Runboard.com
You're welcome.





runboard.com       Sign up (learn about it) | Sign in (lost password?)

Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6 

 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6471
Karma: 11 (+26/-15)
Reply | Quote
Re: "Fighting" racism


quote:

katie5445 wrote:

quote:

Rigby5 wrote:

I am ambivalent on this one.
The white woman was acting like a real jerk in the video, but we don't see the beginning, so can't really tell?
Personally I think asking to put that particular dog on a leash is wrong. The law would be wrong for most dogs, and only appropriate for some dogs.
So I think it is likely the Black male may have started it.
He did one other serious thing wrong.
And that it is totally and completely illegal to video someone without their consent, and then publish it.
That violates both their privacy and copyrights.
The only exception to that is when someone is a public figure, which she was not.



Considering the number of viscious dogs and injuries that is a ridiculous statement. The "black man started it" well we know where you stand. It was leash your dog as in the rules, whether you like them or not, to a black man was threatening my life, which happened in Starbucks, to a golf course to a swimming pool to walking in a neighbood your aren't supposed to be in, as in Trayvon Martin, it can end. If you notice, the majority of those protesting, are white. "Youre' ambivalent" then you are a huge part of the problem in racism in this country, your ambivlence injures and kills fellow Americans who have doing NOTHING wrong, how proud you must be for that stance............



Wrong.
Leash laws are so that you can demand dangerous dogs be leashed.
If you insist dogs like this be leashed, that is a total abuse of the intent of the law and makes the whole law illegal.
Dog in general should NOT be leashed, ever.
Anyone who does not get that should not be free harm human society.
And I do not even have a dog.
I just understand their vast historic importance and what the intent and authority for law is.


Last edited by Rigby5, 6/14/2020, 4:19 pm
6/13/2020, 4:32 am Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 5162
Karma: 33 (+36/-3)
Reply | Quote
Re: "Fighting" racism


quote:

katie5445 wrote:

I don't care your colour, women need to call anytime their life is threatened, this was not the case. It is extremely obvious what she did and I don't think it was due to racism, I think she was pissed she was called on having her dog off leash and used the black guy as an excuse hoping the cops would race to her defense, they never came did they?



I agree that it was not the case but I'm not sure she knew that at the time. I hesitate to judge her actions as simply those of a racist who got mad at a black man who irritated her.

Apparently by the time the cops showed up both parties had left.

As for calling anytime your life is threatened, a better alternative to that is being able to defend yourself without calling 911.
6/13/2020, 5:27 am Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 
Geezess Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 3062
Karma: 12 (+17/-5)
Reply | Quote
Re: "Fighting" racism


"I agree that it was not the case but I'm not sure she knew that at the time."

Philler, men underestimating women's intelligence the man'splaing for them is not your usual brand ... or upon more consideration is it really totally your brand ?
6/13/2020, 10:46 pm Link to this post PM Geezess Blog
 
Philer Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 12-2016
Posts: 5162
Karma: 33 (+36/-3)
Reply | Quote
Re: "Fighting" racism


quote:

Geezess wrote:

"I agree that it was not the case but I'm not sure she knew that at the time."

Philler, men underestimating women's intelligence the man'splaing for them is not your usual brand ... or upon more consideration is it really totally your brand ?



I'm not the one doing the "man'splaining". That would be all the black and white men who appear to believe they can even explain why Amy Cooper did what she did to her, the woman who was actually there. As well as explain it to everyone else. I suspect she knows more about how she felt and what she experienced than they do. But perhaps they are all psychics or at least very perceptive guys who know what women go through whenever they say they felt threatened by some man.
6/14/2020, 3:13 am Link to this post PM Philer Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6471
Karma: 11 (+26/-15)
Reply | Quote
Re: "Fighting" racism


The problem that I can come up with no possible reason for the guy to tell the woman to leash the dog?

What could possibly have been his motive?

I can remember one time I was delivering a rug and had to park in a no-parking zone to get right in front of the door. I had the flashers on and left the doors open.

Yet still a cop not only gave me a ticket, but I had to waste half a day to beat it in court.
Clearly people do not understand law.
If the enforcement of a law is not necessary in order to defend the rights of someone, then the enforcement of that law in that application is illegal.

This is a very simple but basic principle of law that this society gets wrong very often. The whole war on drugs being a good example.

Last edited by Rigby5, 6/14/2020, 4:18 pm
6/14/2020, 4:13 pm Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
Geezess Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 3062
Karma: 12 (+17/-5)
Reply | Quote
Re: "Fighting" racism


Explain the facts of this case.

6/17/2020, 10:48 pm Link to this post PM Geezess Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6471
Karma: 11 (+26/-15)
Reply | Quote
Re: "Fighting" racism


quote:

Geezess wrote:

Explain the facts of this case.




The problem in this case is that the mother should not have b een forced to euthanize her autistic son.
There should be some legal mechanism by which this could have been done with medical help.
6/18/2020, 3:28 am Link to this post PM Rigby5
 
Geezess Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 11-2016
Posts: 3062
Karma: 12 (+17/-5)
Reply | Quote
Re: "Fighting" racism


The problem in this case is that the mother should not have been forced to euthanize her autistic son and blame some innocent black men, to be named at a later date ?

