Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Bad Dog Cafe' started by Dan R, May 25, 2019.
Can withering sarcasm count as a concealed weapon?
I believe these three rules (which are very common sense laden) were created for this thread. I do not think you will find PSA posters around Boston, nor anywhere else, where they are stated.
It is highly likely that there is no correlative evidence to support the claim BUT, in a very brief (but exhaustive) search I found 3 cases which MIGHT in 1 of the cases support that claim. In a geo of about 20 million people, I wont say it isn't a problem, but I'd imagine speeding and general poor decisionmaking resulted in more deaths.
It is poor form and poor behavior to give the finger even to the worst offender as they may be unbalanced people OR do something weird like follow you home OR something you don't expect. Better to forgive the trespass (regardless of degree of egregiousness, get home) and your brain will flush it away in a day or so. Versus (I like starting this sentence this way) having a moment where you 'fly the bird' and now you have months of reliving it and being upset and the whole range of emotions a good man would have.
I have flown the bird and I have had unfortunate traffic encounters and I ALWAYS regret them. I have learned a version of the three rules and I have instructed my family that they should follow them too... and, now, I do.
There are still jackwagons on the highway, but they quickly fade as I get home unscathed another day.
The US is not full of crazy people fighting in traffic and flying the bird and running down pedestrians... Most people are just coming and going and having reasonably nice lives despite reports to the contrary...
The news is just the 'odd thing' that happens or the noteworthy thing.
so, it will have the shark attack in Maui (my daughter was 1000 yards away and only heard about it on the news and laughed when my wife asked if she was scared...) or some other oddball story... I think the point of Dan's story was--> sheesh... I had double crazy happen to me and now I have to deal with it.... and I can only say 'but for the grace of eddie or whoever, most of us could be in Dan's shoes' it is a nice reminder as I return to work tomorrow... to chill the F out and just cruise to work.
there would be far fewer of us if the world was full of people that were violent. There are a few violent people and hopefully they find each other and weed each other out.
Only in Quebec.
Figure of speech. Google translate: There are enough people out there that will resort to confrontation for the littlest thing that it is prudent to err on the side of caution when dealing with strangers.
There you go with that common sense, rational perspective again, pricking the hyperbolic balloons, and injecting some reality into the thread.
The hysteria and fear-mongering is far more entertaining.
this soothes me...especially the words of the woman and the glee of the little boy and the dogs...
Only if used...
Crosswalk Rage, it's been around for decades...
Dan, maybe you shouldn't live in a Tourist Town.
The way I see it, when we chose such places to live, and our community's bills are paid by drunks and the consumers of various intoxicants, we've got to bend over backwards to keep them coming. If we kill too many of them, word will get out and they won't come back and we'll be like so many communities in the USA who cannot pay their bills.
Of course they're jackas$es, sometimes. They come down, drop thousands of dollars in our laps, then they leave. But we need them, because the money is just too good and too easy.
As long as your car is happy, that's what's really important.
Yes, and they are mostly behind the wheel of a car.
I'm not that optimistic. They're just easier to spot when they're behind the wheel.
I’m originally from Brooklyn NY. I fully understand aggressive Jaywalking and was quite adept at it at one time. To wit, one month after I got to SoCal in 1973 I received a summons from a motorcycle policeman for jaywalking Hollywood Boulevard. I was just trying to get across a busy street in a fashion to which I was accustomed.
In this case there was true maleficence on the part of the woman. She wasn’t simply trying to cross the street she intentionally provoked the driver. That must be some manifestation of mental illness.
Yeah, I miss the Charleston of the past (sarcasm). Black folk keeping their gaze averted from you; women not competing with you for jobs.
I really have had a great time everytime I've been there. I think the modern visits are better - I just like to come when the place isn't choked with outsiders - and when the temperatures are not so high as to rile up people's tempers.
Yes. You've even got to step and fetch as a driver(do everything in your power not to hit them) when there's a red pedestrian signal and they've moving too slow or have disregarded it altogether. The pedestrian, really anyone on foot is in a "safe" area legally speaking.
But this does NOT mean a pedestrian is wise to be too confident in the crosswalk, as adherence varies wildly from one community to another. In San Luis Obispo, California you're golden in a crosswalk - you could hardly be safer. Meanwhile in the French Quarter of New Orleans, you best watch your step. Crosswalks used to be about assigning fault after the injury or death, in NOLA and even now, IMO you tourists are making a big mistake just assuming you're in good shape in a crosswalk. Maybe you will be; maybe you won't. But beware: The thing is, it is possible as a ped in San Luis Obispo to be ticketed (as a pedestrian) for crossing against a don't walk signal. I have never seen a ticket issued to a ped in New Orleans, in almost 50 years' living there (mostly full time, not so much anymore).
Check the statutes. The rights are there, in law. They're just ignored out of custom. Same thing with bike riders, and even motorcycle riders. People can be outwardly friendly but they don't recognize anyone's rights to use the roads and streets except vehicles with 4 or more wheels - due to "popular usage". Juries, judges will look for a way to not apply that law as written, if they can.
However, thanks to that old man in the Buick that mowed all the people down in the street market in Santa Monica, the State of California is especially vicious in dealing with older people (even those way out of the way in the country) who prefer to continue to drive. They're presumed incompetent to do so, in my opinion, and admins and courts would rather strip away the rights of such older drivers and intimidate and cow them into being house bound. These people are often not really the "least able" but they're presumed incompetent based on calendar age alone, in CA. By comparison, states with a much larger percentage of older, rural drivers (think Wyoming) just keep renewing drivers licenses and never pay oldster drivers any mind at all. The State of California IMO has an unwritten Objective of driving these older people who insist on being self reliant, out of their state because they refuse to conform to CA biases and prejudices. CA wants youthful people they can tax and regulate to greater gain.
As this has been discussed over and over, and there is no way, short of an omnipotent bird’s eye view, of knowing exactly what happened, and since this has crossed the TDPRI line that must not be crossed, this thread is closed.
At the TDPRI a political post is any post that directly or indirectly encourages discussion of politics, politicians, political parties, political media outlets, or government public policies.
Our "off-topic" areas are not for discussion of foreign policy, global warming, job outsourcing, domestic economic policy, global trade issues, labor politics, gun rights, criminal justice policy or issues, any specific branches of government or generally any government policy on the local, state, national or international level