U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 07-27-2019, 10:57 AM
 
2,168 posts, read 860,610 times
Reputation: 1714

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiatldal View Post
That completely nuts I can't believe you would suggest this, first off it's false, accidents can occur but they goal in it self isn't intentionally to harm people, people also j walk etc does this mean police beat j walker to sends the strongest message? What the heck.



Second off cause US is not 3rd world banana republic, Even criminals themselves have rights and are protected by laws.

Another flaw argue in this thread, is if the cop can't catch them, then that justification for violence, when that's not how that works in the first place. It's rowdy behavior but nothing about this warrants the call for police violence. what you stating is call excessive use of force. Police Jobs are de-escalate problems not making them worst by doing most extreme measure. Police should only use force when dealing with force.

For example your saying 'if one of these clowns came through your windshield and killed your wife, or your daughter.".............. The error if a cop used force on some one moving fast only could increase the likely hood of them loosing control?

The "strongest message" is too increase fines and jail time or something, Not police force

What's tricky about this while it's dangerous riding non street legal vehicular in the street, riding bikes in the street It's nothing more than a misdemeanor of a issue. What make this stands is activity itself it's large crowds. Any time you have large crowds gather with out Reservations on streets and parks it create issues. So I understand what they going for it's basically same appeal as motocross, but the settings are not the most appropriate without the Reservations.
It all goes back to my original statement. They have tried conventional means. It doesnt work. If it was effective and efficient by all means I advocate it but this is apparently an issue conventional means will not be enough to delegate. Do we just let them continue running amok commiting endangering others? It doesnt matter that they do not 'intend' to cause harm to innocents. People who street race, or motorcycles who weave in and out of traffic recklessly do not 'intend' to wreck....but they do anyway and often take innocents along with them in their act. Just because you do not 'intend' to cause harm does not suddenly make you any less of a threat if you are partaking in something you outright know is illegal / dangerous to those around you. I'm against sitting here and just letting them have their way on our streets just because it's too excessive to do anything that will send them a message.

 
Old 07-27-2019, 12:50 PM
 
Location: East Side of ATL
4,383 posts, read 6,055,541 times
Reputation: 1960
Quote:
Originally Posted by Need4Camaro View Post
Do we just let them continue running amok commiting endangering others? It doesnt matter that they do not 'intend' to cause harm to innocents.
Pretty much, yes. Most of your other ideas won't pass Constitutional muster.

If move to the other extreme, we are going to have a lot of officers killed or injured using stop sticks.

Honestly, not worth it.
 
Old 07-27-2019, 10:11 PM
 
4,440 posts, read 4,432,600 times
Reputation: 3512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Need4Camaro View Post
It all goes back to my original statement. They have tried conventional means. It doesnt work. If it was effective and efficient by all means I advocate it but this is apparently an issue conventional means will not be enough to delegate. Do we just let them continue running amok commiting endangering others? It doesnt matter that they do not 'intend' to cause harm to innocents. People who street race, or motorcycles who weave in and out of traffic recklessly do not 'intend' to wreck....but they do anyway and often take innocents along with them in their act. Just because you do not 'intend' to cause harm does not suddenly make you any less of a threat if you are partaking in something you outright know is illegal / dangerous to those around you. I'm against sitting here and just letting them have their way on our streets just because it's too excessive to do anything that will send them a message.
Dude the issue itself an misdemeanor, The nothing remotely about this warrants the necessary of police force. and even people who commit crimes have rights and under the safety of the police. Infact the act of fleeing from the cops is actually worst crime then them ridding. As state the issue isn't even people are ridding bikes, the actual issue is of lack of permits for the activity and gathering. With out this the setting the parks and streets become inappropriate. It be one thing if they had permits to close the streets or gather a parks. but cause they don't that what create the danger. Otherwise this would nothing than people gather who like motocross.

Again with your argument, using your logic cops should use force on people J walking as well, let stop giving tickets for people speed and talk on their phones, and use police force.since all of thing create accidental danger, in fact those are actually much bigger issues.

And yes intent matters in law,

The irony of your suggestion, again it makes the problem worst. Let use our thinking caps for a second, You saying your worry about public safety but you don't think violence against people who are moving on bikes wouldn't increase the odds of a accident itself? putting the rider and public safety in more even danger?
 
