The woman who falsely accused the black guy of threating her when he asked her to put the leash on her dog

[ABikerSailor]

I saw this on Inside Edition yesterday, and they said that the dude was already in the area, doing some birdwatching. While he was there, the woman came walking by with her dog off leash, but she still had a leash in her hand.

The dude doing the birdwatching asked her to put her dog on a leash, as that was the rule in that particular area of the park. Dogs could be there, but they have to be on a leash so they don't disturb the birds, or the people in the area watching them.

She could have avoided the whole thing by simply putting the leash she had in her hand on her dog and nothing would have come out of it. However, she didn't do that, she got all belligerent with the man, told him she wouldn't put her dog on a leash (that she had in her hand). Then, she got even more agitated, and threatened to call the police and say that a black man was harassing her. The dude then told her to go ahead and call. He'd like for them to show up as well.

Inside Edition showed the whole tape of the woman having a meltdown and from watching the video, she was clearly in the wrong.

 

[Blues Man]

Her punishment will be far more severe than the seriousness of her crime. She will spend the rest of her life in hiding because of the death threats. She will never be able to get a job again. Everyone she knows, except her few real friends, will disown her.

Actions have consequences.

Like I said she should have just ignored him

No. She should have put her dog on a leash.

Says you.

She has no obligation to comply with the orders of some unknown civilian.

In fact she has no obligation to acknowledge him if he speaks to her

True, but she was in an area where dogs are supposed to be leashed and there were plenty of signs to that effect. Sure she could have made a choice to ignore him (and he could have rightfully filmed her off lead dog and called the cops on her.).

There are signs that say people are supposed to drive at a certain MPH as well.

Tell me how many actually follow those rules.

Was the dog bothering the guy?

It seemed to me he was quite a distance away from the woman and her dog.

Thats a losing argument. It is not sufficient to use the "other people do it too excuse". You sound like a child.

Doesnt matter how far the dog was away. It was disturbing the wild life the sign was posted to protect.

It's not an excuse I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do.

And a dog on a leash can disturb wildlife. FYI people can disturb wildlife too.

It is an excuse. You have the right because of the first amendment. There is also a such thing as citizens arrest for a reason.

A dog on a leash cannot attack wildlife which is the point. Yes humans can disturb and kill wild life but the sign was speaking of dogs being leashed not humans.

No the first amendment does not give you the right to enforce laws.

All he can do is say something, and he did. It's still not his job to make the person put a dog on a leash is it?

Like I said she should have just ignored the guy like I would have done.

Who said the 1rst gave you the right to enforce laws? This was your question...."I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do. "

The first amendment gives you the right to say what you want, including telling people to obey posted signs.

He didnt make the woman put the dog on the leash. Where did you get the assumption he made her do anything?

She had the right to ignore him just like you do. Instead she jumped to becoming a hysterical racist bitch.

You said you have a right because of the first amendment didn't you? Then you mentioned citizens' arrest didn't you?

The first amendment has nothing to do with citizens arrest and nothing to do with enforcing laws

As I said civilians do not have a duty to enforce the laws.

He can say whatever he wants but not one person has any obligation to listen to him.

Yes I did to both.

I didnt say the 1rst had anything to do with citizens arrest. Your reading comprehension is on the fritz.

I dont care what you said. Civillians have a duty to help enforce laws up to a point which includes a citizens arrest.

True. No one has to listen to the guy. That doesnt mean he doesnt have the right to say what he said.

No they don't have an obligation to enforce laws.

If they did then people could be arrested for not stopping a criminal from committing a crime.

Thats an incredibly stupid comment. An obligation doesnt have to be legal. its moral.

I have no moral obligation to enforce any law.

If I see a guy robbing a store I have no legal or moral obligation to stop him from doing so in fact I can leave the scene and refuse to speak to the police if I choose.

That said if i saw a person commit murder I would at the very least tell the cops what I saw but I would have no legal or moral obligation to physically detain that person

Tell what mortal imperative drives a civilian to enforce a leash law? Is it the disturbing the birds thing? Because people disturb birds all the time.

Per the last paragraph, yes. This is one area of the park set aside for people to bird watch. Human traffic on trails is less disruptive than canine traffic running in and out,chasing critters etc. You can assume all dogs are as well trained as yours or thatin all owners are as respectful. A 6 leash allows dog walkers to enjoy that area as well as birdwatchers.

There was no evidence presented that this dog was disturbing the birds.

There was no court case. What are you talking about?

How do you know the dog was disturbing the birds?

Did you see any video of it?

You didn't because there was none.

So you are ASSUMING facts not in evidence

Because the guy asked her to leash the dog.

I dont have to see the video. She con concurred with the way things went down.

So you're assuming just admit it. There is nothing shown that supports the assumption that the dog was bothering this guy or any birds.

And she concurred that her dog was "disturbing the birds"?

I didn't see that. I saw her apologize for overreacting but that's all.

 

[Blues Man]

I saw this on Inside Edition yesterday, and they said that the dude was already in the area, doing some birdwatching. While he was there, the woman came walking by with her dog off leash, but she still had a leash in her hand.

The dude doing the birdwatching asked her to put her dog on a leash, as that was the rule in that particular area of the park. Dogs could be there, but they have to be on a leash so they don't disturb the birds, or the people in the area watching them.

She could have avoided the whole thing by simply putting the leash she had in her hand on her dog and nothing would have come out of it. However, she didn't do that, she got all belligerent with the man, told him she wouldn't put her dog on a leash (that she had in her hand). Then, she got even more agitated, and threatened to call the police and say that a black man was harassing her. The dude then told her to go ahead and call. He'd like for them to show up as well.

Inside Edition showed the whole tape of the woman having a meltdown and from watching the video, she was clearly in the wrong.

She should have just ignored him and kept walking.

 

[Asclepias]

Her punishment will be far more severe than the seriousness of her crime. She will spend the rest of her life in hiding because of the death threats. She will never be able to get a job again. Everyone she knows, except her few real friends, will disown her.

Actions have consequences.

Like I said she should have just ignored him

No. She should have put her dog on a leash.

Says you.

She has no obligation to comply with the orders of some unknown civilian.

In fact she has no obligation to acknowledge him if he speaks to her

True, but she was in an area where dogs are supposed to be leashed and there were plenty of signs to that effect. Sure she could have made a choice to ignore him (and he could have rightfully filmed her off lead dog and called the cops on her.).

There are signs that say people are supposed to drive at a certain MPH as well.

Tell me how many actually follow those rules.

Was the dog bothering the guy?

It seemed to me he was quite a distance away from the woman and her dog.

Thats a losing argument. It is not sufficient to use the "other people do it too excuse". You sound like a child.

Doesnt matter how far the dog was away. It was disturbing the wild life the sign was posted to protect.

It's not an excuse I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do.

And a dog on a leash can disturb wildlife. FYI people can disturb wildlife too.

It is an excuse. You have the right because of the first amendment. There is also a such thing as citizens arrest for a reason.

A dog on a leash cannot attack wildlife which is the point. Yes humans can disturb and kill wild life but the sign was speaking of dogs being leashed not humans.

No the first amendment does not give you the right to enforce laws.

All he can do is say something, and he did. It's still not his job to make the person put a dog on a leash is it?

Like I said she should have just ignored the guy like I would have done.

Who said the 1rst gave you the right to enforce laws? This was your question...."I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do. "

The first amendment gives you the right to say what you want, including telling people to obey posted signs.

He didnt make the woman put the dog on the leash. Where did you get the assumption he made her do anything?

She had the right to ignore him just like you do. Instead she jumped to becoming a hysterical racist bitch.

You said you have a right because of the first amendment didn't you? Then you mentioned citizens' arrest didn't you?

The first amendment has nothing to do with citizens arrest and nothing to do with enforcing laws

As I said civilians do not have a duty to enforce the laws.

He can say whatever he wants but not one person has any obligation to listen to him.

Yes I did to both.

I didnt say the 1rst had anything to do with citizens arrest. Your reading comprehension is on the fritz.

I dont care what you said. Civillians have a duty to help enforce laws up to a point which includes a citizens arrest.

True. No one has to listen to the guy. That doesnt mean he doesnt have the right to say what he said.

No they don't have an obligation to enforce laws.

If they did then people could be arrested for not stopping a criminal from committing a crime.

Thats an incredibly stupid comment. An obligation doesnt have to be legal. its moral.

I have no moral obligation to enforce any law.

If I see a guy robbing a store I have no legal or moral obligation to stop him from doing so in fact I can leave the scene and refuse to speak to the police if I choose.

That said if i saw a person commit murder I would at the very least tell the cops what I saw but I would have no legal or moral obligation to physically detain that person

Tell what mortal imperative drives a civilian to enforce a leash law? Is it the disturbing the birds thing? Because people disturb birds all the time.

Per the last paragraph, yes. This is one area of the park set aside for people to bird watch. Human traffic on trails is less disruptive than canine traffic running in and out,chasing critters etc. You can assume all dogs are as well trained as yours or thatin all owners are as respectful. A 6 leash allows dog walkers to enjoy that area as well as birdwatchers.

There was no evidence presented that this dog was disturbing the birds.

There was no court case. What are you talking about?

How do you know the dog was disturbing the birds?

Did you see any video of it?

You didn't because there was none.

So you are ASSUMING facts not in evidence

Because the guy asked her to leash the dog.

I dont have to see the video. She con concurred with the way things went down.

So you're assuming just admit it. There is nothing shown that supports the assumption that the dog was bothering this guy or any birds.

And she concurred that her dog was "disturbing the birds"?

I didn't see that. I saw her apologize for overreacting but that's all.

No. I'm not assuming. I read her apology. Looks like you should be better informed before you assume. She clearly stated she was in the wrong.

