your egocentric self sound like a self-righteous know it all.

I am trying to have a discussion here about the issue - if you want to whine about me - kindly do it elsewhere - I have email and PM's readily available for you to use...

Every good team has an offense and defense. You DO have to react, and you DO have to do "the right thing". Could you imagine a football team playing without a defense? THEY WOULD NEVER WIN!


Since you seem to understand it all.. then answer me this:

Go ask any football coach from Peewee to NFL and see if you will EVER win playing a realctionary tactic throughout the game.


Nobody was suggesting defensive tactics be thrown out the window in their entirety... But defense as the major tactic is NO WAY TO WIN.

Originally posted by DRM

Can you answer that question yourself? Maybe I give the average public a *little* more credit than you do - I am quite sure that John Q. Public does not assume a Honda filming crew just pulled off some dirt road and started filming.. Is that what you think the average public thinks?


No, I think that the average public thinks that they are going to get a Honda Pilot or Nissan Pathfinder or Dodge truck or whatever and go blazin' off wherever they want. Honestly, that is fun, and if they keep seeing it happen on the television and no one tells them that it is wrong, then I think they will go blazing trails too.




Sadly, here is where you take up an egocentric approach - ASSUMING that you have the right, priveledge, or permission to access that same piece of land.


You use the example of running over a tree away so no one can enjoy it again and *I* am egocentric. :shaking:


I have found over the last 10 years I have been involved with this sport that people from out west fail to see it from any other viewpoint. Sure - I could fall into the same thinking over here - as we have very little public land to ride on and therefore are faced with the exact opposite situation... but I at least recognize that one way is ont the ONLY way to approach the situation.

I admit that when I think of "four wheeling" I think of public lands, because that is where I (and most people on the West Coast) do my four wheeling. I can see how you look at things differently since you usually wheel on private land, but don't you still want to minimize impact?


But on to that little tree. Trees die every day - lighting, burns, disease, insects, wind, etc. I guess I have a more open approach and don't find the demise of a tree here and there to be a cardinal sin.


Right, and buildings are demolished every day, but I bet you still get a little angry when someone puts a plane into the side of one and brings it down. THE CIRCUMSTANCES ARE DIFFERENT.


So I ask - do *you* find the death of that "wittle twee" to be a cardinal sin, of the utmost importance? Or, as I said all along - you are FORCED to take that stand because you are playing DEFENSE against the greenies? I am only asking you to evaluate your own motivation for the stand you take, don't take it out on me ;)


No, I do not consider it a cardinal sin. I guess that I do not see the issue as being so black and white. I would prefer that the tree were there, so the next person that comes by can enjoy it too. I am not forced to take this stand, it is common courtesy.

I also find it ironic David that the same person that thinks it is OK to run over one little tree doesn't think that it is OK to drink one little beer on the trail.


Sadly, I see too many fellow 4 wheeler having a hard enough time just trying to hold on to what we have, having already given up on gaining ground. And part of the reason they are having such a hard time, is they are wasting valuable time and resource in issues EXACTLY this this petty Honda commercial.

Now I understand not everyone feels this same way. That's fine if you think Tread Lightly and other crippled organizations are ont he right track. I happen to think that they are missing the point, but until you and others see what I am saying - we will continue to be forced to waste time and resources to whine, bitch, and moan about things as sickeningly irrelevant as a TV commercial :(

I see your point, there are always bigger fish to fry. If Tread Lightly and Blue Ribbon don't get the job done though, who does? I see no better alternative out there.

Originally posted by DRM


I am trying to have a discussion here about the issue - if you want to whine about me - kindly do it elsewhere - I have email and PM's readily available for you to use...


So it's ok for you to whine about "crippled organizations" such as Tread Lightly rather than sending them your thoughts via email?



Since you seem to understand it all.. then answer me this:

Go ask any football coach from Peewee to NFL and see if you will EVER win playing a realctionary tactic throughout the game.


Nobody was suggesting defensive tactics be thrown out the window in their entirety... But defense as the major tactic is NO WAY TO WIN.


You have clearly made the point that reacting to this commercial was "playing by THEIR rules". That sounds to me like you are implying that we should not react. My point was simply that reacting IS part of the game.

Originally posted by Robert
Whether we are on offense or defense, we MUST protect our image. We can not have the public believing that four wheelers are out tearing up new trails as they see fit. That is what the Honda commercial portrays.

As a side note, I do believe this topic belongs right where it is, General 4x4 Discussion. This affects all of us that use public lands for four wheeling purposes. I see nothing that demands that every thing on this board be tech related. If that were the case, then we should get the "2002 Rubicon Cleanup" thread moved over to Chit Chat.:rolleyes:

Protect your image, yes, but do a better job of knowing when and where to identify the true threat? This type of information does belong where people will see it and act (IMO). I just hope the readers and posters can get past just complaining and focus concern to the point of choosing priorities for where to apply your wrath in action?