Old 07-27-2019, 10:39 PM
 
2,168 posts, read 860,610 times
Reputation: 1714
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiatldal View Post
Dude the issue itself an misdemeanor, The nothing remotely about this warrants the necessary of police force. and even people who commit crimes have rights and under the safety of the police. Infact the act of fleeing from the cops is actually worst crime then them ridding. As state the issue isn't even people are ridding bikes, the actual issue is of lack of permits for the activity and gathering. With out this the setting the parks and streets become inappropriate. It be one thing if they had permits to close the streets or gather a parks. but cause they don't that what create the danger. Otherwise this would nothing than people gather who like motocross.
You can paint it anyway you like but the bottom line is, they performing unsafe manuevers in populated areas, regardless of the code of offense, it changes nothing. They are putting others at risk willfully and unnecessarily. There's a big difference between a closed off event designed for this sort of activity than arbitrarily taking it out right in the middle of a public area.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiatldal View Post
Again with your argument, using your logic cops should use force on people J walking as well, let stop giving tickets for people speed and talk on their phones, and use police force.since all of thing create accidental danger, in fact those are actually much bigger issues.
J-Walkers typically only have best interest in mind, these riders are voluntarily full well willing and knowingly putting hundreds of people at risk. J-Walkers are also tenfold easier to apprehend. These riders will almost ALWAYS evade enforcement, and in doing so put hundred folds more risk to bystanders than a J-Walker ever could.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiatldal View Post
And yes intent matters in law,
No it does not.
If you run into a pedestrian where said pedestrian has right-of-way, unintentionally - even by accident should it happen on your daily commute minding your own business heading to work, and the pedestrian did not survive, you will still be imprisoned for vehicular manslaughter.

Quote:
Originally Posted by chiatldal View Post
The irony of your suggestion, again it makes the problem worst. Let use our thinking caps for a second, You saying your worry about public safety but you don't think violence against people who are moving on bikes wouldn't increase the odds of a accident itself? putting the rider and public safety in more even danger?
Who said I would stage said act right there in the public area?

Last edited by Need4Camaro; 07-27-2019 at 10:57 PM..
 
Old Yesterday, 12:38 AM
 
4,440 posts, read 4,432,600 times
Reputation: 3512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Need4Camaro View Post
You can paint it anyway you like but the bottom line is, they performing unsafe manuevers in populated areas, regardless of the code of offense, it changes nothing. They are putting others at risk willfully and unnecessarily. There's a big difference between a closed off event designed for this sort of activity than arbitrarily taking it out right in the middle of a public area.


J-Walkers typically only have best interest in mind, these riders are voluntarily full well willing and knowingly putting hundreds of people at risk. J-Walkers are also tenfold easier to apprehend. These riders will almost ALWAYS evade enforcement, and in doing so put hundred folds more risk to bystanders than a J-Walker ever could.






Who said I would stage said act right there in the public area?


Your response is basically reguardless, regurdless, reguardless, ignore. There is no difference,

I just said my first post, the "goal in it self isn't intentionally to harm people" referring to rider

you respond back and said "It doesnt matter that they do not 'intend' to cause harm to innocents. "

So replied again about J walkers now you saying " J-Walkers typically only have best interest in mind, these riders are voluntarily full well willing and knowingly putting hundreds of people at risk"

And don't anything flawed about argument?

The error is neither have bad intention, and both situation are against the law, and if one some is harm it's a untended accident. You are oblivious as hell if think these riders are under the thought they are putting people in danger. They likely underestimating the risk, and confident in there ridding. These rider oblivious goal is not harm other people them doing might be fetal themselves self.

A j walker does not just effect themselves, walking in the street the walker put himself and other in danger, drivers can try to dodge the walker and it can an cause accidents.


What's going there something else in your head that you making want to dehumanize these riders apart from J wakers in which excessive use of force by police is ok.

Quote:
No it does not.
If you run into a pedestrian where said pedestrian has right-of-way, unintentionally - even by accident should it happen on your daily commute minding your own business heading to work, and the pedestrian did not survive, you will still be imprisoned for vehicular manslaughter.
Excatly manslaughter is not muder, Cops do not use violent force to stop manslaughter. That's an unintent accident.

And you also ignore pointless of the argument a third time, using force on these riders, they could lose control it would actually increase the danger, A cop could easily knock them off there bike and kill them, or because a cop hit one as you said "one of these clowns came through your windshield and killed your wife, or your daughter." Nothing about using force moving people on bikes would help public safety, That's an oxymoron.
 