To answer your initial question.

"I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do. "

"He had every right to request that I leash my dog in an area where it was required."

 

[ABikerSailor]

Her punishment will be far more severe than the seriousness of her crime. She will spend the rest of her life in hiding because of the death threats. She will never be able to get a job again. Everyone she knows, except her few real friends, will disown her.

Actions have consequences.

Like I said she should have just ignored him

No. She should have put her dog on a leash.

Says you.

She has no obligation to comply with the orders of some unknown civilian.

In fact she has no obligation to acknowledge him if he speaks to her

True, but she was in an area where dogs are supposed to be leashed and there were plenty of signs to that effect. Sure she could have made a choice to ignore him (and he could have rightfully filmed her off lead dog and called the cops on her.).

There are signs that say people are supposed to drive at a certain MPH as well.

Tell me how many actually follow those rules.

Was the dog bothering the guy?

It seemed to me he was quite a distance away from the woman and her dog.

Thats a losing argument. It is not sufficient to use the "other people do it too excuse". You sound like a child.

Doesnt matter how far the dog was away. It was disturbing the wild life the sign was posted to protect.

It's not an excuse I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do.

And a dog on a leash can disturb wildlife. FYI people can disturb wildlife too.

It is an excuse. You have the right because of the first amendment. There is also a such thing as citizens arrest for a reason.

A dog on a leash cannot attack wildlife which is the point. Yes humans can disturb and kill wild life but the sign was speaking of dogs being leashed not humans.

No the first amendment does not give you the right to enforce laws.

All he can do is say something, and he did. It's still not his job to make the person put a dog on a leash is it?

Like I said she should have just ignored the guy like I would have done.

Who said the 1rst gave you the right to enforce laws? This was your question...."I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do. "

The first amendment gives you the right to say what you want, including telling people to obey posted signs.

He didnt make the woman put the dog on the leash. Where did you get the assumption he made her do anything?

She had the right to ignore him just like you do. Instead she jumped to becoming a hysterical racist bitch.

You said you have a right because of the first amendment didn't you? Then you mentioned citizens' arrest didn't you?

The first amendment has nothing to do with citizens arrest and nothing to do with enforcing laws

As I said civilians do not have a duty to enforce the laws.

He can say whatever he wants but not one person has any obligation to listen to him.

Yes I did to both.

I didnt say the 1rst had anything to do with citizens arrest. Your reading comprehension is on the fritz.

I dont care what you said. Civillians have a duty to help enforce laws up to a point which includes a citizens arrest.

True. No one has to listen to the guy. That doesnt mean he doesnt have the right to say what he said.

No they don't have an obligation to enforce laws.

If they did then people could be arrested for not stopping a criminal from committing a crime.

Thats an incredibly stupid comment. An obligation doesnt have to be legal. its moral.

I have no moral obligation to enforce any law.

If I see a guy robbing a store I have no legal or moral obligation to stop him from doing so in fact I can leave the scene and refuse to speak to the police if I choose.

That said if i saw a person commit murder I would at the very least tell the cops what I saw but I would have no legal or moral obligation to physically detain that person

Tell what mortal imperative drives a civilian to enforce a leash law? Is it the disturbing the birds thing? Because people disturb birds all the time.

Per the last paragraph, yes. This is one area of the park set aside for people to bird watch. Human traffic on trails is less disruptive than canine traffic running in and out,chasing critters etc. You can assume all dogs are as well trained as yours or thatin all owners are as respectful. A 6 leash allows dog walkers to enjoy that area as well as birdwatchers.

There was no evidence presented that this dog was disturbing the birds.

There was no court case. What are you talking about?

How do you know the dog was disturbing the birds?

Did you see any video of it?

You didn't because there was none.

So you are ASSUMING facts not in evidence

Because the guy asked her to leash the dog.

I dont have to see the video. She con concurred with the way things went down.

So you're assuming just admit it. There is nothing shown that supports the assumption that the dog was bothering this guy or any birds.

And she concurred that her dog was "disturbing the birds"?

I didn't see that. I saw her apologize for overreacting but that's all.

Doesn't matter if the dog was or wasn't chasing birds. The rule in that part of the park is that all dogs must be on a leash so as not to disturb the birds or the people watching them. She had a leash in her hand, so why in the hell couldn't she have just leashed the dog and been on her way? Would have avoided a whole bunch of problems.

 

[Blues Man]

Her punishment will be far more severe than the seriousness of her crime. She will spend the rest of her life in hiding because of the death threats. She will never be able to get a job again. Everyone she knows, except her few real friends, will disown her.

Actions have consequences.

Like I said she should have just ignored him

No. She should have put her dog on a leash.

Says you.

She has no obligation to comply with the orders of some unknown civilian.

In fact she has no obligation to acknowledge him if he speaks to her

True, but she was in an area where dogs are supposed to be leashed and there were plenty of signs to that effect. Sure she could have made a choice to ignore him (and he could have rightfully filmed her off lead dog and called the cops on her.).

There are signs that say people are supposed to drive at a certain MPH as well.

Tell me how many actually follow those rules.

Was the dog bothering the guy?

It seemed to me he was quite a distance away from the woman and her dog.

Thats a losing argument. It is not sufficient to use the "other people do it too excuse". You sound like a child.

Doesnt matter how far the dog was away. It was disturbing the wild life the sign was posted to protect.

It's not an excuse I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do.

And a dog on a leash can disturb wildlife. FYI people can disturb wildlife too.

It is an excuse. You have the right because of the first amendment. There is also a such thing as citizens arrest for a reason.

A dog on a leash cannot attack wildlife which is the point. Yes humans can disturb and kill wild life but the sign was speaking of dogs being leashed not humans.

No the first amendment does not give you the right to enforce laws.

All he can do is say something, and he did. It's still not his job to make the person put a dog on a leash is it?

Like I said she should have just ignored the guy like I would have done.

Who said the 1rst gave you the right to enforce laws? This was your question...."I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do. "

The first amendment gives you the right to say what you want, including telling people to obey posted signs.

He didnt make the woman put the dog on the leash. Where did you get the assumption he made her do anything?

She had the right to ignore him just like you do. Instead she jumped to becoming a hysterical racist bitch.

You said you have a right because of the first amendment didn't you? Then you mentioned citizens' arrest didn't you?

The first amendment has nothing to do with citizens arrest and nothing to do with enforcing laws

As I said civilians do not have a duty to enforce the laws.

He can say whatever he wants but not one person has any obligation to listen to him.

Yes I did to both.

I didnt say the 1rst had anything to do with citizens arrest. Your reading comprehension is on the fritz.

I dont care what you said. Civillians have a duty to help enforce laws up to a point which includes a citizens arrest.

True. No one has to listen to the guy. That doesnt mean he doesnt have the right to say what he said.

No they don't have an obligation to enforce laws.

If they did then people could be arrested for not stopping a criminal from committing a crime.

Thats an incredibly stupid comment. An obligation doesnt have to be legal. its moral.

I have no moral obligation to enforce any law.

If I see a guy robbing a store I have no legal or moral obligation to stop him from doing so in fact I can leave the scene and refuse to speak to the police if I choose.

That said if i saw a person commit murder I would at the very least tell the cops what I saw but I would have no legal or moral obligation to physically detain that person

Tell what mortal imperative drives a civilian to enforce a leash law? Is it the disturbing the birds thing? Because people disturb birds all the time.

Per the last paragraph, yes. This is one area of the park set aside for people to bird watch. Human traffic on trails is less disruptive than canine traffic running in and out,chasing critters etc. You can assume all dogs are as well trained as yours or thatin all owners are as respectful. A 6 leash allows dog walkers to enjoy that area as well as birdwatchers.

There was no evidence presented that this dog was disturbing the birds.

There was no court case. What are you talking about?

How do you know the dog was disturbing the birds?

Did you see any video of it?

You didn't because there was none.

So you are ASSUMING facts not in evidence

Because the guy asked her to leash the dog.

I dont have to see the video. She con concurred with the way things went down.

So you're assuming just admit it. There is nothing shown that supports the assumption that the dog was bothering this guy or any birds.

And she concurred that her dog was "disturbing the birds"?

I didn't see that. I saw her apologize for overreacting but that's all.

No. I'm not assuming. I read her apology. Looks like you should be better informed before you assume.

She apologized for what? Her completely inappropriate behavior in response to being told to leash her dog by a guy who had no authority to do so. Right?.

I'm not defending what she said or how she acted.

I am wondering why a person feels the need to tell other people what to do when it there was nothing presented that shows the dog misbehaving whatsoever.

Like I said if it was me i would have simply ignored the guy and kept walking

 

[Blues Man]

Her punishment will be far more severe than the seriousness of her crime. She will spend the rest of her life in hiding because of the death threats. She will never be able to get a job again. Everyone she knows, except her few real friends, will disown her.

Actions have consequences.

Like I said she should have just ignored him

No. She should have put her dog on a leash.

Says you.

She has no obligation to comply with the orders of some unknown civilian.

In fact she has no obligation to acknowledge him if he speaks to her

True, but she was in an area where dogs are supposed to be leashed and there were plenty of signs to that effect. Sure she could have made a choice to ignore him (and he could have rightfully filmed her off lead dog and called the cops on her.).

There are signs that say people are supposed to drive at a certain MPH as well.

Tell me how many actually follow those rules.

Was the dog bothering the guy?

It seemed to me he was quite a distance away from the woman and her dog.

Thats a losing argument. It is not sufficient to use the "other people do it too excuse". You sound like a child.

Doesnt matter how far the dog was away. It was disturbing the wild life the sign was posted to protect.

It's not an excuse I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do.

And a dog on a leash can disturb wildlife. FYI people can disturb wildlife too.

