|
#1
14th February 2012, 04:28 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Who is the Asshole Here?
Take a look at this; Video 1.
An animal-rights guy was protesting pigeon shoots. He follows a guy in order to copy his license plate number. The guy stop, blocks the following car and pulls a gun. Who was the asshole? The guy with the gun or the guy who provoked him? OK, but here is another one. Video 2 Here the same protestors are taking photos of the hunt club where the pigeon shoots happen. A state police officer arrives and what happens happens. The protestors stand on their rights. "Do I have to tell you my name?" Who is the asshole? The cop or the guy who seems to be pushing all his buttons? I am all worked up. I am rooting for the animal rights guy. But on the other hand, I suspect if I tried a stunt like this I would get shot. Your thoughts? 
|
|
#2
14th February 2012, 04:32 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The animal rights guy.
|
|
#3
14th February 2012, 05:18 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I don't have the plug-in software or the bandwidth to view Youtube videos. So they were shooting actual live pigeons? Is it legal in the location where they were doing it? If so, I'd say the animal rights guy was pushing his luck.
I have similar questions about the police encounter. Is this in the US? Which state? Laws vary. In my state, police have the authority to demand id (I think Mo. Rev. Stat. §84.710(2) gives them that authority). Even if they didn't, it would probably be a good idea to cooperate. They have guns and badges and stuff. I know some animal rights people do excellent work on behalf of animals, but every one I've ever encountered in person has been a jerk. That's a very limited sample, and anecdotal on top of the statistical weakness, but it does affect my opinion.
|
|
#4
14th February 2012, 05:56 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
I value your comments about AR people very much. They guy managed to provoke two near fights at least. I mean, I doubt I have provoked two such situations in my lifetime. He must be a jerk. BUT... Gosh darn it, what good are rights if common sense tells us not to use them? BUT is there not a strange sort of madness of those who follow the rules and fly in the face of society? BUT... well isn't that what Martin Luther King, Jesus and the rest do? As you can see I am betwixt and between on this and very much value the comments of you all.
|
|
#5
14th February 2012, 06:01 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The animal "rights" guy was totally the asshole. He was tailgating the 60-ish year old hunter for at least 3 blocks, the "rights" guy's camera man was literally in the hunter's face and the hunter claimed (and it looked like) the animal rights guy pushed/hit the hunter before the gun was pulled.
I also notice that the animal rights douchebags didn't show the alleged vehicular assaults they claim the 60 year old guy repeatedly committed. I only saw the first few minutes--the so-called assault, the whiney guy snivelling about it, the second, more complete view of the so-called assault, but the animal guy was clearly in the wrong.
|
|
#6
14th February 2012, 06:06 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Not snivelling, bragging or .... something.
|
|
#7
14th February 2012, 06:06 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
The right not to harass a 60-ish year old man engaged in a legal (I assume) activity? The right to not shove a 60-ish year old man? What "right" is the animal rights guy in that video not using? PS, my experience with "animal rights activists" matches 3Acres 100%. There are many animal lovers who work for good organizations like the ASPCA or (in Denver, the DDFL*) and local animal shelters, and those are very often wonderful, warm-hearted people. But they tend to not call themselves "animal rights activists". *Denver Dumb Friends League--dumb as in mute
|
|
#8
14th February 2012, 06:08 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Snivelling.
|
|
#9
14th February 2012, 06:15 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Well, the policeman was out of line for telling them to get off the easement. Everyone knows the public right of way extends to each side of the road. That is why you can walk there. That is why the state (city, whatever) maintains the drainage there.
The Old Guy stopped his car in the middle of the road in a dangerous way. He blocked traffic and can toward the AR guy. (But on the other hand, the AR got out of the car, it takes too to make a fight.) The Old Guy shoved the camera lady. Both that and his words are assault. The AR guy used force to make the assault stop. That (I suppose) is legal. If someone shove my lady friend I am pretty well obligated to make the assault stop. Then the Old Guy pulled a gun when no deadly force was threatened against him. BUT the AR guy provoked him. Even if legal, certainly that is unwise and assholish behavior.
|
|
#10
14th February 2012, 06:21 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I didn't see the part with the police so I don't know if the cop was right or not. But while there are easement rules, they're not as hard and fast as you might think. There are laws preventing people from blocking access to businesses, to stop protests that are harassing customers*, etc.
