Define 'Bandit' (Read 1314 times)

Ok, ok, ok. I see the consensus of the early responders is clearly, and somewhat sanctimoniously, bandit. To answer Rick's question of why it's safer with lots of people, the cars can more easily see that they need to slow down with a good number of people out -- they may come come flying down a country road unaware that there is a lone runner around the next curve, but if there are a few hundred folks in the same stretch of road, they at least have a heads up that it would be good to slow down and drive carefully. For what it's worth, I'm a good running citizen who pays local running club dues, sets out water for group runs, volunteers at packet pickup, & cheers at races I'm not running (including at this very one last year, complete with specially burned CD of good running music and kids with cowbells. Runners are runners, you know?) Shoot, I don't even drop my GU packets in the road. And I've never been annoyed by non-racers who happen to be running along part of a race course

Bandit, but I say do it. If there aren't any bandits, then the word becomes useless

Hmmm, is that true for , say, "pirates" as well? you made me laugh, which I appreciate, but I see some logical difficulties with this as an argument ....

"Sanctimonious?" I don't think so. Your action would fit the definition of "banditry" perfectly, however you try to rationalize it.

Specifically, it depends on how you want to define the term "bandit" (duh, that's the title of the post!). The most common definition of bandit is "one who participates in a race (or in a portion of a race) without paying the registeration fee". So, under that definition and by your own admission, what you described intially would constitute banditing a race. I think the reason behind your question is more along the lines of "why is banditing wrong?" Your sticking point seems to be the fact that if a race doesn't pay to have any of the roads closed, simply running along a portion of the public, open course with other runners isn't really "stealing" from the race. If the race were to have paid to have the roads closed, and you ran on those roads and benefited from those closures without helping to offset costs incurred by the race, then there would be no question. But, can you really steal something that isn't being provided? It's an interesting question and I don't think it's as simplistic as many have interpreted it. Then again, IMHO you probably could have framed it better. I suppose banditing is wrong for two reasons. Theft being the more obvious reason. However, in the scenario you've painted, you could make a decent arguement that you're not really stealing anything, given the specific race conditions you've described. The second reason I think banditing is wrong is the safety and liability aspect and I don't think you can get around that, even in the race you've described. Who's liable if you fall down and injure yourself? What happens if you fall and knock yourself unconscious? Who's liable if you accidently cause the injury of registered runner? These issues are a little tougher to get around, even in a race with minimal support. Either way, interesting question.

I have a different angle on this. A local club puts on a 5K series on trails our running group runs on often. These trails were established and are maintained by another biking club, to which some in our group belong. Assuming this club putting on the race does not pay the bike club or help with the trail maintenance (not sure if this is the case, just hypothetical). Now if the racers are on our course who is banditing? I welcome these races as I might run it sometime, but a question for the sake of argument I guess.

I suppose banditing is wrong for two reasons. Theft being the more obvious reason. However, in the scenario you've painted, you could make a decent arguement that you're not really stealing anything, given the specific race conditions you've described. The second reason I think banditing is wrong is the safety and liability aspect and I don't think you can get around that, even in the race you've described. Who's liable if you fall down and injure yourself? What happens if you fall and knock yourself unconscious? Who's liable if you accidently cause the injury of registered runner? These issues are a little tougher to get around, even in a race with minimal support. Either way, interesting question.

Ahhh but the question was not one of rightness or wrongness. Simply of being.