It is an excuse. You have the right because of the first amendment. There is also a such thing as citizens arrest for a reason.

A dog on a leash cannot attack wildlife which is the point. Yes humans can disturb and kill wild life but the sign was speaking of dogs being leashed not humans.

No the first amendment does not give you the right to enforce laws.

All he can do is say something, and he did. It's still not his job to make the person put a dog on a leash is it?

Like I said she should have just ignored the guy like I would have done.

Who said the 1rst gave you the right to enforce laws? This was your question...."I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do. "

The first amendment gives you the right to say what you want, including telling people to obey posted signs.

He didnt make the woman put the dog on the leash. Where did you get the assumption he made her do anything?

She had the right to ignore him just like you do. Instead she jumped to becoming a hysterical racist bitch.

You said you have a right because of the first amendment didn't you? Then you mentioned citizens' arrest didn't you?

The first amendment has nothing to do with citizens arrest and nothing to do with enforcing laws

As I said civilians do not have a duty to enforce the laws.

He can say whatever he wants but not one person has any obligation to listen to him.

Yes I did to both.

I didnt say the 1rst had anything to do with citizens arrest. Your reading comprehension is on the fritz.

I dont care what you said. Civillians have a duty to help enforce laws up to a point which includes a citizens arrest.

True. No one has to listen to the guy. That doesnt mean he doesnt have the right to say what he said.

No they don't have an obligation to enforce laws.

If they did then people could be arrested for not stopping a criminal from committing a crime.

Thats an incredibly stupid comment. An obligation doesnt have to be legal. its moral.

I have no moral obligation to enforce any law.

If I see a guy robbing a store I have no legal or moral obligation to stop him from doing so in fact I can leave the scene and refuse to speak to the police if I choose.

That said if i saw a person commit murder I would at the very least tell the cops what I saw but I would have no legal or moral obligation to physically detain that person

Tell what mortal imperative drives a civilian to enforce a leash law? Is it the disturbing the birds thing? Because people disturb birds all the time.

Per the last paragraph, yes. This is one area of the park set aside for people to bird watch. Human traffic on trails is less disruptive than canine traffic running in and out,chasing critters etc. You can assume all dogs are as well trained as yours or thatin all owners are as respectful. A 6 leash allows dog walkers to enjoy that area as well as birdwatchers.

There was no evidence presented that this dog was disturbing the birds.

There was no court case. What are you talking about?

How do you know the dog was disturbing the birds?

Did you see any video of it?

You didn't because there was none.

So you are ASSUMING facts not in evidence

Because the guy asked her to leash the dog.

I dont have to see the video. She con concurred with the way things went down.

So you're assuming just admit it. There is nothing shown that supports the assumption that the dog was bothering this guy or any birds.

And she concurred that her dog was "disturbing the birds"?

I didn't see that. I saw her apologize for overreacting but that's all.

Doesn't matter if the dog was or wasn't chasing birds. The rule in that part of the park is that all dogs must be on a leash so as not to disturb the birds or the people watching them. She had a leash in her hand, so why in the hell couldn't she have just leashed the dog and been on her way? Would have avoided a whole bunch of problems.

and you NEVER break any rules right? We don't know that the dog wasn't walking right next to her on a heel do we? We certainly don't know if the dog was "disturbing the birds" do we?

Thing is this woman would have kept on walking right by mister birdwatcher if he would have minded his own business.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Her punishment will be far more severe than the seriousness of her crime. She will spend the rest of her life in hiding because of the death threats. She will never be able to get a job again. Everyone she knows, except her few real friends, will disown her.

Actions have consequences.

Like I said she should have just ignored him

No. She should have put her dog on a leash.

Says you.

She has no obligation to comply with the orders of some unknown civilian.

In fact she has no obligation to acknowledge him if he speaks to her

True, but she was in an area where dogs are supposed to be leashed and there were plenty of signs to that effect. Sure she could have made a choice to ignore him (and he could have rightfully filmed her off lead dog and called the cops on her.).

There are signs that say people are supposed to drive at a certain MPH as well.

Tell me how many actually follow those rules.

Was the dog bothering the guy?

It seemed to me he was quite a distance away from the woman and her dog.

Thats a losing argument. It is not sufficient to use the "other people do it too excuse". You sound like a child.

Doesnt matter how far the dog was away. It was disturbing the wild life the sign was posted to protect.

It's not an excuse I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do.

And a dog on a leash can disturb wildlife. FYI people can disturb wildlife too.

It is an excuse. You have the right because of the first amendment. There is also a such thing as citizens arrest for a reason.

A dog on a leash cannot attack wildlife which is the point. Yes humans can disturb and kill wild life but the sign was speaking of dogs being leashed not humans.

No the first amendment does not give you the right to enforce laws.

All he can do is say something, and he did. It's still not his job to make the person put a dog on a leash is it?

Like I said she should have just ignored the guy like I would have done.

Who said the 1rst gave you the right to enforce laws? This was your question...."I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do. "

The first amendment gives you the right to say what you want, including telling people to obey posted signs.

He didnt make the woman put the dog on the leash. Where did you get the assumption he made her do anything?

She had the right to ignore him just like you do. Instead she jumped to becoming a hysterical racist bitch.

You said you have a right because of the first amendment didn't you? Then you mentioned citizens' arrest didn't you?

The first amendment has nothing to do with citizens arrest and nothing to do with enforcing laws

As I said civilians do not have a duty to enforce the laws.

He can say whatever he wants but not one person has any obligation to listen to him.

Yes I did to both.

I didnt say the 1rst had anything to do with citizens arrest. Your reading comprehension is on the fritz.

I dont care what you said. Civillians have a duty to help enforce laws up to a point which includes a citizens arrest.

True. No one has to listen to the guy. That doesnt mean he doesnt have the right to say what he said.

No they don't have an obligation to enforce laws.

If they did then people could be arrested for not stopping a criminal from committing a crime.

Thats an incredibly stupid comment. An obligation doesnt have to be legal. its moral.

I have no moral obligation to enforce any law.

If I see a guy robbing a store I have no legal or moral obligation to stop him from doing so in fact I can leave the scene and refuse to speak to the police if I choose.

That said if i saw a person commit murder I would at the very least tell the cops what I saw but I would have no legal or moral obligation to physically detain that person

Tell what mortal imperative drives a civilian to enforce a leash law? Is it the disturbing the birds thing? Because people disturb birds all the time.

Per the last paragraph, yes. This is one area of the park set aside for people to bird watch. Human traffic on trails is less disruptive than canine traffic running in and out,chasing critters etc. You can assume all dogs are as well trained as yours or thatin all owners are as respectful. A 6 leash allows dog walkers to enjoy that area as well as birdwatchers.

There was no evidence presented that this dog was disturbing the birds.

There was no court case. What are you talking about?

How do you know the dog was disturbing the birds?

Did you see any video of it?

You didn't because there was none.

So you are ASSUMING facts not in evidence

Because the guy asked her to leash the dog.

I dont have to see the video. She con concurred with the way things went down.

So you're assuming just admit it. There is nothing shown that supports the assumption that the dog was bothering this guy or any birds.

And she concurred that her dog was "disturbing the birds"?

I didn't see that. I saw her apologize for overreacting but that's all.

No. I'm not assuming. I read her apology. Looks like you should be better informed before you assume.

She apologized for what? Her completely inappropriate behavior in response to being told to leash her dog by a guy who had no authority to do so. Right?.

I'm not defending what she said or how she acted.

I am wondering why a person feels the need to tell other people what to do when it there was nothing presented that shows the dog misbehaving whatsoever.

Like I said if it was me i would have simply ignored the guy and kept walking

She had a leash in her hand. How hard would it have been for her to clip it on the dogs collar, walk out of the area, and take the dog off the leash again?

 

[ABikerSailor]

Her punishment will be far more severe than the seriousness of her crime. She will spend the rest of her life in hiding because of the death threats. She will never be able to get a job again. Everyone she knows, except her few real friends, will disown her.

Actions have consequences.

Like I said she should have just ignored him

No. She should have put her dog on a leash.

Says you.

She has no obligation to comply with the orders of some unknown civilian.

In fact she has no obligation to acknowledge him if he speaks to her

True, but she was in an area where dogs are supposed to be leashed and there were plenty of signs to that effect. Sure she could have made a choice to ignore him (and he could have rightfully filmed her off lead dog and called the cops on her.).

There are signs that say people are supposed to drive at a certain MPH as well.

Tell me how many actually follow those rules.

Was the dog bothering the guy?

It seemed to me he was quite a distance away from the woman and her dog.

Thats a losing argument. It is not sufficient to use the "other people do it too excuse". You sound like a child.

Doesnt matter how far the dog was away. It was disturbing the wild life the sign was posted to protect.

It's not an excuse I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do.

And a dog on a leash can disturb wildlife. FYI people can disturb wildlife too.

It is an excuse. You have the right because of the first amendment. There is also a such thing as citizens arrest for a reason.

A dog on a leash cannot attack wildlife which is the point. Yes humans can disturb and kill wild life but the sign was speaking of dogs being leashed not humans.

No the first amendment does not give you the right to enforce laws.

All he can do is say something, and he did. It's still not his job to make the person put a dog on a leash is it?

Like I said she should have just ignored the guy like I would have done.

Who said the 1rst gave you the right to enforce laws? This was your question...."I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do. "

The first amendment gives you the right to say what you want, including telling people to obey posted signs.

He didnt make the woman put the dog on the leash. Where did you get the assumption he made her do anything?

She had the right to ignore him just like you do. Instead she jumped to becoming a hysterical racist bitch.

You said you have a right because of the first amendment didn't you? Then you mentioned citizens' arrest didn't you?

The first amendment has nothing to do with citizens arrest and nothing to do with enforcing laws

As I said civilians do not have a duty to enforce the laws.

