megan_ Posted September 30, 2015 Share Posted September 30, 2015 The rangers weren't patrolling, they were called. It's not because of the leash law, it's because of the way they assaulted him over it.. that's obviously where the contention is I'd have thought. But you don't know what led to this. When I've asked someone nicely to put their dog on leash in an on leash area, I've been called a "f****** c***" among other things. Maybe they asked him, he refused, they asked again, he threatened them, then they tackled him. Should they just have walked away from crazy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katdogs Posted October 1, 2015 Share Posted October 1, 2015 Dog wanted to play the wrestling game too, and kept checking in with the other bloke and then the female. Good dog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lhok Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 Another update this time from the news. news story. --Lhok Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhou Xuanyao Posted October 7, 2015 Author Share Posted October 7, 2015 Bastards. Sounds like the cops are going to nail them for it after all... and then they're going to get a pounding if they end up in Grafton, see how good his Karate does him then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheena Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 I can't watch it as my download would be all used up to watch a video that long....what's happening Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhou Xuanyao Posted October 7, 2015 Author Share Posted October 7, 2015 Interviewing the bloke, he says he has an ongiong neck injury (obviously, given the hold) and that they were also punching him repeatedly on the side of the head and neck. Police are saying that they're still investigating but charges are likely, and that the young guy is no longer with the council. A Coffs Councillor has also spoken out in support of the victim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salukifan Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 (edited) Interviewing the bloke, he says he has an ongiong neck injury (obviously, given the hold) and that they were also punching him repeatedly on the side of the head and neck. Police are saying that they're still investigating but charges are likely, and that the young guy is no longer with the council. A Coffs Councillor has also spoken out in support of the victim. The most astounding part of that news story was that the dog owner actually managed to have his dog on a lead for it. If he'd done that when asked.... Edited October 7, 2015 by Haredown Whippets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhou Xuanyao Posted October 7, 2015 Author Share Posted October 7, 2015 How would you know? If he'd done that when asked then what? So if he refuses then that gives them a right to beat him up? Maybe that's cool by your world view and you're entitled to your opinion, but it isn't cool by mine, it's starting to sound like it isn't cool by the police's either, and it won't be cool by their cell mates, so this incident is starting to look up--could turn out to be a nice little warning to the other tough guys to pull their heads in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salukifan Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 How would you know? If he'd done that when asked then what? So if he refuses then that gives them a right to beat him up? Maybe that's cool by your world view and you're entitled to your opinion, but it isn't cool by mine, it's starting to sound like it isn't cool by the police's either, and it won't be cool by their cell mates, so this incident is starting to look up--could turn out to be a nice little warning to the other tough guys to pull their heads in. My guess is that the incident would never have occurred. The owner needs to step up and take some responsibility for that. No, it doesn't justify excessive use of force but where I sit, nothing justifies a person blowing off the law because it suits them to. The fact he'll leash his dog for the TV cameras and not his community? Well that's telling now isn't it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhou Xuanyao Posted October 7, 2015 Author Share Posted October 7, 2015 (edited) No he doesn't need to take any responsibility for the assault whatsoever. The issue of the dog being off the lead and the assault are completely separate, the former does not justify the latter in even the smallest degree. Edited October 7, 2015 by Lee Kum Kee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salukifan Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 No he doesn't need to take any responsibility for the assault whatsoever. The issue of the dog being off the lead and the assault are completely separate, the former does not justify the latter in even the smallest degree. I've already said that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhou Xuanyao Posted October 7, 2015 Author Share Posted October 7, 2015 Then he doesn't need to take responsibility because he's not responsible. The leash issue is a minor by-law and whether or not he should have obeyed it is another discussion not relevant to this one. Earlier you said that he created the situation and that had the dog bitten his attackers and been subsequently put