I have to question the maturity and priority of this complaint, against Honda, compared to other misleading and abusive portrayals of off-roaders?
What justifies this threat as worthy, and how do you qualify it in your priority for action (or rant, if you cannot get off your tail and write letters to the people in charge).

I will give an example: a contrast of this thread's complaint activity about American Honda's commercial (something everyone who drives knows is a staged advertisement), compared to comments about the Four Wheeler article "Low Rage" in the October issue (see link below). This rant about Honda's advertisement has 365 readers and 21 posts of concern (of one sort or another). The post regarding Four Wheeler's slam on off-roaders has only 152 readers and only two responses.

What is more threatening to your sport: a misleading advertisement that everyone knows is BS showing a poor example of off-road behavior, or a misleading article in a National Motorized Off-Road Enthusiast Publication spreading unsubstantiated claims and opinion blaming unconfirmed poor off-road behavior as fact?

Can we agree that Honda lies to your senses, to the public, to get a laugh? What is Four Wheeler Magazines reason for not researching the truth, and targeting off-roaders as the problem in Surprise Canyon?

Who should be your primary target for corrective action demands, a corporation twisting a message for laughs, or an off-road publication that carelessly tells the world false facts damning participants of off-road recreation?

Who do you think the Sierra Club will have more fun quoting over the next few years: Honda's laughable commercial antics or Four Wheeler Magazine's (unsubstantiated) serious condemnation of off-roaders?

So, for every poster and reader of this thread: which threat to off-road recreation is more critical to address (Honda, or Four Wheeler)?

Happy Trails!

Low Rage, One man's rant -- Surprise Canyon (http://www.pirate4x4.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=79619)

Originally posted by JoshC
So it's ok for you to whine about "crippled organizations" such as Tread Lightly rather than sending them your thoughts via email?

I am having a discussion about a TOPIC - you were taking it to a personal level about ME - see the difference yet?


You have clearly made the point that reacting to this commercial was "playing by THEIR rules". That sounds to me like you are implying that we should not react. My point was simply that reacting IS part of the game.

If that is what you get from my comments here - you have missed what I have been saying. Try reading for the entire idea I am talking about, not picking a few lines apart - it may help let you see where I am coming from on this.

Originally posted by DRM
If that is what you get from my comments here - you have missed what I have been saying. Try reading for the entire idea I am talking about, not picking a few lines apart - it may help let you see where I am coming from on this.

I get YOUR point. That's why the comments about YOU. Rather than agreeing with the initial post and subsadising it with additional thought on how we can better fight for land use rights, you disagree and explain why your way is better.

What good does that actually do US.

The way I see it is that the perception that is being portrayed is to cut a new trial when you want to. Please remember that perception is reality until proven otherwise.

The people that are mst influinced by this, IMO, is the future wheelers that are looking at this commercial, and others like it, and saying to themselves how cool it is to run through the forest any time they want. This is the same mentality that has happened in Tellico on lower 2.

Do we need to react to these situations? I think so. If we do not let the manufacturers, and I am talking about all of them not just Honda or Ford, know hwat we think about thier commercials, adn what they are portrying as a 4-wheeler. They honestly may not realize it. Most of them probably don't even know how to put a transfer case in 4 wheel drive.

If we pursue the defense on some issues, and maintain the offense on other issues, then we can get new trials and change the perseption of the true 4-wheeler. W/o addressing both side of the issue, then we will lose.

Is the property private land? Who cares. They are making it ok to destroy undamaged land because the driver is too lazy to get out and do something w/ the bikes.

Very interesting responses.. Many points and ideas.

I can see several valid points to be taken more seriously by the wheeling public here.

I would like to point out a small observation for two of the points.

DRM's comments about (my interpretation) "seize what you can or have nothing". Has some merit. If we didn't build trails, there would not be any.

Secondly: there were several observations about the general public and their apparent ASS U ME'd knowledge of the commercial advertising industry.and their intelligence. This is a very big mistake to make.

These are the people who vote with their dollars and their legislations, These people smoke crack, make left hand turns from the right hand lane, drop out of school, have degrees in subjects in which they cannot get jobs, live on welfare all their lives, Drive Honda 4x4's, Win the Nobel prize etc etc etc.


Work locally and think globally. We need trails to ride on. the population growth is exponential. that means the opinions are as well.

This has little or no relevance to this thread as a whole, but it is interesting to think about!

Did you know that like 90% of Pennsylvania was logged less than 100 years ago?

I was at a state park last year and they had a presentation on bears. The ranger giving the presentation gave a little speach about it.

Funny how it all came back!

Of course - this didn't happen entirely on its' own... it was at that time that they developed the forest service in PA. They are responsible for replanting the majority of the forest.

CAZ

Originally posted by ItsaCJ6
DRM's comments about (my interpretation) "seize what you can or have nothing". Has some merit. If we didn't build trails, there would not be any.