He can say whatever he wants but not one person has any obligation to listen to him.

Yes I did to both.

I didnt say the 1rst had anything to do with citizens arrest. Your reading comprehension is on the fritz.

I dont care what you said. Civillians have a duty to help enforce laws up to a point which includes a citizens arrest.

True. No one has to listen to the guy. That doesnt mean he doesnt have the right to say what he said.

No they don't have an obligation to enforce laws.

If they did then people could be arrested for not stopping a criminal from committing a crime.

Thats an incredibly stupid comment. An obligation doesnt have to be legal. its moral.

I have no moral obligation to enforce any law.

If I see a guy robbing a store I have no legal or moral obligation to stop him from doing so in fact I can leave the scene and refuse to speak to the police if I choose.

That said if i saw a person commit murder I would at the very least tell the cops what I saw but I would have no legal or moral obligation to physically detain that person

Tell what mortal imperative drives a civilian to enforce a leash law? Is it the disturbing the birds thing? Because people disturb birds all the time.

Per the last paragraph, yes. This is one area of the park set aside for people to bird watch. Human traffic on trails is less disruptive than canine traffic running in and out,chasing critters etc. You can assume all dogs are as well trained as yours or thatin all owners are as respectful. A 6 leash allows dog walkers to enjoy that area as well as birdwatchers.

There was no evidence presented that this dog was disturbing the birds.

There was no court case. What are you talking about?

How do you know the dog was disturbing the birds?

Did you see any video of it?

You didn't because there was none.

So you are ASSUMING facts not in evidence

Because the guy asked her to leash the dog.

I dont have to see the video. She con concurred with the way things went down.

So you're assuming just admit it. There is nothing shown that supports the assumption that the dog was bothering this guy or any birds.

And she concurred that her dog was "disturbing the birds"?

I didn't see that. I saw her apologize for overreacting but that's all.

Doesn't matter if the dog was or wasn't chasing birds. The rule in that part of the park is that all dogs must be on a leash so as not to disturb the birds or the people watching them. She had a leash in her hand, so why in the hell couldn't she have just leashed the dog and been on her way? Would have avoided a whole bunch of problems.

and you NEVER break any rules right? We don't know that the dog wasn't walking right next to her on a heel do we? We certainly don't know if the dog was "disturbing the birds" do we?

Thing is this woman would have kept on walking right by mister birdwatcher if he would have minded his own business.

From the way the dog was acting, looking like it was trying to get away from her, I seriously doubt that it's been trained well enough to heel.

And, it doesn't matter if the dog was disturbing the birds or not, the rule is that dogs must be leashed in that area of the park.

But, keep defending the indefensible if that helps you sleep at night.

 

[Blues Man]

Her punishment will be far more severe than the seriousness of her crime. She will spend the rest of her life in hiding because of the death threats. She will never be able to get a job again. Everyone she knows, except her few real friends, will disown her.

Actions have consequences.

Like I said she should have just ignored him

No. She should have put her dog on a leash.

Says you.

She has no obligation to comply with the orders of some unknown civilian.

In fact she has no obligation to acknowledge him if he speaks to her

True, but she was in an area where dogs are supposed to be leashed and there were plenty of signs to that effect. Sure she could have made a choice to ignore him (and he could have rightfully filmed her off lead dog and called the cops on her.).

There are signs that say people are supposed to drive at a certain MPH as well.

Tell me how many actually follow those rules.

Was the dog bothering the guy?

It seemed to me he was quite a distance away from the woman and her dog.

Thats a losing argument. It is not sufficient to use the "other people do it too excuse". You sound like a child.

Doesnt matter how far the dog was away. It was disturbing the wild life the sign was posted to protect.

It's not an excuse I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do.

And a dog on a leash can disturb wildlife. FYI people can disturb wildlife too.

It is an excuse. You have the right because of the first amendment. There is also a such thing as citizens arrest for a reason.

A dog on a leash cannot attack wildlife which is the point. Yes humans can disturb and kill wild life but the sign was speaking of dogs being leashed not humans.

No the first amendment does not give you the right to enforce laws.

All he can do is say something, and he did. It's still not his job to make the person put a dog on a leash is it?

Like I said she should have just ignored the guy like I would have done.

Who said the 1rst gave you the right to enforce laws? This was your question...."I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do. "

The first amendment gives you the right to say what you want, including telling people to obey posted signs.

He didnt make the woman put the dog on the leash. Where did you get the assumption he made her do anything?

She had the right to ignore him just like you do. Instead she jumped to becoming a hysterical racist bitch.

You said you have a right because of the first amendment didn't you? Then you mentioned citizens' arrest didn't you?

The first amendment has nothing to do with citizens arrest and nothing to do with enforcing laws

As I said civilians do not have a duty to enforce the laws.

He can say whatever he wants but not one person has any obligation to listen to him.

Yes I did to both.

I didnt say the 1rst had anything to do with citizens arrest. Your reading comprehension is on the fritz.

I dont care what you said. Civillians have a duty to help enforce laws up to a point which includes a citizens arrest.

True. No one has to listen to the guy. That doesnt mean he doesnt have the right to say what he said.

No they don't have an obligation to enforce laws.

If they did then people could be arrested for not stopping a criminal from committing a crime.

Thats an incredibly stupid comment. An obligation doesnt have to be legal. its moral.

I have no moral obligation to enforce any law.

If I see a guy robbing a store I have no legal or moral obligation to stop him from doing so in fact I can leave the scene and refuse to speak to the police if I choose.

That said if i saw a person commit murder I would at the very least tell the cops what I saw but I would have no legal or moral obligation to physically detain that person

Tell what mortal imperative drives a civilian to enforce a leash law? Is it the disturbing the birds thing? Because people disturb birds all the time.

Per the last paragraph, yes. This is one area of the park set aside for people to bird watch. Human traffic on trails is less disruptive than canine traffic running in and out,chasing critters etc. You can assume all dogs are as well trained as yours or thatin all owners are as respectful. A 6 leash allows dog walkers to enjoy that area as well as birdwatchers.

There was no evidence presented that this dog was disturbing the birds.

There was no court case. What are you talking about?

How do you know the dog was disturbing the birds?

Did you see any video of it?

You didn't because there was none.

So you are ASSUMING facts not in evidence

Because the guy asked her to leash the dog.

I dont have to see the video. She con concurred with the way things went down.

So you're assuming just admit it. There is nothing shown that supports the assumption that the dog was bothering this guy or any birds.

And she concurred that her dog was "disturbing the birds"?

I didn't see that. I saw her apologize for overreacting but that's all.

No. I'm not assuming. I read her apology. Looks like you should be better informed before you assume.

She apologized for what? Her completely inappropriate behavior in response to being told to leash her dog by a guy who had no authority to do so. Right?.

I'm not defending what she said or how she acted.

I am wondering why a person feels the need to tell other people what to do when it there was nothing presented that shows the dog misbehaving whatsoever.

Like I said if it was me i would have simply ignored the guy and kept walking

She had a leash in her hand. How hard would it have been for her to clip it on the dogs collar, walk out of the area, and take the dog off the leash again?

Don't know don't care.

I walk my dogs on a heel all the time and they stay closer to me than any dog on a 6 foot leash I have ever seen. I'm not going to assume this dog was bothering anyone or any birds.

But I do always wonder why people don't mind their own business.

 

[Blues Man]

Her punishment will be far more severe than the seriousness of her crime. She will spend the rest of her life in hiding because of the death threats. She will never be able to get a job again. Everyone she knows, except her few real friends, will disown her.

Actions have consequences.

Like I said she should have just ignored him

No. She should have put her dog on a leash.

Says you.

She has no obligation to comply with the orders of some unknown civilian.

In fact she has no obligation to acknowledge him if he speaks to her

True, but she was in an area where dogs are supposed to be leashed and there were plenty of signs to that effect. Sure she could have made a choice to ignore him (and he could have rightfully filmed her off lead dog and called the cops on her.).

There are signs that say people are supposed to drive at a certain MPH as well.

Tell me how many actually follow those rules.

Was the dog bothering the guy?

It seemed to me he was quite a distance away from the woman and her dog.

Thats a losing argument. It is not sufficient to use the "other people do it too excuse". You sound like a child.

Doesnt matter how far the dog was away. It was disturbing the wild life the sign was posted to protect.

It's not an excuse I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do.

And a dog on a leash can disturb wildlife. FYI people can disturb wildlife too.

It is an excuse. You have the right because of the first amendment. There is also a such thing as citizens arrest for a reason.

A dog on a leash cannot attack wildlife which is the point. Yes humans can disturb and kill wild life but the sign was speaking of dogs being leashed not humans.

No the first amendment does not give you the right to enforce laws.

All he can do is say something, and he did. It's still not his job to make the person put a dog on a leash is it?

Like I said she should have just ignored the guy like I would have done.

Who said the 1rst gave you the right to enforce laws? This was your question...."I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do. "

The first amendment gives you the right to say what you want, including telling people to obey posted signs.

He didnt make the woman put the dog on the leash. Where did you get the assumption he made her do anything?

She had the right to ignore him just like you do. Instead she jumped to becoming a hysterical racist bitch.

You said you have a right because of the first amendment didn't you? Then you mentioned citizens' arrest didn't you?

The first amendment has nothing to do with citizens arrest and nothing to do with enforcing laws

As I said civilians do not have a duty to enforce the laws.

He can say whatever he wants but not one person has any obligation to listen to him.

Yes I did to both.

I didnt say the 1rst had anything to do with citizens arrest. Your reading comprehension is on the fritz.

I dont care what you said. Civillians have a duty to help enforce laws up to a point which includes a citizens arrest.