down that would have been his fault as-well, would you like me to quote you? Nice logic there. Like I said at the end of the day nothing you say is really 'wrong', it's just a differing, albeit distasteful opinion in my view--differing values. I think you've drawn a few parallels in your own mind as this discussion has progressed and realized the same thing but still want to hang on to a thread of 'blaming him' in some way so you don't let him off scot-free for breaking the leash law Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salukifan Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 (edited) Then he doesn't need to take responsibility because he's not responsible. The leash issue is a minor by-law and whether or not he should have obeyed it is another discussion not relevant to this one. Earlier you said that he created the situation and that had the dog bitten his attackers and been subsequently put down that would have been his fault as-well, would you like me to quote you? Nice logic there. Like I said at the end of the day nothing you say is really 'wrong', it's just a differing, albeit distasteful opinion in my view--differing values. I think you've drawn a few parallels in your own mind as this discussion has progressed and realized the same thing but still want to hang on to a thread of 'blaming him' in some way so you don't let him off scot-free for breaking the leash law I'm more than capable of remembering what I wrote. I think I'm also more than capable of understanding my train of thought without your assistance too. The reason the rangers were called was ... because this guy's dog was offlead. He is the reason the rangers where there, yes? My guess is his response when asked to leash his dog wasn't "yep, no worries guys". Then yes, his refusal to obey a minor law is the catalyst for what followed. It doesn't justify it but it CAUSED it. So it goes like this. Obey the damn laws. Even if you think they are minor. Then you avoid the attention of heavy handed people who appear to have overstepped the mark and probably should have called the police before deciding to use force. My guess is they have no training. So now one man is out of a job and rate payers will be shelling out cash because someone thought they were above the law. I don't call that a good result for anyone. A permanent neck injury is a high price to pay so I don't think he's getting of scott free at all. An ugly situation all round. Best avoided by not behaving like a prat in the first place don't you think? That goes for everyone involved. The best way of avoiding heavy handed law enforcement is not to break the law. I find nothing "distasteful" in that statement whatsoever. Edited October 7, 2015 by Haredown Whippets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhou Xuanyao Posted October 7, 2015 Author Share Posted October 7, 2015 No, his refusal, if that's what happened, didn't cause it. They caused it when they assaulted him. It was their choice to react that way, their actions, their choice, their responsibility. Each individual is the cause of their own behaviour, no-one else is responsible. The best way to avoid heavy handed law enforcement is to force them not to be heavy handed by creating a society that doesn't accept it and a culture that will ensure that they end up charged and in jail when they overstep the mark. One man is out of a job because he assaulted a citizen on the beach, and rate payers are shelling out cash for a new ute because the morons are not capable of driving responsibly on a beach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salukifan Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 (edited) No, his refusal, if that's what happened, didn't cause it. They caused it when they assaulted him. It was their choice to react that way, their actions, their choice, their responsibility. Each individual is the cause of their own behaviour, no-one else is responsible. The best way to avoid heavy handed law enforcement is to force them not to be heavy handed by creating a society that doesn't accept it and a culture that will ensure that they end up charged and in jail when they overstep the mark. One man is out of a job because he assaulted a citizen on the beach, and rate payers are shelling out cash for a new ute because the morons are not capable of driving responsibly on a beach. I only wish that the solution was as easy as you suggest. The question you might want to start asking yourself is what causes "heavy handed law enforcement". And where is the society that obeys laws as they expect law enforcement officers to?? What you don't and will never see in the paper is the human cost of law enforcement on the people who do it. When you work with people who are abused, assaulted, bitten, spat on on a regular basis, who'll tell you they'd rather raid an OMCG meth lab than walk through a door into a family violence situation or execute a child recovery order, or who casually inform you they're awaiting the results of their latest HIV test as a result of simply doing their job, you start to realise that for some members of the community, law enforcement officers are punching bags no matter how restrained they are. Does it justify them using excessive force on others. Of course not. But what it does create is a situation when they simply never know