To me, it looked like the old guy pulled into a strip-mall's parking lot after being tailgated, which wouldn't be unsafe Shoving the camera-person is fine with me if she was as close as the video made it appear (like inches from his face). The fact that he was able to shove her says that she was way the hell into his personal space. The old guy isn't a celebrity. There are laws that say that celebs give up some right to privacy by virtue of their fame, but that doesn't apply to regular people. *"Bubble zone" laws around abortion clinics for instance
|
|
#11
14th February 2012, 06:34 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The AR guy was looking for a fight so they could show how dickish the pigeon shooters are, and the old guy gaave him one.
That makes the old guy stupid and the animal rights guy an asshole.
|
|
#12
14th February 2012, 06:42 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
We really want to keep the rule of law in this country and not let people decide on their own which laws to obey.
Why? Conservatives are much more efficient at killing than Progressives, and you really don't want the right wing death squads forming.
|
|
#13
14th February 2012, 06:47 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
In any case, I appreciate you folks talking me down. Other videos of these fellows blasting at pigeons (at 30 yards? 30 freaking yards?) got me upset and I identified with the AR guy's politics. But then I saw these two videos and (as someone upstream said) suspected the guy was a jerk. Even if a jerk in a good cause.
|
|
#14
14th February 2012, 07:33 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The animal rights guy is a jerk. He loses.
|
|
#15
14th February 2012, 07:34 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Yeah, while pulling a gun on a guy is not a friendly move, and might have been over-the-top in that case, the fellow was in that situation because he was given the paparazzi treatment. It's one thing to be a documentarian, hanging out and filming stuff. Even if you don't have permission (and you leave when authorities show up). It's another to start stalking someone to get pictures of them, or to get pushy when people tell you to stop filming them. Maybe you think you're right to do it, maybe you even ARE right to do it. Doesn't prevent you from being the jerk in the situation.
|
|
#16
14th February 2012, 11:28 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
It's definitely the AR guy. If you listen closely, after he shove/hits the hunter he actually says "come on motherfucker let's go". In other words, he followed the hunter, physically assaulted him, then whined about it.
Not to disparage all activists, but this seems to be a the pattern for a lot of these You Tube wannabes.
|
|
#18
14th February 2012, 12:43 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Maybe I'm not as animal rights as I should be, as I see nothing wrong with shooting pigeons. They're an alien species and have become tremendously overpopulated, together with starlings and English sparrows. Something has to keep them from entirely taking over cities, and peregrine falcons just can't eat enough of them to make a dent. I sympathize with them to the same degree as I do with rats.
Unless the subject pigeons are a different species than plain ol' city pigeons?
|
|
#19
14th February 2012, 12:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm pretty sure that following someone in a car and taking a video picture is not justification for assault and threatening deadly force. The guy with the gun is the asshole hands down.
|
|
#20
14th February 2012, 01:01 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
You know that in some states, even liberal California, harassing legal hunters is a crime, right? I don't know about PA, but here, the AR asshole could easily have been arrested.
|
|
#21
14th February 2012, 01:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#22
14th February 2012, 02:20 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#23
14th February 2012, 02:26 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Oh great. Now you got me watching inbreds shooting at aircraft.
http://youtu.be/WfJeSlMzRyE It's actually quite entertaining.
|
|
#24
14th February 2012, 03:48 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I think I might have seen different videos than you guys.