True. No one has to listen to the guy. That doesnt mean he doesnt have the right to say what he said.

No they don't have an obligation to enforce laws.

If they did then people could be arrested for not stopping a criminal from committing a crime.

Thats an incredibly stupid comment. An obligation doesnt have to be legal. its moral.

I have no moral obligation to enforce any law.

If I see a guy robbing a store I have no legal or moral obligation to stop him from doing so in fact I can leave the scene and refuse to speak to the police if I choose.

That said if i saw a person commit murder I would at the very least tell the cops what I saw but I would have no legal or moral obligation to physically detain that person

Tell what mortal imperative drives a civilian to enforce a leash law? Is it the disturbing the birds thing? Because people disturb birds all the time.

Per the last paragraph, yes. This is one area of the park set aside for people to bird watch. Human traffic on trails is less disruptive than canine traffic running in and out,chasing critters etc. You can assume all dogs are as well trained as yours or thatin all owners are as respectful. A 6 leash allows dog walkers to enjoy that area as well as birdwatchers.

There was no evidence presented that this dog was disturbing the birds.

There was no court case. What are you talking about?

How do you know the dog was disturbing the birds?

Did you see any video of it?

You didn't because there was none.

So you are ASSUMING facts not in evidence

Because the guy asked her to leash the dog.

I dont have to see the video. She con concurred with the way things went down.

So you're assuming just admit it. There is nothing shown that supports the assumption that the dog was bothering this guy or any birds.

And she concurred that her dog was "disturbing the birds"?

I didn't see that. I saw her apologize for overreacting but that's all.

Doesn't matter if the dog was or wasn't chasing birds. The rule in that part of the park is that all dogs must be on a leash so as not to disturb the birds or the people watching them. She had a leash in her hand, so why in the hell couldn't she have just leashed the dog and been on her way? Would have avoided a whole bunch of problems.

and you NEVER break any rules right? We don't know that the dog wasn't walking right next to her on a heel do we? We certainly don't know if the dog was "disturbing the birds" do we?

Thing is this woman would have kept on walking right by mister birdwatcher if he would have minded his own business.

From the way the dog was acting, looking like it was trying to get away from her, I seriously doubt that it's been trained well enough to heel.

And, it doesn't matter if the dog was disturbing the birds or not, the rule is that dogs must be leashed in that area of the park.

But, keep defending the indefensible if that helps you sleep at night.

I see that as the dog picking up on her emotions. As i said I'm not defending her reaction at all. She was a complete asshole in her reaction.

I would have just ignored him and kept on walking

And really when did it become indefensible to walk a dog off leash.

I'll ask again have you NEVER broken a "rule"?

 

[Asclepias]

Her punishment will be far more severe than the seriousness of her crime. She will spend the rest of her life in hiding because of the death threats. She will never be able to get a job again. Everyone she knows, except her few real friends, will disown her.

Actions have consequences.

Like I said she should have just ignored him

No. She should have put her dog on a leash.

Says you.

She has no obligation to comply with the orders of some unknown civilian.

In fact she has no obligation to acknowledge him if he speaks to her

True, but she was in an area where dogs are supposed to be leashed and there were plenty of signs to that effect. Sure she could have made a choice to ignore him (and he could have rightfully filmed her off lead dog and called the cops on her.).

There are signs that say people are supposed to drive at a certain MPH as well.

Tell me how many actually follow those rules.

Was the dog bothering the guy?

It seemed to me he was quite a distance away from the woman and her dog.

Thats a losing argument. It is not sufficient to use the "other people do it too excuse". You sound like a child.

Doesnt matter how far the dog was away. It was disturbing the wild life the sign was posted to protect.

It's not an excuse I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do.

And a dog on a leash can disturb wildlife. FYI people can disturb wildlife too.

It is an excuse. You have the right because of the first amendment. There is also a such thing as citizens arrest for a reason.

A dog on a leash cannot attack wildlife which is the point. Yes humans can disturb and kill wild life but the sign was speaking of dogs being leashed not humans.

No the first amendment does not give you the right to enforce laws.

All he can do is say something, and he did. It's still not his job to make the person put a dog on a leash is it?

Like I said she should have just ignored the guy like I would have done.

Who said the 1rst gave you the right to enforce laws? This was your question...."I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do. "

The first amendment gives you the right to say what you want, including telling people to obey posted signs.

He didnt make the woman put the dog on the leash. Where did you get the assumption he made her do anything?

She had the right to ignore him just like you do. Instead she jumped to becoming a hysterical racist bitch.

You said you have a right because of the first amendment didn't you? Then you mentioned citizens' arrest didn't you?

The first amendment has nothing to do with citizens arrest and nothing to do with enforcing laws

As I said civilians do not have a duty to enforce the laws.

He can say whatever he wants but not one person has any obligation to listen to him.

Yes I did to both.

I didnt say the 1rst had anything to do with citizens arrest. Your reading comprehension is on the fritz.

I dont care what you said. Civillians have a duty to help enforce laws up to a point which includes a citizens arrest.

True. No one has to listen to the guy. That doesnt mean he doesnt have the right to say what he said.

No they don't have an obligation to enforce laws.

If they did then people could be arrested for not stopping a criminal from committing a crime.

Thats an incredibly stupid comment. An obligation doesnt have to be legal. its moral.

I have no moral obligation to enforce any law.

If I see a guy robbing a store I have no legal or moral obligation to stop him from doing so in fact I can leave the scene and refuse to speak to the police if I choose.

That said if i saw a person commit murder I would at the very least tell the cops what I saw but I would have no legal or moral obligation to physically detain that person

Tell what mortal imperative drives a civilian to enforce a leash law? Is it the disturbing the birds thing? Because people disturb birds all the time.

Per the last paragraph, yes. This is one area of the park set aside for people to bird watch. Human traffic on trails is less disruptive than canine traffic running in and out,chasing critters etc. You can assume all dogs are as well trained as yours or thatin all owners are as respectful. A 6 leash allows dog walkers to enjoy that area as well as birdwatchers.

There was no evidence presented that this dog was disturbing the birds.

There was no court case. What are you talking about?

How do you know the dog was disturbing the birds?

Did you see any video of it?

You didn't because there was none.

So you are ASSUMING facts not in evidence

Because the guy asked her to leash the dog.

I dont have to see the video. She con concurred with the way things went down.

So you're assuming just admit it. There is nothing shown that supports the assumption that the dog was bothering this guy or any birds.

And she concurred that her dog was "disturbing the birds"?

I didn't see that. I saw her apologize for overreacting but that's all.

Doesn't matter if the dog was or wasn't chasing birds. The rule in that part of the park is that all dogs must be on a leash so as not to disturb the birds or the people watching them. She had a leash in her hand, so why in the hell couldn't she have just leashed the dog and been on her way? Would have avoided a whole bunch of problems.

and you NEVER break any rules right? We don't know that the dog wasn't walking right next to her on a heel do we? We certainly don't know if the dog was "disturbing the birds" do we?

Thing is this woman would have kept on walking right by mister birdwatcher if he would have minded his own business.

From the way the dog was acting, looking like it was trying to get away from her, I seriously doubt that it's been trained well enough to heel.

And, it doesn't matter if the dog was disturbing the birds or not, the rule is that dogs must be leashed in that area of the park.

But, keep defending the indefensible if that helps you sleep at night.

I see that as the dog picking up on her emotions. As i said I'm not defending her reaction at all. She was a complete asshole in her reaction.

I would have just ignored him and kept on walking

And really when did it become indefensible to walk a dog off leash.

I'll ask again have you NEVER broken a "rule"?

"And really when did it become indefensible to walk a dog off leash."

When there is a sign posted saying to leash your dog.

 

[Blues Man]

Her punishment will be far more severe than the seriousness of her crime. She will spend the rest of her life in hiding because of the death threats. She will never be able to get a job again. Everyone she knows, except her few real friends, will disown her.

Actions have consequences.

Like I said she should have just ignored him

No. She should have put her dog on a leash.

Says you.

She has no obligation to comply with the orders of some unknown civilian.

In fact she has no obligation to acknowledge him if he speaks to her

True, but she was in an area where dogs are supposed to be leashed and there were plenty of signs to that effect. Sure she could have made a choice to ignore him (and he could have rightfully filmed her off lead dog and called the cops on her.).

There are signs that say people are supposed to drive at a certain MPH as well.

Tell me how many actually follow those rules.

Was the dog bothering the guy?

It seemed to me he was quite a distance away from the woman and her dog.

Thats a losing argument. It is not sufficient to use the "other people do it too excuse". You sound like a child.

Doesnt matter how far the dog was away. It was disturbing the wild life the sign was posted to protect.

It's not an excuse I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do.

And a dog on a leash can disturb wildlife. FYI people can disturb wildlife too.

It is an excuse. You have the right because of the first amendment. There is also a such thing as citizens arrest for a reason.

A dog on a leash cannot attack wildlife which is the point. Yes humans can disturb and kill wild life but the sign was speaking of dogs being leashed not humans.

No the first amendment does not give you the right to enforce laws.

All he can do is say something, and he did. It's still not his job to make the person put a dog on a leash is it?

Like I said she should have just ignored the guy like I would have done.

Who said the 1rst gave you the right to enforce laws? This was your question...."I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do. "

The first amendment gives you the right to say what you want, including telling people to obey posted signs.

He didnt make the woman put the dog on the leash. Where did you get the assumption he made her do anything?

She had the right to ignore him just like you do. Instead she jumped to becoming a hysterical racist bitch.

You said you have a right because of the first amendment didn't you? Then you mentioned citizens' arrest didn't you?

The first amendment has nothing to do with citizens arrest and nothing to do with enforcing laws

As I said civilians do not have a duty to enforce the laws.

