mr-ed209
Sparrow
I'm getting bored of this as you're clearly too ignorant to actually engage with any argument i'm making so this will be my last post on the matter. If the law is there then this guy had every right to call the authorities on this woman, who would have dealt with it in due process and decided her punishment accordingly. That would have been the right and proper thing to do.
He did not have the right to take the matter into his own hands. Trying to force this woman to accept his abstract authority, to lure her pet away from her, to film her and make a mockery of her on social media. The resulting punishment for all of this has been wholly disproportionate. But you cant seem to get your thick head around the semantics of 'sign say dog on leash - woman wrong'.
She's been trialled by twitter resulting in the loss of her job and livelihood. A punishment, which if gone through due process would likely have resulted in a $50 fine. This is the problem when people take undue authority into their own hands; shit escalates because people in exchanges are going to feel obliged to defend their own civil liberties. That's why i have a problem with it, what part of that can't you understand?
He did not have the right to take the matter into his own hands. Trying to force this woman to accept his abstract authority, to lure her pet away from her, to film her and make a mockery of her on social media. The resulting punishment for all of this has been wholly disproportionate. But you cant seem to get your thick head around the semantics of 'sign say dog on leash - woman wrong'.
She's been trialled by twitter resulting in the loss of her job and livelihood. A punishment, which if gone through due process would likely have resulted in a $50 fine. This is the problem when people take undue authority into their own hands; shit escalates because people in exchanges are going to feel obliged to defend their own civil liberties. That's why i have a problem with it, what part of that can't you understand?