 I agree that the AR guy was an asshole, but only in that he's constantly shrill and over-dramatic about "pigeon murderers" and whatnot. The altercation between him and the douche with the gun seemed to be: 1) douche with gun allegedly swerves at them while they're doing their protestor. No way of knowing whether this is true or not. 2) they follow him in order to get his license plate number and report him for "vehicular assault". This seems pretty shrill and annoying, but hey, whatever. At no point in the video were they "tailgating" him...they were following, and you can clearly see plenty of space. 3) the guy swerves his car off onto a side street, stops it in the middle of the road, jumps out and aggressively approaches them. The AR dildo gets out of his car, and says "are you trying to intimidate us?" and the response from the gun guy is "any way, any time I can." As annoying as the AR dude is, there's no way he's the aggressor. He didn't even get out of his car until the hunter was a couple steps away (and closing), yelling "what the fuck do you want?" 4) The person taking video gets out of the car and comes around to film, obviously stops advancing on the hunter, and then the hunter casually reaches over and swats her while continuing to berate the AR guy. She was clearly not being aggressive, and if he claims he felt threatened, he's a goddamn liar. The "come on motherfucker, let's go" from the AR guy was before the hunter pulled the gun, but in response to the hunter swatting the lady. 5) immediately after all this, the hunter starts saying "you hit me", but the only time he could have been hit in the whole thing was during the portion where the camera was shaking as a result of him hitting the lady. It's difficult to say whether he actually got hit, but it's not difficult to say that if he did get hit, it A) wasn't a serious hit, and B) it was in response to him hitting the lady.All of that seems pretty clear cut to me. I think at this point they're both being kind of assholes, but the hunter started the physical altercation. But suddenly, a minor confrontation turns into an asshole pointing a gun in people's faces, and that's when the asshole scale tips way the fuck over to the hunter's side. I have always been taught that you do not use a gun to threaten, and that you do not point a gun at something that you're not planning to shoot. Pointing a gun at someone on a city street because they're annoying you should get your shit thrown in fucking jail.
|
|
#25
14th February 2012, 03:53 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
At face value and not taking a side in the fight, both of them are idiots. The AR guy is a fool for winding up an armed man. And Olsen is a fool for rising to it.
But seriously; "Get on the ground motherfucker. Right now." Huh. Would someone on camera really threaten someone like that? Try to force someone into an execution position? And would the cameraman really keep a stable, well-framed picture when a gun was being waved around by someone they knew to be angry? On a third viewing (and some background research) it seems that the answer is, sadly, yes. Both of these people are full of fail, and both were apparently egged on by their entourages. ETA: For clarity, I was complaining about the cameraman because it looked like he didn't think Olsen was about to open fire - a fact that he can't have known for certain. Last edited by Mako; 14th February 2012 at 03:59 PM.
|
|
#26
14th February 2012, 03:57 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#27
14th February 2012, 04:05 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#28
14th February 2012, 04:07 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
McNutty has the answer on this one. You don't pull a gun on somebody unless you're planning to kill them. If the other person isn't do anything worth killing them for then there's no justification ever for taking a sight on them.
That's not any kind of liberal, anti-gun bullshit, that's the first thing you hear in any kind of firearms training from the NRA to police academies to the military, to grandpa on the farm. If the firearm had discharged by accident and killed the animal rights guy, who would have defended the guy with the gun?
|
|
#29
14th February 2012, 04:08 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#30
14th February 2012, 04:19 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
|
|
#31
14th February 2012, 05:58 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
It's like a war between these people. Except one side uses cameras, the other uses guns.
|
|
#32
14th February 2012, 06:25 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I agree they both are. The AR guy for picking a fight, the gun guy for giving him one. He is one reason I am leery of guns around. I cannot put ANY faith in said gun owner 1. keeping his temper or 2. using sound judgement when it comes to provocation.
That said, AR guy was a jerk as well, especially if shooting pigeons (and please let them be the rats with wings that infest every city in this country) is legal in that area. The cop was out of line, because he can be. Yeah, I'm not a great cop lover.
|
|
#33
14th February 2012, 06:43 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
So these guys shoot tame, domesticated pigeons? (That's what it looks like on the video.)
|
|
#34
15th February 2012, 04:53 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Yes, they pay people to provide pigeons (which are bred or more likely caught) and placed in remote-controlled boxes. At a signal, they open the box by remote control and the shooter shoots.
|
|
#36
15th February 2012, 05:04 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
To realize why, imagine if it was dogs let out of a box, and they shot them with shotguns. And they didn't always die, but flopped about screaming, before being scooped up and killed.