He can say whatever he wants but not one person has any obligation to listen to him.

Yes I did to both.

I didnt say the 1rst had anything to do with citizens arrest. Your reading comprehension is on the fritz.

I dont care what you said. Civillians have a duty to help enforce laws up to a point which includes a citizens arrest.

True. No one has to listen to the guy. That doesnt mean he doesnt have the right to say what he said.

No they don't have an obligation to enforce laws.

If they did then people could be arrested for not stopping a criminal from committing a crime.

Thats an incredibly stupid comment. An obligation doesnt have to be legal. its moral.

I have no moral obligation to enforce any law.

If I see a guy robbing a store I have no legal or moral obligation to stop him from doing so in fact I can leave the scene and refuse to speak to the police if I choose.

That said if i saw a person commit murder I would at the very least tell the cops what I saw but I would have no legal or moral obligation to physically detain that person

Tell what mortal imperative drives a civilian to enforce a leash law? Is it the disturbing the birds thing? Because people disturb birds all the time.

Per the last paragraph, yes. This is one area of the park set aside for people to bird watch. Human traffic on trails is less disruptive than canine traffic running in and out,chasing critters etc. You can assume all dogs are as well trained as yours or thatin all owners are as respectful. A 6 leash allows dog walkers to enjoy that area as well as birdwatchers.

There was no evidence presented that this dog was disturbing the birds.

There was no court case. What are you talking about?

How do you know the dog was disturbing the birds?

Did you see any video of it?

You didn't because there was none.

So you are ASSUMING facts not in evidence

Because the guy asked her to leash the dog.

I dont have to see the video. She con concurred with the way things went down.

So you're assuming just admit it. There is nothing shown that supports the assumption that the dog was bothering this guy or any birds.

And she concurred that her dog was "disturbing the birds"?

I didn't see that. I saw her apologize for overreacting but that's all.

Doesn't matter if the dog was or wasn't chasing birds. The rule in that part of the park is that all dogs must be on a leash so as not to disturb the birds or the people watching them. She had a leash in her hand, so why in the hell couldn't she have just leashed the dog and been on her way? Would have avoided a whole bunch of problems.

and you NEVER break any rules right? We don't know that the dog wasn't walking right next to her on a heel do we? We certainly don't know if the dog was "disturbing the birds" do we?

Thing is this woman would have kept on walking right by mister birdwatcher if he would have minded his own business.

From the way the dog was acting, looking like it was trying to get away from her, I seriously doubt that it's been trained well enough to heel.

And, it doesn't matter if the dog was disturbing the birds or not, the rule is that dogs must be leashed in that area of the park.

But, keep defending the indefensible if that helps you sleep at night.

I see that as the dog picking up on her emotions. As i said I'm not defending her reaction at all. She was a complete asshole in her reaction.

I would have just ignored him and kept on walking

And really when did it become indefensible to walk a dog off leash.

I'll ask again have you NEVER broken a "rule"?

"And really when did it become indefensible to walk a dog off leash."

When there is a sign posted saying to leash your dog.

Boo Fucking Hoo

tell me have you NEVER broken a rule?

If you say no you're a liar.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Her punishment will be far more severe than the seriousness of her crime. She will spend the rest of her life in hiding because of the death threats. She will never be able to get a job again. Everyone she knows, except her few real friends, will disown her.

Actions have consequences.

Like I said she should have just ignored him

No. She should have put her dog on a leash.

Says you.

She has no obligation to comply with the orders of some unknown civilian.

In fact she has no obligation to acknowledge him if he speaks to her

True, but she was in an area where dogs are supposed to be leashed and there were plenty of signs to that effect. Sure she could have made a choice to ignore him (and he could have rightfully filmed her off lead dog and called the cops on her.).

There are signs that say people are supposed to drive at a certain MPH as well.

Tell me how many actually follow those rules.

Was the dog bothering the guy?

It seemed to me he was quite a distance away from the woman and her dog.

Thats a losing argument. It is not sufficient to use the "other people do it too excuse". You sound like a child.

Doesnt matter how far the dog was away. It was disturbing the wild life the sign was posted to protect.

It's not an excuse I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do.

And a dog on a leash can disturb wildlife. FYI people can disturb wildlife too.

It is an excuse. You have the right because of the first amendment. There is also a such thing as citizens arrest for a reason.

A dog on a leash cannot attack wildlife which is the point. Yes humans can disturb and kill wild life but the sign was speaking of dogs being leashed not humans.

No the first amendment does not give you the right to enforce laws.

All he can do is say something, and he did. It's still not his job to make the person put a dog on a leash is it?

Like I said she should have just ignored the guy like I would have done.

Who said the 1rst gave you the right to enforce laws? This was your question...."I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do. "

The first amendment gives you the right to say what you want, including telling people to obey posted signs.

He didnt make the woman put the dog on the leash. Where did you get the assumption he made her do anything?

She had the right to ignore him just like you do. Instead she jumped to becoming a hysterical racist bitch.

You said you have a right because of the first amendment didn't you? Then you mentioned citizens' arrest didn't you?

The first amendment has nothing to do with citizens arrest and nothing to do with enforcing laws

As I said civilians do not have a duty to enforce the laws.

He can say whatever he wants but not one person has any obligation to listen to him.

Yes I did to both.

I didnt say the 1rst had anything to do with citizens arrest. Your reading comprehension is on the fritz.

I dont care what you said. Civillians have a duty to help enforce laws up to a point which includes a citizens arrest.

True. No one has to listen to the guy. That doesnt mean he doesnt have the right to say what he said.

No they don't have an obligation to enforce laws.

If they did then people could be arrested for not stopping a criminal from committing a crime.

Thats an incredibly stupid comment. An obligation doesnt have to be legal. its moral.

I have no moral obligation to enforce any law.

If I see a guy robbing a store I have no legal or moral obligation to stop him from doing so in fact I can leave the scene and refuse to speak to the police if I choose.

That said if i saw a person commit murder I would at the very least tell the cops what I saw but I would have no legal or moral obligation to physically detain that person

Tell what mortal imperative drives a civilian to enforce a leash law? Is it the disturbing the birds thing? Because people disturb birds all the time.

Per the last paragraph, yes. This is one area of the park set aside for people to bird watch. Human traffic on trails is less disruptive than canine traffic running in and out,chasing critters etc. You can assume all dogs are as well trained as yours or thatin all owners are as respectful. A 6 leash allows dog walkers to enjoy that area as well as birdwatchers.

There was no evidence presented that this dog was disturbing the birds.

There was no court case. What are you talking about?

How do you know the dog was disturbing the birds?

Did you see any video of it?

You didn't because there was none.

So you are ASSUMING facts not in evidence

Because the guy asked her to leash the dog.

I dont have to see the video. She con concurred with the way things went down.

So you're assuming just admit it. There is nothing shown that supports the assumption that the dog was bothering this guy or any birds.

And she concurred that her dog was "disturbing the birds"?

I didn't see that. I saw her apologize for overreacting but that's all.

Doesn't matter if the dog was or wasn't chasing birds. The rule in that part of the park is that all dogs must be on a leash so as not to disturb the birds or the people watching them. She had a leash in her hand, so why in the hell couldn't she have just leashed the dog and been on her way? Would have avoided a whole bunch of problems.

and you NEVER break any rules right? We don't know that the dog wasn't walking right next to her on a heel do we? We certainly don't know if the dog was "disturbing the birds" do we?

Thing is this woman would have kept on walking right by mister birdwatcher if he would have minded his own business.

From the way the dog was acting, looking like it was trying to get away from her, I seriously doubt that it's been trained well enough to heel.

And, it doesn't matter if the dog was disturbing the birds or not, the rule is that dogs must be leashed in that area of the park.

But, keep defending the indefensible if that helps you sleep at night.

I see that as the dog picking up on her emotions. As i said I'm not defending her reaction at all. She was a complete asshole in her reaction.

I would have just ignored him and kept on walking

And really when did it become indefensible to walk a dog off leash.

I'll ask again have you NEVER broken a "rule"?

Actually, yes, I have gone against the rules before, but I was always held accountable for my actions. Just one of them things that the military is good at.

But, that doesn't excuse the woman for not having her dog on a leash.

 

[Coyote]

Her punishment will be far more severe than the seriousness of her crime. She will spend the rest of her life in hiding because of the death threats. She will never be able to get a job again. Everyone she knows, except her few real friends, will disown her.

Actions have consequences.

Like I said she should have just ignored him

No. She should have put her dog on a leash.

Says you.

She has no obligation to comply with the orders of some unknown civilian.

In fact she has no obligation to acknowledge him if he speaks to her

True, but she was in an area where dogs are supposed to be leashed and there were plenty of signs to that effect. Sure she could have made a choice to ignore him (and he could have rightfully filmed her off lead dog and called the cops on her.).

There are signs that say people are supposed to drive at a certain MPH as well.

Tell me how many actually follow those rules.

Was the dog bothering the guy?

It seemed to me he was quite a distance away from the woman and her dog.

Thats a losing argument. It is not sufficient to use the "other people do it too excuse". You sound like a child.

Doesnt matter how far the dog was away. It was disturbing the wild life the sign was posted to protect.

It's not an excuse I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do.

And a dog on a leash can disturb wildlife. FYI people can disturb wildlife too.

It is an excuse. You have the right because of the first amendment. There is also a such thing as citizens arrest for a reason.

A dog on a leash cannot attack wildlife which is the point. Yes humans can disturb and kill wild life but the sign was speaking of dogs being leashed not humans.

No the first amendment does not give you the right to enforce laws.

All he can do is say something, and he did. It's still not his job to make the person put a dog on a leash is it?

Like I said she should have just ignored the guy like I would have done.