how their shift will go and whether not they're going to casualty before they clock off. That does tend to colour my views of people behaving like idiots when others are simply trying to do their jobs. How do you deal with the choices and actions of those who overstep the mark? You tell me. They generally aren't bad people or they don't start that way. Society never accepts it and it judges it with the benefit of hindsight and pretty much no understanding of the demands placed on people, most of whom who are trying to do a decent job. We constantly wean out those who cannot deal with it and throw the book at those who overstep the mark. That is as it should be. I personally think its a shame the rest of them have to continue to shrug off the abuse, disdain and violence directed at them. So when some idiot cheerfully walks his dog on lead along a beach for the TV cameras when he refused to it for his community, and you can see the dollar signs in his eyes as he talks to the camera about how he's a victim, I do find it difficult to consider him in as a innocent. I think, "gee but for you getting your hand off it and being a responsible dog owner, none of this would ever have happened". Pardon me, my cynicism is showing. I'll usually be on the side of law enforcement officials and show little sympathy for those who antagonise them. You and I have sparred long enough for us both to know that. That doesn't for a second mean I will ever condone law enforcement behaving like thugs - it is actually my job to ensure that they obey the law and I take it damn seriously. This is a particularly difficult week for those who work in law enforcement. That does not justify any person who is authorised to use force for law enforcement over stepping the mark. I doubt any such authorisation was available to the rangers. But I can understand what drives them to it at times. Edited October 7, 2015 by Haredown Whippets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhou Xuanyao Posted October 7, 2015 Author Share Posted October 7, 2015 (edited) It's a difference in values, as I mentioned before. I don't think you're 'wrong', it's a subjective matter, I just don't like your opinion. You say you'll usually side with law enforcement, whereas in my case, I will defend the rights of the accused in the face of government abuses, often but not necessarily for their sake, but for the sake of upholding the values I believe in for society as a whole--just as courts do. Maybe I should have been a defence lawyer. To me, all individuals have certain rights in this country. This is not a lawless society of corruption and impunity where jackboots rule and do as they wish even though they too often do, so for the sake of a civilized society where life, liberty and peoples rights are respected there can be no exceptions and no excuses for government abuse of citizens. Obviously now we are going into it a bit more than might be necessary, but suffice to say we disagree and I sympathise with abusive law enforcement about as much as you do with the accused. Edited October 7, 2015 by Lee Kum Kee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhou Xuanyao Posted October 7, 2015 Author Share Posted October 7, 2015 Hang on, are you a prosecutor? I will ROFL if you are, but then a few things will make sense, I know you're in the legal field in some capacity Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salukifan Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 (edited) It's a difference in values, as I mentioned before. I don't think you're 'wrong', it's a subjective matter, I just don't like your opinion. You say you'll usually side with law enforcement, whereas in my case, I will defend the rights of the accused in the face of government abuses, often but not necessarily for their sake, but for the sake of upholding the values I believe in for society as a whole--just as courts do. Maybe I should have been a defence lawyer. To me, all individuals have certain rights in this country. This is not a lawless society of corruption and impunity where jackboots rule and do as they wish even though they too often do, so for the sake of a civilized society where life, liberty and peoples rights are respected there can be no exceptions and no excuses for government abuse of citizens. Obviously now we are going into it a bit more than might be necessary, but suffice to say we disagree and I sympathise with abusive law enforcement about as much as you do with the accused. Trust me when I say it would be the fast track to a level of cynicism that makes me look like Pollyanna. Your much vaunted values wouldn't last long. Your first dog cruelty defence would see to that. Edited October 7, 2015 by Haredown Whippets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Salukifan Posted October 7, 2015 Share Posted October 7, 2015 (edited) Hang on, are you a prosecutor? I will ROFL if you are, but then a few things will make sense, I know you're in the legal field in some capacity No. Not a prosecutor. Edited October 7, 2015 by Haredown Whippets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zhou Xuanyao Posted October 7, 2015 Author Share Posted October 7, 2015 You gotta do what you gotta do when you're an Indian, when you become a chief you can choose your work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now