That's how animal rights people feel about it. To us, they are stupid useless birds. To an animal rights person, they are as human as dogs. Or babies. Something. Shooting a bird out of a box, that is fat asshole shit behavior. They want to kill something, but are too lazy to go out and hunt.
|
|
#37
15th February 2012, 07:48 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Well, at the danger of breaking out in a shrill, Simpsonesque "Won't someone think of the children?!"
They are having their kids pick up the wounded birds and (or) stomping them to death, or tossing them in piles to die and rot. Do we really want to teach kids this is the way to deal with injured animals? For bonus shrillness, add a comment about bed wetting + fire setting + animal injury = serial killer.
|
|
#39
15th February 2012, 10:21 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
But I think you're agreeing with most other people in the thread so far.
|
|
#40
15th February 2012, 10:44 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I'm far more interested in the total "fuck the law" attitude these mouth breathers have, to shoot down an aircraft. If a drone is illegal, they call the cops. The same ones that don't do shit about their activities, and report a crime.
You don't fucking shoot down something flying around. That's a crime. Same for pointing a gun at somebody during an argument on the street. The whole shooting birds thing pales besides that rampant "fuck you and your laws" attitude these redneck motherfuckers display.
|
|
#41
15th February 2012, 10:47 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
My answer then, is, the guy shooting the tame birds and pulling a gun on someone is an asshole and a waste of oxygen. The other guy is just calling a spade a spade.
|
|
#42
15th February 2012, 10:50 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I can't be bothered to watch the videos, but the answer to the question "Who's the arsehole" is always the animal rights activist. Animal rights are a ridiculous construction at the best of times, being an activist for them is utterly absurd, and the fact that these people think they can ignore people's rights makes them, at minimum, utter arseholes.
|
|
#43
15th February 2012, 10:55 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
The pigeons are captured and collected for weeks ahead of time, then released from trap boxes only yards away from the so-called "sportsmen". The birds are generally dazed and suffering from dehydration or starvation as they are sprung out of the boxes.
Rather than mercifully being given a quick death, 70% of the birds are injured when shot and either left to suffer slow deaths or collected and killed by pigeon shoot "trapper boys" or "wringers", traditionally children, who break their necks, step on them, tear off wings, suffocate them, or cut off their heads with garden shears, among other abuses.
|
|
#45
15th February 2012, 11:28 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
FWIW, that's Bensalem, PA. One word. I used to live there.
|
|
#46
15th February 2012, 11:30 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
In that respect, these pigeon hunts don't pass the sniff test.
|
|
#47
15th February 2012, 12:20 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Yeah, I don't think it's correct to let dumb terminology like "animal rights" cloud the issue here. We've been referring to the guy as "the animal rights guy" but what he really is in this instance is an anti-animal-cruelty guy, which has merit in my book. I don't necessarily agree with the guy's approach, but the shots of the kids finishing off the pigeons at the end of the second video were pretty sickening, and I would support making it illegal to hold birds in boxes in order to shoot them the second they're released. Shoot some fucking skeet, you assholes. [here's a link directly to the kids, if you can stand it]
|
|
#48
15th February 2012, 01:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I'm pretty sure that if I challenged someone who was following me, called him a motherfucker, punched a camera person, and pulled and cocked a loaded weapon and threatened to shoot, I would be arrested as well.
|
|
#49
15th February 2012, 03:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I'm no fan of "Canned Hunts" or "Animal Right Activists" either one.
Those pigeon shoots aren't my idea of hunting. You want to kill an animal? Go find that animal in its natural habitat. Prairie Dog shooting, for instance.
|
|
#50
15th February 2012, 06:30 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
As said, "AR" rules really protect humans from inhumane behavior. Few people think animals have political rights. We ought not to follow that red herring.
The other thing we are seeing is rule by Good Old Boys. The hunt club is owned by a local businessman. The policemen are local kids. The judge runs for election in town. The AR people are outsiders. You see the same dynamic over and over again in all sorts of situations. The AR guy might even be right, but his antics will force the locals to dig in their heels.
|
 |
| Giraffiti |
| Ben Salem, Dio is the Asshole here, drive-by 'humping, Pigeons, Pigeons = City Quail, police |
|
|
Linear Mode