Old Yesterday, 01:01 AM
 
4,440 posts, read 4,432,600 times
Reputation: 3512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Need4Camaro View Post
Who said I would stage said act right there in the public area?
Yeah you right illegal police brutality are things a bad cops would want to hind

- Soo it's only when they are away from public are times cops should use force?

- A cop could just hit a rider causing him to die, is that the lesson?

- I thought "public area" cause your whole argument stern of "putting hundreds of people at risk" remember?

So your saying to prevent those riders from "putting hundreds of people at risk" you say... cops should use force when these riders aren't "putting hundreds of people at risk" because if cops did it public it actually increase the odds of "putting hundreds of people at risk".

You aren't thinking the situation through,
 
Old Yesterday, 08:58 AM
 
5,134 posts, read 3,335,011 times
Reputation: 3413
Quote:
Originally Posted by Need4Camaro View Post
No it does not.
If you run into a pedestrian where said pedestrian has right-of-way, unintentionally - even by accident should it happen on your daily commute minding your own business heading to work, and the pedestrian did not survive, you will still be imprisoned for vehicular manslaughter.
And wouldn’t intent change that to murder? That’s where Intent in the law matters.
 
Old Yesterday, 10:10 AM
 
1,027 posts, read 583,265 times
Reputation: 640
Shoot 'em. Softly.
 
Old Yesterday, 03:03 PM
 
2,168 posts, read 860,610 times
Reputation: 1714
Quote:
Originally Posted by samiwas1 View Post
And wouldn’t intent change that to murder? That’s where Intent in the law matters.
No.

In any instance where a vehicle kills another occupant of another vehicle, or a pedestrian where the victem had the right of way at the time of the occurrence, regardless of intent, it is considered vehicular-homicide and is instant jail time. That's why it's extremely important to drive cautiously around pedestrians. It doesnt matter what the intent is, it is still murder regardless of whether you intended it to be or not.

The same applies for some Joe who's late for work and gets on I-285 and does 90 while weaving in and out of traffic. If he kills someone while doing it, its jail time (that's if he's not caught beforehand and imprisoned for reckless driving.). Sure he didn't intend on hurting anyone, but does his intentions make his actions any less lethal? No.

Last edited by Need4Camaro; Yesterday at 03:32 PM..
 
Old Yesterday, 03:09 PM
 
2,168 posts, read 860,610 times
Reputation: 1714
Quote:
Originally Posted by chiatldal View Post
Your response is basically reguardless, regurdless, reguardless, ignore. There is no difference,

I just said my first post, the "goal in it self isn't intentionally to harm people" referring to rider

you respond back and said "It doesnt matter that they do not 'intend' to cause harm to innocents. "

So replied again about J walkers now you saying " J-Walkers typically only have best interest in mind, these riders are voluntarily full well willing and knowingly putting hundreds of people at risk"

And don't anything flawed about argument?

The error is neither have bad intention, and both situation are against the law, and if one some is harm it's a untended accident. You are oblivious as hell if think these riders are under the thought they are putting people in danger. They likely underestimating the risk, and confident in there ridding. These rider oblivious goal is not harm other people them doing might be fetal themselves self.

A j walker does not just effect themselves, walking in the street the walker put himself and other in danger, drivers can try to dodge the walker and it can an cause accidents.


What's going there something else in your head that you making want to dehumanize these riders apart from J wakers in which excessive use of force by police is ok.


Excatly manslaughter is not muder, Cops do not use violent force to stop manslaughter. That's an unintent accident.

And you also ignore pointless of the argument a third time, using force on these riders, they could lose control it would actually increase the danger, A cop could easily knock them off there bike and kill them, or because a cop hit one as you said "one of these clowns came through your windshield and killed your wife, or your daughter." Nothing about using force moving people on bikes would help public safety, That's an oxymoron.
Its plainly simple. J-Walkers are hardly a threat in comparison to multiple ATV's suddenly appearing in the middle of a central business district who are willfully and intentfully willing to put others at risk for their plain amusement and are also willing to do it again and again while also evading enforcement. I dont get what part of riding a mechanicalized machine weighing between 200 - 500 lbs around bystanders while performing stunts which could cause them to lose control, evading enforcement,
riding on sidewalks, ect is far more dangerous than J-Walking. If you cant put that together you're unqualified for this argument. Regardless of their intents or not they know they are putting others at risk by doing this. And it wont end until something serious is done about it.

Last edited by Need4Camaro; Yesterday at 03:34 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Closed Thread


Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2016 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Georgia > Atlanta
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top