He was 100% in the right. He was confronting a scofflaw, and instead of calling 911 on her and pretending like she was threatening him and trying to get her arrested, he calmly tells her the law, then arranges the mildest possible rebuke, in a way that annoys her without annoying the dog, who’s done nothing wrong.
His response is hilariously apt, and he’s a hero, goddammit. And your need to criticize him instead of focusing on her attempt to have him attacked by police? Check your shit.
Fine. Act however you feel appropriate when you perceive someone to be “a scofflaw”. Just welcome anyone else - including police and the courts - interpreting your actions as an assault, interference with their property, disturbing the peace, etc.
Hero?
Some people you say “check,” they hear “double down on.”
His goal was to get the owner to leash the dog:
The annoyance of the dog owner may be a necessary step in the process, but it’s not the goal. I suspect that anything that guy did, short of quietly leaving the area, was going to be annoying to her.
Interestingly, after the dog biscuits were offered the dog owner in this case still wouldn’t leash her dog, instead preferring to strangle the unfortunate animal by hoisting it nearly off of the ground. 
He didn’t threaten her; all he said was she wasn’t going to like what he would do next.
The idea that he “interfered” with her property is debatable. If he walked up to her leashed dog and dangled a biscuit in its face, I’d say yes. But enticing an unleashed dog from several yards away? If the dog wanders over then she’s not in control of her animal, and that’s not his fault in any way.
Yep, dog treats are now assault.
Fucking seriously?
Yes, I’d say he was a hero. He came up with a creative solution (feeding dog treats) to an ongoing problem (people walking their dogs without leashes). Then when some racist loon lost her shit, he stayed calm and reasonable. “If you can keep your head when all about you are losing theirs and blaming it on you.”
Fine. Act however you wish, and happily allow cops and courts to interpret it how they will.
If I were a man alone in a park w/ a strange woman, I would certainly not say that I was going to do something they wouldn’t like. Doesn’t matter what our respective skin colors. And whatever one’s goal, intentionally annoying someone generally suggests to me that another option might be preferable.
But, different strokes. And I generally expect everyone i meet - whether walking dogs or watching birds, to be unreasonable.
I already said twice that the woman was CLEARLY wrong.
IN the Minneapolis case, I just wonder, what where the cops thinking? This wasn’t someone resisting arrest, or even “resisting arrest”, he was cuffed. What did kneeling on him accomplish?
Are the cops so fucked in the head that they thought…what? No one would care? It doesn’t make any sense.
And I wonder if the other cops are all “the city doesn’t support us”, the old blue wall thing. How many Minneapolis cops are going to go on strike to protest the firing of their “bother officers”? I guess we’ll see.
I never said that you mentally deficient fool. I said, to paraphrase, if a country was too dangerous to live in than migration is a rational decision. Anyways, find the links of what I’ve said and prove you are not a liar.
Here: https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=22323617&postcount=1649
Basically, you’re saying that if a country is too dangerous to live in (not for everyone, of course, because the US isn’t too dangerous for white people), they should consider leaving. How about, the US stops beating, reporting on, and killing black people for no reason? They are more American than nearly everyone here – most have been here for many generations, whereas my parents came off the boat. Maybe they should kick out the white people, you know, the ones making it too dangerous for them.
I agree. However, the courage to have convictions and then to stand by them is a rare thing. It’s a disturbing trait how organizations form thin lines or wagon circles to protect their own. It’s disturbing how what looks like an obvious murder is so casually committed.
It’s also ironic that it’s this thread where a conversation about the arbitrary application of “justice” on a black man is occurring.
Surely dog treats could be poisoned, and urgent defense of the dog was dictated before a 2nd poisonous biscuit could be crammed down the innocent dog’s throat. Did the dog’s owner empty his magazine into this poisoner? Acquitted! (And shame on any D.A. who brings this good kill to trial. I think the case should be added to the “Guns help me masturbate” thread in MPSIMS as another positive gun story.)
There wasn’t even a shooting? I hope the heartless and cowardly woman who failed to protect her dog is drummed out of the NRA.
EVERY time I have asked a dog owner to leash their dog, they refused. Every time. Birdwatcher came up with a pretty decent solution, in my opinion - offer the dog a treat, and the owner proactively leashes the dog.
People occasionally offered my dog a treat while we were out (back when I still had my dog). In no universe would I have considered it a threatening move.
That would be the ideal solution. Yet, until that occurs each individual needs to make rational choices. It’s not rocket science.
If ‘you’re not going to like what I do next’ is a serious threat, what the devil is, every ‘Karen’s’ scream of, ‘I’m gonna get you fired?’
He told her she wouldn’t like it. She saw the phone come out. That’s TWO solid chances for her to get a grip on herself. That she CHOSE to ignore. And if you want to talk escalation, she had EVERY opportunity to turn, ignore him and just walk off. But she called into the police, lied about being threatened and purposely sounded in danger, which she was not. Actions that could have seen him killed. THAT’S escalation, right there.
She was provided several chances to change the course of the encounter that has cost her so dearly. She ignored them all.
She was entirely the engineer of her own demise. You wanna be proudly racist, you deserve it.
I don’t think it is all that rare. It’s just a coward’s excuse that it is hard. And tribe is an easy place for a coward to hide.
I’m a strange woman who goes to the park alone a lot.
Yes, if a man came up to me and said he was about to do something that I wasn’t going to like, I wouldn’t like it. I wouldn’t like it if anyone said that to me. Especially if I was minding my own business, not doing anything wrong.
But that’s not this chick. She was doing something wrong and she actually wasn’t minding her own business–her business being her dog and the damage he was inflicting on city property. She wasn’t entitled to an annoyance-free existence. A person is only entitled to that when they are doing what they’re supposed to be doing.
To me, this no different than stopping kids from vandalizing public property by yelling at them. You standing there scolding them is definitely going to annoy them. But isn’t that the point?
I think when you have to go to this ridiculous extreme to find the birdwatcher at fault in any way you’re being an asshole.
I carry a pocket full of dog biscuits in my coat at all times, just in case of an encounter with those of the Canis persuasion, a common event in my neighborhood. Some know me well, and look forward to an encounter.
However, I never offer a biscuit to a dog without the owner’s permission, because there are some butt-hurt owners who don’t want their dogs to eat it – dietary restrictions or other :dubious: reasons --perhaps irrational, but I respect their wishes.