Who said the 1rst gave you the right to enforce laws? This was your question...."I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do. "

The first amendment gives you the right to say what you want, including telling people to obey posted signs.

He didnt make the woman put the dog on the leash. Where did you get the assumption he made her do anything?

She had the right to ignore him just like you do. Instead she jumped to becoming a hysterical racist bitch.

You said you have a right because of the first amendment didn't you? Then you mentioned citizens' arrest didn't you?

The first amendment has nothing to do with citizens arrest and nothing to do with enforcing laws

As I said civilians do not have a duty to enforce the laws.

He can say whatever he wants but not one person has any obligation to listen to him.

Yes I did to both.

I didnt say the 1rst had anything to do with citizens arrest. Your reading comprehension is on the fritz.

I dont care what you said. Civillians have a duty to help enforce laws up to a point which includes a citizens arrest.

True. No one has to listen to the guy. That doesnt mean he doesnt have the right to say what he said.

No they don't have an obligation to enforce laws.

If they did then people could be arrested for not stopping a criminal from committing a crime.

Thats an incredibly stupid comment. An obligation doesnt have to be legal. its moral.

I have no moral obligation to enforce any law.

If I see a guy robbing a store I have no legal or moral obligation to stop him from doing so in fact I can leave the scene and refuse to speak to the police if I choose.

That said if i saw a person commit murder I would at the very least tell the cops what I saw but I would have no legal or moral obligation to physically detain that person

Tell what mortal imperative drives a civilian to enforce a leash law? Is it the disturbing the birds thing? Because people disturb birds all the time.

Per the last paragraph, yes. This is one area of the park set aside for people to bird watch. Human traffic on trails is less disruptive than canine traffic running in and out,chasing critters etc. You can assume all dogs are as well trained as yours or thatin all owners are as respectful. A 6 leash allows dog walkers to enjoy that area as well as birdwatchers.

There was no evidence presented that this dog was disturbing the birds.

There doesn't need to be. Just like you don't have to prove someone is being directly harmed when you run a red light.

Since the disturbing the birds thing was the reason people here are saying he told the woman to leash her dog I would like to see evidence of the birds being disturbed.

It sounds like you are saying Pete shouldn't be required to obey laws if there is no sign it adversely effects anyone.

I have yet to see any evidence that this dog adversely affected anyone or even any bird.

All you see is a brief video. You can’t draw any conclusions other than:

This happened in an area where dogs are required to be on leash.

The man politely asked her to leash the dog.

She (in my subjective wording) went bonkers and called in a false claim of assault.

Isnt it enough that the area required dogs to be on leash?

 

[Coyote]

Her punishment will be far more severe than the seriousness of her crime. She will spend the rest of her life in hiding because of the death threats. She will never be able to get a job again. Everyone she knows, except her few real friends, will disown her.

Actions have consequences.

Like I said she should have just ignored him

No. She should have put her dog on a leash.

Says you.

She has no obligation to comply with the orders of some unknown civilian.

In fact she has no obligation to acknowledge him if he speaks to her

True, but she was in an area where dogs are supposed to be leashed and there were plenty of signs to that effect. Sure she could have made a choice to ignore him (and he could have rightfully filmed her off lead dog and called the cops on her.).

There are signs that say people are supposed to drive at a certain MPH as well.

Tell me how many actually follow those rules.

Was the dog bothering the guy?

It seemed to me he was quite a distance away from the woman and her dog.

Thats a losing argument. It is not sufficient to use the "other people do it too excuse". You sound like a child.

Doesnt matter how far the dog was away. It was disturbing the wild life the sign was posted to protect.

It's not an excuse I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do.

And a dog on a leash can disturb wildlife. FYI people can disturb wildlife too.

It is an excuse. You have the right because of the first amendment. There is also a such thing as citizens arrest for a reason.

A dog on a leash cannot attack wildlife which is the point. Yes humans can disturb and kill wild life but the sign was speaking of dogs being leashed not humans.

No the first amendment does not give you the right to enforce laws.

All he can do is say something, and he did. It's still not his job to make the person put a dog on a leash is it?

Like I said she should have just ignored the guy like I would have done.

Who said the 1rst gave you the right to enforce laws? This was your question...."I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do. "

The first amendment gives you the right to say what you want, including telling people to obey posted signs.

He didnt make the woman put the dog on the leash. Where did you get the assumption he made her do anything?

She had the right to ignore him just like you do. Instead she jumped to becoming a hysterical racist bitch.

You said you have a right because of the first amendment didn't you? Then you mentioned citizens' arrest didn't you?

The first amendment has nothing to do with citizens arrest and nothing to do with enforcing laws

As I said civilians do not have a duty to enforce the laws.

He can say whatever he wants but not one person has any obligation to listen to him.

Yes I did to both.

I didnt say the 1rst had anything to do with citizens arrest. Your reading comprehension is on the fritz.

I dont care what you said. Civillians have a duty to help enforce laws up to a point which includes a citizens arrest.

True. No one has to listen to the guy. That doesnt mean he doesnt have the right to say what he said.

No they don't have an obligation to enforce laws.

If they did then people could be arrested for not stopping a criminal from committing a crime.

Thats an incredibly stupid comment. An obligation doesnt have to be legal. its moral.

I have no moral obligation to enforce any law.

If I see a guy robbing a store I have no legal or moral obligation to stop him from doing so in fact I can leave the scene and refuse to speak to the police if I choose.

That said if i saw a person commit murder I would at the very least tell the cops what I saw but I would have no legal or moral obligation to physically detain that person

Tell what mortal imperative drives a civilian to enforce a leash law? Is it the disturbing the birds thing? Because people disturb birds all the time.

Per the last paragraph, yes. This is one area of the park set aside for people to bird watch. Human traffic on trails is less disruptive than canine traffic running in and out,chasing critters etc. You can assume all dogs are as well trained as yours or thatin all owners are as respectful. A 6 leash allows dog walkers to enjoy that area as well as birdwatchers.

There was no evidence presented that this dog was disturbing the birds.

There was no court case. What are you talking about?

How do you know the dog was disturbing the birds?

Did you see any video of it?

You didn't because there was none.

So you are ASSUMING facts not in evidence

Because the guy asked her to leash the dog.

I dont have to see the video. She con concurred with the way things went down.

So you're assuming just admit it. There is nothing shown that supports the assumption that the dog was bothering this guy or any birds.

And she concurred that her dog was "disturbing the birds"?

I didn't see that. I saw her apologize for overreacting but that's all.

Doesn't matter if the dog was or wasn't chasing birds. The rule in that part of the park is that all dogs must be on a leash so as not to disturb the birds or the people watching them. She had a leash in her hand, so why in the hell couldn't she have just leashed the dog and been on her way? Would have avoided a whole bunch of problems.

and you NEVER break any rules right? We don't know that the dog wasn't walking right next to her on a heel do we? We certainly don't know if the dog was "disturbing the birds" do we?

Thing is this woman would have kept on walking right by mister birdwatcher if he would have minded his own business.

From the way the dog was acting, looking like it was trying to get away from her, I seriously doubt that it's been trained well enough to heel.

And, it doesn't matter if the dog was disturbing the birds or not, the rule is that dogs must be leashed in that area of the park.

But, keep defending the indefensible if that helps you sleep at night.

I see that as the dog picking up on her emotions. As i said I'm not defending her reaction at all. She was a complete asshole in her reaction.

I would have just ignored him and kept on walking

And really when did it become indefensible to walk a dog off leash.

I'll ask again have you NEVER broken a "rule"?

That isn’t really the point. If you are in an area that requires dogs to be on leash, and some asks you to leash your dog, you should. It is at that point your choice becomes indefensible.

 

[Coyote]

Her punishment will be far more severe than the seriousness of her crime. She will spend the rest of her life in hiding because of the death threats. She will never be able to get a job again. Everyone she knows, except her few real friends, will disown her.

Actions have consequences.

Like I said she should have just ignored him

No. She should have put her dog on a leash.

Says you.

She has no obligation to comply with the orders of some unknown civilian.

In fact she has no obligation to acknowledge him if he speaks to her

True, but she was in an area where dogs are supposed to be leashed and there were plenty of signs to that effect. Sure she could have made a choice to ignore him (and he could have rightfully filmed her off lead dog and called the cops on her.).

There are signs that say people are supposed to drive at a certain MPH as well.

Tell me how many actually follow those rules.

Was the dog bothering the guy?

It seemed to me he was quite a distance away from the woman and her dog.

Thats a losing argument. It is not sufficient to use the "other people do it too excuse". You sound like a child.

Doesnt matter how far the dog was away. It was disturbing the wild life the sign was posted to protect.

It's not an excuse I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do.

And a dog on a leash can disturb wildlife. FYI people can disturb wildlife too.

It is an excuse. You have the right because of the first amendment. There is also a such thing as citizens arrest for a reason.

A dog on a leash cannot attack wildlife which is the point. Yes humans can disturb and kill wild life but the sign was speaking of dogs being leashed not humans.

No the first amendment does not give you the right to enforce laws.

All he can do is say something, and he did. It's still not his job to make the person put a dog on a leash is it?

Like I said she should have just ignored the guy like I would have done.

Who said the 1rst gave you the right to enforce laws? This was your question...."I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do. "

The first amendment gives you the right to say what you want, including telling people to obey posted signs.

He didnt make the woman put the dog on the leash. Where did you get the assumption he made her do anything?

She had the right to ignore him just like you do. Instead she jumped to becoming a hysterical racist bitch.

You said you have a right because of the first amendment didn't you? Then you mentioned citizens' arrest didn't you?

The first amendment has nothing to do with citizens arrest and nothing to do with enforcing laws

As I said civilians do not have a duty to enforce the laws.

He can say whatever he wants but not one person has any obligation to listen to him.

