Old man disrespects Young guy and calls him a typical black punk

reply to post by MilzGatez



Ok, let me type real slow so maybe you can follow along...

Yes I said the young black man was far from a child...and guess what genius? That young black man is no child.

Again... reading comprehension goes a long way. Learn about it.

Originally posted by MrWendal
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff

 

Show me one black guy in the video who is fishing.

The only person fishing is some white guy who is not even involved in the argument until the end.

Did I watch the video?? Well I have stated repeatedly that the entire confrontation is started by the black guy. So if I have not watched the video, that should be very easy to disprove. Please do so.

Am I a troll? I think my posting record on this site speaks for itself. Feel free to look into it and you let me know if I am a "troll" or not.

I for one, am Trolling on you tho

but like you said to me "Maybe you should learn something about reading comprehension"

reply to post by MilzGatez


Troll all you want, I am not impressed and I do not need to learn about reading comprehension. I understand exactly what you are typing and what I am reading. It is you who is failing in those regards. It is you who is attempting to twist what I say into something it is not, and you are failing at doing so.

It is ok if you are mentally handicapped, I am just here to help, not judge you.

After watching the video, there are a few things that can be stated:
Both sides are wrong. The first part is the old man, as he came walking up, and should not have gotten into any confrontation what so ever. In the heat of anger, one will say things that are not needing to be stated, and once stated, it can not be taken back. So the older person should not have provoked this confrontation, as he is of an age where he should know better.
On the other side, the younger person is wrong for trespassing on any yard that is not his, or that he does not have permission to walk on. This can be construed as a set up on both parts, as neither is willing to back down. Based off of what is in the video clip, the following can be stated:
Take this down to the lowest common denominator and put it into a basic perspective:
Homes are near a natural feature, partially surrounding it. The natural feature is considered private property, but the areas up to said features are not. The question of easement, the right to get to a particular point, has to be asked, and chances are there are ways for people, who do not live around said public feature to get to, so there is no need for someone to cut across any property. Most towns and older communities have codes, so that would include how the yards are to look, this is true in many neighborhoods and residential areas around the country. Many states, counties and cities, have laws that dictate how and where one may walk a dog, to include picking up and restraining of said animals.
So if person A has a home, near a natural feature, that he does not own, his property would go up to a certain point. Person b can visit said feature, but has no right to go onto person’s A property for any reason. If Person B does cross that line, no matter if it is marked or not, then that person is trespassing, and is in violation of the law. The only way that Person B can cross a property line is if, and only if, there is no way to the feature, or other point, that either Person B owns, or is a natural feature that is open to all, such as a park or something that would be considered county controlled or owned.
Having looked at it from that point of view, both are wrong. The older person is wrong for starting a conflict, and the younger is wrong for trespassing and allowing his dog to walk and mess on another persons yard.

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by MrWendal
reply to post by MilzGatez

 

Troll all you want, I am not impressed and I do not need to learn about reading comprehension. I understand exactly what you are typing and what I am reading. It is you who is failing in those regards. It is you who is attempting to twist what I say into something it is not, and you are failing at doing so.

It is ok if you are mentally handicapped, I am just here to help, not judge you.

Im not twisting nothing, Im just replying to your comments and Im not going to waste my time looking for all your replies and pasting them here, go read back to your reply and maybe u will understand more. You seem to got lost in all the BS you typed

reply to post by IkNOwSTuff


I'm a Caucasian guy, too. I can remember being a young punk and in similar situations. If I was the old guy and the young dude was just passing through, then I would probably continue sipping my margarita and listening to Jimmy Buffet (assuming that's what old dudes in Florida do).

It does look like the young guy started it, but the old man threw in the racial slur, but was it instigated. It seems that way, but just calling the kid a typical punk would have sufficed.

I live how I do now, because I think crime is rampant in the United States. I also live in a region infested with tweakers (crystal meth addicts). When I first came back to the U.S., I saw more than one house get pillaged, and it seems home invasions are happening more often.

It can also be further stated, that this is not racists in any way. The language did not reflect such, on either part, and the older person is old enough to have heard and call out some things that could be considered racist, but did not. So where is it racist? It does not appear as such, nor did the language state such. Just don't see it as such.

OK folks... Can we please stick to the topic and cease with the personal jabs? Thanks so much.

interesting how the dynamic that takes place in the video is also happening in this thread


give respect to get repsect

try it !!!

People are funny.. all sandwiched in together like sardines in a can....arguing about a piece of grass, or a piece of Sh%#.... this whole scene is a dog turd.

Once again...

Realizing that race is an issue that invokes passionate feelings and reactions... We must stick to the topic and refrain from attacking, disparaging, or insulting one another. We also must stay on topic. These are the rules of ATS and what you all agreed to when you joined.

Thanks for your cooperation.

Ok I understand..... its over..... but anyways........

Both were wrong but at the end...... the white guy was wrong when he lay his hands on another person. Once that happen, everything else goes out the window.

Originally posted by IkNOwSTuff

Originally posted by MrWendal
reply to post by IkNOwSTuff

 

Show me one black guy in the video who is fishing.

The only person fishing is some white guy who is not even involved in the argument until the end.

Did I watch the video?? Well I have stated repeatedly that the entire confrontation is started by the black guy. So if I have not watched the video, that should be very easy to disprove. Please do so.

Am I a troll? I think my posting record on this site speaks for itself. Feel free to look into it and you let me know if I am a "troll" or not.

I thought it possible you didnt watch the vid for 2 reasons, the 1st is the dog didnt crap in the yard and that was your main issue initially. 2nd coz your blatantly sticking up for the wrong guy.

I didnt call you a troll I asked if you were trolling.

Im not gonna check your previous posts coz I just dont care enough, what Ive seen here is enough to convince
me of your character.

So because the kid said 1 line and walked his dog on the old guys UNFENCED NEXT TO A PUBLIC PARK BACKYARD you think the way the old dude behaved is justified?

Edit: Its not a black guy fishing my bad, Im at a net cafe and the contrast on the screen is awful, doesnt change one thing though.
As a side note at least Ill admit I was wrong, still havent heard you acknowledge the was no crap, you just seem to have forgotten that major issue

edit on 11-6-2011 by IkNOwSTuff because: (no reason given)

That is not a public park. That is a residential neighborhood with a lake behind it. It is no different than this ..

Lakeside apartments

This is an apartment complex with a lake that sits in the middle. The lake is shared by all the residents, but the yards are not. Anyone is free to use the lake, but if you were to walk your dog through other people's yards to get there, you would be trespassing for all intents and purposes.

As far as the "crap" thing I keep talking about.... as i said in a previous post, when people say they are "walking their dog" that usually means you are walking your dog so he can crap/pee. Not many people walk there dog for exercise, or walk their dog for fun. In the US, "walking the dog" means you are taking the dog outside to do it's business. So I do agree that no one says anything about dog crap, but it is an easy assumption to make since "walking the dog" means you are taking it outside to crap.

In the interest of being fair, let us assume that the dog did not crap in the old man's yard. Does the old man have a right to stop people from walking through his yard? I would say that as a landowner that is his right.

reply to post by MilzGatez


as I said in my post that was deleted as "off topic"... the old man was wrong for putting his hands on the black guy. The old man crossed that line. That being said, he was baited. The old man's complaint is valid, but he clearly shares fault for making this confrontation physical.

typical punk, no matter what color... there is no more respect for your elders or other peoples property, thats how these punk kids think, send them to iraq, then back to the us in a coffin! enough said