Last edited by Geezess, 6/20/2020, 6:35 pm
6/18/2020, 6:07 pm Link to this post PM Geezess Blog
 
katie5445 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Administrator

Registered: 10-2016
Posts: 7165
Karma: 41 (+56/-15)
Reply | Quote
Re: "Fighting" racism


quote:

Rigby5 wrote:

quote:

katie5445 wrote:

quote:

Rigby5 wrote:

I am ambivalent on this one.
The white woman was acting like a real jerk in the video, but we don't see the beginning, so can't really tell?
Personally I think asking to put that particular dog on a leash is wrong. The law would be wrong for most dogs, and only appropriate for some dogs.
So I think it is likely the Black male may have started it.
He did one other serious thing wrong.
And that it is totally and completely illegal to video someone without their consent, and then publish it.
That violates both their privacy and copyrights.
The only exception to that is when someone is a public figure, which she was not.



Considering the number of viscious dogs and injuries that is a ridiculous statement. The "black man started it" well we know where you stand. It was leash your dog as in the rules, whether you like them or not, to a black man was threatening my life, which happened in Starbucks, to a golf course to a swimming pool to walking in a neighbood your aren't supposed to be in, as in Trayvon Martin, it can end. If you notice, the majority of those protesting, are white. "Youre' ambivalent" then you are a huge part of the problem in racism in this country, your ambivlence injures and kills fellow Americans who have doing NOTHING wrong, how proud you must be for that stance............



Wrong.
Leash laws are so that you can demand dangerous dogs be leashed.
If you insist dogs like this be leashed, that is a total abuse of the intent of the law and makes the whole law illegal.
Dog in general should NOT be leashed, ever.
Anyone who does not get that should not be free harm human society.
And I do not even have a dog.
I just understand their vast historic importance and what the intent and authority for law is.



Tough, if a city makes a law your dog should be leashed, then leash your dog. I had a dog until last year, died at 17, border collie, half Aussie shepherd, she was a biter including when strangers came to my front door, she bit into my leg. and made puncture wounds and bruises.I knew who she was, the most awesome animal I loved dearly but she bit. It is recognizing who your dog is, instead of being in denial it is also following simple laws. If you object to dog leashing don't own a dog, it's not the end of life as you know it.........
6/19/2020, 2:35 am Link to this post PM katie5445 Blog
 
Rigby5 Profile
Live feed
Blog
Friends
Miscellaneous info

Registered user

Registered: 04-2005
Location: Mountain Time
Posts: 6471
Karma: 11 (+26/-15)
Reply | Quote
Re: "Fighting" racism


quote:

katie5445 wrote:

quote:

Rigby5 wrote:

quote:

katie5445 wrote:

quote:

Rigby5 wrote:

I am ambivalent on this one.
The white woman was acting like a real jerk in the video, but we don't see the beginning, so can't really tell?
Personally I think asking to put that particular dog on a leash is wrong. The law would be wrong for most dogs, and only appropriate for some dogs.
So I think it is likely the Black male may have started it.
He did one other serious thing wrong.
And that it is totally and completely illegal to video someone without their consent, and then publish it.
That violates both their privacy and copyrights.
The only exception to that is when someone is a public figure, which she was not.



Considering the number of viscious dogs and injuries that is a ridiculous statement. The "black man started it" well we know where you stand. It was leash your dog as in the rules, whether you like them or not, to a black man was threatening my life, which happened in Starbucks, to a golf course to a swimming pool to walking in a neighbood your aren't supposed to be in, as in Trayvon Martin, it can end. If you notice, the majority of those protesting, are white. "Youre' ambivalent" then you are a huge part of the problem in racism in this country, your ambivlence injures and kills fellow Americans who have doing NOTHING wrong, how proud you must be for that stance............



Wrong.
Leash laws are so that you can demand dangerous dogs be leashed.
If you insist dogs like this be leashed, that is a total abuse of the intent of the law and makes the whole law illegal.
Dog in general should NOT be leashed, ever.
Anyone who does not get that should not be free harm human society.
And I do not even have a dog.
I just understand their vast historic importance and what the intent and authority for law is.



Tough, if a city makes a law your dog should be leashed, then leash your dog. I had a dog until last year, died at 17, border collie, half Aussie shepherd, she was a biter including when strangers came to my front door, she bit into my leg. and made puncture wounds and bruises.I knew who she was, the most awesome animal I loved dearly but she bit. It is recognizing who your dog is, instead of being in denial it is also following simple laws. If you object to dog leashing don't own a dog, it's not the end of life as you know it.........



Laws are only valid when in defense of the rights of someone.
If there is no potential victim, no potential threat to any inherent rights, etc., then to enforce laws that are themselves inherently harmful and restrictive, is illegal.

An example I won in court was when I was ticketed for parking in a bus loading zone, during the bus driver strike.
The judge had to throw out the ticket.
It is not that I was not in violation of the ordnance, but that the ordinance had no legal justification during the bus strike.

If the black guy felt no threat from the dog and was free to approach, then the law had no application and was unenforceable.
6/20/2020, 6:43 pm Link to this post PM Rigby5
 


Add a reply

Page:  1  2  3  4  5  6 





You are not logged in (login)