Yes I did to both.

I didnt say the 1rst had anything to do with citizens arrest. Your reading comprehension is on the fritz.

I dont care what you said. Civillians have a duty to help enforce laws up to a point which includes a citizens arrest.

True. No one has to listen to the guy. That doesnt mean he doesnt have the right to say what he said.

No they don't have an obligation to enforce laws.

If they did then people could be arrested for not stopping a criminal from committing a crime.

Thats an incredibly stupid comment. An obligation doesnt have to be legal. its moral.

I have no moral obligation to enforce any law.

If I see a guy robbing a store I have no legal or moral obligation to stop him from doing so in fact I can leave the scene and refuse to speak to the police if I choose.

That said if i saw a person commit murder I would at the very least tell the cops what I saw but I would have no legal or moral obligation to physically detain that person

Tell what mortal imperative drives a civilian to enforce a leash law? Is it the disturbing the birds thing? Because people disturb birds all the time.

Per the last paragraph, yes. This is one area of the park set aside for people to bird watch. Human traffic on trails is less disruptive than canine traffic running in and out,chasing critters etc. You can assume all dogs are as well trained as yours or thatin all owners are as respectful. A 6 leash allows dog walkers to enjoy that area as well as birdwatchers.

There was no evidence presented that this dog was disturbing the birds.

There was no court case. What are you talking about?

How do you know the dog was disturbing the birds?

Did you see any video of it?

You didn't because there was none.

So you are ASSUMING facts not in evidence

Because the guy asked her to leash the dog.

I dont have to see the video. She con concurred with the way things went down.

So you're assuming just admit it. There is nothing shown that supports the assumption that the dog was bothering this guy or any birds.

And she concurred that her dog was "disturbing the birds"?

I didn't see that. I saw her apologize for overreacting but that's all.

No. I'm not assuming. I read her apology. Looks like you should be better informed before you assume.

She apologized for what? Her completely inappropriate behavior in response to being told to leash her dog by a guy who had no authority to do so. Right?.

I'm not defending what she said or how she acted.

I am wondering why a person feels the need to tell other people what to do when it there was nothing presented that shows the dog misbehaving whatsoever.

Like I said if it was me i would have simply ignored the guy and kept walking

She had a leash in her hand. How hard would it have been for her to clip it on the dogs collar, walk out of the area, and take the dog off the leash again?

Don't know don't care.

I walk my dogs on a heel all the time and they stay closer to me than any dog on a 6 foot leash I have ever seen. I'm not going to assume this dog was bothering anyone or any birds.

But I do always wonder why people don't mind their own business.

When I walk my dogs, I allow them to range, sniff, explore as long as they listen, check in, and there are no people or other animals they can bother. That is what makes it enjoyable for them. If your dog is required to be at heel at all times, itisn’t much fun for them.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

I saw this on Inside Edition yesterday, and they said that the dude was already in the area, doing some birdwatching. While he was there, the woman came walking by with her dog off leash, but she still had a leash in her hand.

The dude doing the birdwatching asked her to put her dog on a leash, as that was the rule in that particular area of the park. Dogs could be there, but they have to be on a leash so they don't disturb the birds, or the people in the area watching them.

She could have avoided the whole thing by simply putting the leash she had in her hand on her dog and nothing would have come out of it. However, she didn't do that, she got all belligerent with the man, told him she wouldn't put her dog on a leash (that she had in her hand). Then, she got even more agitated, and threatened to call the police and say that a black man was harassing her. The dude then told her to go ahead and call. He'd like for them to show up as well.

Inside Edition showed the whole tape of the woman having a meltdown and from watching the video, she was clearly in the wrong.

Yes, she was wrong, but all the Karen's have DESTROYED this womans life -- really DESTROYED HER. She deserved something, but even the "victim" has begged people to stop. He didnt deserve that, and she doesnt deserve this

 

[Coyote]

Her punishment will be far more severe than the seriousness of her crime. She will spend the rest of her life in hiding because of the death threats. She will never be able to get a job again. Everyone she knows, except her few real friends, will disown her.

Actions have consequences.

Like I said she should have just ignored him

No. She should have put her dog on a leash.

Says you.

She has no obligation to comply with the orders of some unknown civilian.

In fact she has no obligation to acknowledge him if he speaks to her

True, but she was in an area where dogs are supposed to be leashed and there were plenty of signs to that effect. Sure she could have made a choice to ignore him (and he could have rightfully filmed her off lead dog and called the cops on her.).

There are signs that say people are supposed to drive at a certain MPH as well.

Tell me how many actually follow those rules.

Was the dog bothering the guy?

It seemed to me he was quite a distance away from the woman and her dog.

Thats a losing argument. It is not sufficient to use the "other people do it too excuse". You sound like a child.

Doesnt matter how far the dog was away. It was disturbing the wild life the sign was posted to protect.

It's not an excuse I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do.

And a dog on a leash can disturb wildlife. FYI people can disturb wildlife too.

It is an excuse. You have the right because of the first amendment. There is also a such thing as citizens arrest for a reason.

A dog on a leash cannot attack wildlife which is the point. Yes humans can disturb and kill wild life but the sign was speaking of dogs being leashed not humans.

No the first amendment does not give you the right to enforce laws.

All he can do is say something, and he did. It's still not his job to make the person put a dog on a leash is it?

Like I said she should have just ignored the guy like I would have done.

Who said the 1rst gave you the right to enforce laws? This was your question...."I am merely wondering why anyone who is not in law enforcement thinks they have the right to tell other people what to do. "

The first amendment gives you the right to say what you want, including telling people to obey posted signs.

He didnt make the woman put the dog on the leash. Where did you get the assumption he made her do anything?

She had the right to ignore him just like you do. Instead she jumped to becoming a hysterical racist bitch.

You said you have a right because of the first amendment didn't you? Then you mentioned citizens' arrest didn't you?

The first amendment has nothing to do with citizens arrest and nothing to do with enforcing laws

As I said civilians do not have a duty to enforce the laws.

He can say whatever he wants but not one person has any obligation to listen to him.

Yes I did to both.

I didnt say the 1rst had anything to do with citizens arrest. Your reading comprehension is on the fritz.

I dont care what you said. Civillians have a duty to help enforce laws up to a point which includes a citizens arrest.

True. No one has to listen to the guy. That doesnt mean he doesnt have the right to say what he said.

No they don't have an obligation to enforce laws.

If they did then people could be arrested for not stopping a criminal from committing a crime.

Thats an incredibly stupid comment. An obligation doesnt have to be legal. its moral.

I have no moral obligation to enforce any law.

If I see a guy robbing a store I have no legal or moral obligation to stop him from doing so in fact I can leave the scene and refuse to speak to the police if I choose.

That said if i saw a person commit murder I would at the very least tell the cops what I saw but I would have no legal or moral obligation to physically detain that person

Tell what mortal imperative drives a civilian to enforce a leash law? Is it the disturbing the birds thing? Because people disturb birds all the time.

Per the last paragraph, yes. This is one area of the park set aside for people to bird watch. Human traffic on trails is less disruptive than canine traffic running in and out,chasing critters etc. You can assume all dogs are as well trained as yours or thatin all owners are as respectful. A 6 leash allows dog walkers to enjoy that area as well as birdwatchers.

There was no evidence presented that this dog was disturbing the birds.

There was no court case. What are you talking about?

How do you know the dog was disturbing the birds?

Did you see any video of it?

You didn't because there was none.

So you are ASSUMING facts not in evidence

Because the guy asked her to leash the dog.

I dont have to see the video. She con concurred with the way things went down.

So you're assuming just admit it. There is nothing shown that supports the assumption that the dog was bothering this guy or any birds.

And she concurred that her dog was "disturbing the birds"?

I didn't see that. I saw her apologize for overreacting but that's all.

Doesn't matter if the dog was or wasn't chasing birds. The rule in that part of the park is that all dogs must be on a leash so as not to disturb the birds or the people watching them. She had a leash in her hand, so why in the hell couldn't she have just leashed the dog and been on her way? Would have avoided a whole bunch of problems.

and you NEVER break any rules right? We don't know that the dog wasn't walking right next to her on a heel do we? We certainly don't know if the dog was "disturbing the birds" do we?

Thing is this woman would have kept on walking right by mister birdwatcher if he would have minded his own business.

From the way the dog was acting, looking like it was trying to get away from her, I seriously doubt that it's been trained well enough to heel.

And, it doesn't matter if the dog was disturbing the birds or not, the rule is that dogs must be leashed in that area of the park.

But, keep defending the indefensible if that helps you sleep at night.

I think also, she adopted the dog from a rescue a few months ago. You do not train a dog to off lead reliability that quickly.

 

[Coyote]

I saw this on Inside Edition yesterday, and they said that the dude was already in the area, doing some birdwatching. While he was there, the woman came walking by with her dog off leash, but she still had a leash in her hand.

The dude doing the birdwatching asked her to put her dog on a leash, as that was the rule in that particular area of the park. Dogs could be there, but they have to be on a leash so they don't disturb the birds, or the people in the area watching them.

She could have avoided the whole thing by simply putting the leash she had in her hand on her dog and nothing would have come out of it. However, she didn't do that, she got all belligerent with the man, told him she wouldn't put her dog on a leash (that she had in her hand). Then, she got even more agitated, and threatened to call the police and say that a black man was harassing her. The dude then told her to go ahead and call. He'd like for them to show up as well.

Inside Edition showed the whole tape of the woman having a meltdown and from watching the video, she was clearly in the wrong.

Yes, she was wrong, but all the Karen's have DESTROYED this womans life. She deserved something, but even the "victim" has begged people to stop. He didnt deserve that, and she doesnt deserve this

That is true, and frankly, that is the downside of instantaneous social media.