Uh, public lands dont need to be "seized". They are already public lands, they belong to us. As a group, we need to have some appreciation and respect for them, or they will be taken away.

DRM, please quit being your normal jerkoff self. You are the biggest pain in the ass around. Grow up:zzz:

Originally posted by ItsaCJ6
DRM's comments about (my interpretation) "seize what you can or have nothing". Has some merit. If we didn't build trails, there would not be any.

No, I think that is a very good way to put it.


Thanks to those who are able to discuss this as a topic, and to those who have little else to add besides personal insults - go away, it's not needed.





BTW - above, when I said "egocentric" - that was not an insult. It was merely used to describe the natural human tendancy to only take into account your own surroundings in this discussion. As I said - we all do it, but on this topic you have to take into account that people out west will tend to view trails as "public land" and people from the east see trails as "private land" - because that is the majority of what each of us deal with from day to day. Just wanted to clear that up in case there was any confusion...


IMHO - trails on public lands are existing on borrowed time. I just canot see any rational way to explain their continued existance to he average person in the public, enough so to justify their support through the legislative and legal systems. Not that I am opposed to keeping public land open for trail use - 'cause if someone can figure out a way to get the public to support it on a wide scale I am all ears :)

Originally posted by Keith

Uh, public lands dont need to be "seized". They are already public lands, they belong to us. As a group, we need to have some appreciation and respect for them, or they will be taken away.



What we are talking about is seizing the OPPORTUNITY to create trails, not seizing the actual land...


BTW - check into the "public land belongs to us" line of thinking... unfortunately, that is not quite as true as we may want to believe... Last time I checked, I am at the mercy of the gov't to use ANY public land. They can close, restrict, etc. me from it's use (and do, on a regular basis) pretty much any time they wish.

I too will agree with DRM.

Bitching and moaning about this commercial is as asinine as PETA complaining about the commercial with the football player chasing a chicken with the Brett Favre jersey.

When did we all become such pussies, that roll over and let certain groups dictate how we 'should think'.

Originally posted by Hayraker
...Bitching and moaning about this commercial is as asinine as PETA complaining about the commercial with the football player chasing a chicken with the Brett Favre jersey.

When did we all become such pussies, that roll over and let certain groups dictate how we 'should think'.

Correct, we shouldn't b!tch & moan about it. We should do something.

Are we such pussies that we can't write to the manufacturers about our thoughts onthe commercials?

Originally posted by Hayraker
I too will agree with DRM.

Bitching and moaning about this commercial is as asinine as PETA complaining about the commercial with the football player chasing a chicken with the Brett Favre jersey.

When did we all become such pussies, that roll over and let certain groups dictate how we 'should think'.

I just re-read the entire thread and didn't see a single statement suggesting that anybody puss out, roll over, or let certain groups dictate how we should think.

Oh wait... Are you refering to DRM as "certain groups"?

We do have to fight back. We have to blaze new trails by participating in or organizing trail maintenance programs, attending legislature meetings, VOTING!!!!

We also have to react and even protest the kind of shit demonstrated in said Honda commercial. Imagine your little brother getting beat up by an older kid, a kid your age, at school. You'd look that kid up and smack him down right? Same thig here. Reacting to this kind of shit is not backing down... It's standing up!

Damn, DRM convinced me!

I swear this weekend I'm going to go out and run over a tree!

Hey, why doesn't everyone get out and run over a tree this weekend!?!

Hey, why doesn't everyone commit to doing this for the next four weekends!?!

We will have made so damn many trails that the environmentalists will just give up!

Hey, after we do it here, we can just swing south into Mexico and do it there! Like a swarm of locusts! After we get to Terra del Fuego, we can tramp steamer over to the tip of Africa and start back north!

DRM, you're the man!:rolleyes:

Hmmmm, well, maybe I won't run over that tree:(

DRM, if you think I am belittleing your opinion, you're right. IMO, your stance is childishly and dangerously naive. I'm with the Federal government in an environmental enforcement position. Yes, that vile Dept. of the Interior. I can guarantee you that public perception does play a role in land management; after all, the lands are supposed to be managed for the public. Managed for the PUBLIC as a whole, not you as an individual.

I can't think of a faster way of getting our motorized asses locked out quicker than turning lose a couple of million off roaders that don't give a damn about that one little tree.

But, that's just my opinion.

I know, I know, you've posted in the past, oh, in this thread also, to send you an e-mail or PM when you believe you are being personally attacked. I'd rather call you an ass in public. I haven't replied to you once in the years I've been coming here because it is pointless, but just once I just have to say:flipoff2:

There, I'll hold it in for another couple of years. (I really am typing this with a grin)

Oh, if you think private land impacts are not being scrutinized, read some of your homeboy Al's proposals; non-point source discharge regulations and the like.

DRM=Dumbass Redneck Moron