ADVERTISEMENT

Black man asks for dog to be put on leash...woman calls 911

Christian Cooper said, “That’s when I started video recording with my iPhone, and when her inner Karen fully emerged and took a dark turn…”
So it's not in the video. And the only thing she expresses interest in during the video is him recording her. Again and again. So it's the videoing that sets her off, that she complains about, that she confronts him over. She didn't charge at him and threaten him until she saw him pull his phone out. And her threat to HIM is that he's threatening HER life. Not the dog.

That's what I thought. It wasn't about the treats at all. Thanks for the confirmation.
 
So it's not in the video. And the only thing she expresses interest in during the video is him recording her. Again and again. So it's the videoing that sets her off, that she complains about, that she confronts him over. She didn't charge at him and threaten him until she saw him pull his phone out. And her threat to HIM is that he's threatening HER life. Not the dog.

That's what I thought. It wasn't about the treats at all. Thanks for the confirmation.
Holy shit, you're a mess. She was upset that he tried to lure her dog away from her and then she was also upset that he started recording her. You're an absolute f*cking idiot.
 
What an overwhelming sense of accomplishment you must feel.
He proved my point. He didn't mean to but TJ ain't the brightest bulb in the chandelier.

He said she then yelled at him, “don’t you touch my dog.” Christian Cooper said, “That’s when I started video recording with my iPhone, and when her inner Karen fully emerged and took a dark turn…”
 
If nothing else it demonstrates that Tarheel is once again wrong about a component of this story.
Congrats. The entire point of offering treats to unleashed dogs is as a deterrent to irresponsible dog walkers. They don't like strangers calling or feeding their dog. So? What bigger point do you think that makes?
 
  • Like
Reactions: artradley
Holy shit, you're a mess. She was upset that he tried to lure her dog away from her and then she was also upset that he started recording her. You're an absolute f*cking idiot.
LOL...you were asked to provide proof that, during her diatribe, she expressed ANY concern for her dog. You failed. That's on you.
 
Congrats. The entire point of offering treats to unleashed dogs is as a deterrent to irresponsible dog walkers. They don't like strangers calling or feeding their dog. So? What bigger point do you think that makes?

It's the crutch he's been using the entire thread to place blame on the individual that was politely asking someone to obey a posted law.
 
The entire point of offering treats to unleashed dogs is as a deterrent to irresponsible dog walkers.
Can you point to any place in any NYC Parks Department literature where they encourage private citizens to self-police leash law violators by trying to lure their dog away with treats? Because that doesn’t seem like the type of behavior that the authorities would condone.
 
Can you point to any place in any NYC Parks Department literature where they encourage private citizens to self-police leash law violators by trying to lure their dog away with treats? Because that doesn’t seem like the type of behavior that the authorities would condone.
The authorities would have preferred she be in fear of her life and shoot him.
 
Can you point to any place in any NYC Parks Department literature where they encourage private citizens to self-police leash law violators by trying to lure their dog away with treats? Because that doesn’t seem like the type of behavior that the authorities would condone.

Can you point to literature that forbids it?
 
LOL...you were asked to provide proof that, during her diatribe, she expressed ANY concern for her dog. You failed. That's on you.
She yelled “Don’t you touch my dog!” seconds before he started recording, and then while he was still recording she told the 911 operator twice that he was threatening her and her dog.

But in your tiny, f*cked up brain she wasn’t upset about “the dog treat thing” and was only upset about his phone based on the fact that she didn’t mention the dog during a very specific 5-second ‘diatribe’ snippet of the video.

It’s a shame that your pride precludes you from realizing just how stupid you sound, because right now you’re off the charts.
 
Can you point to literature that forbids it?
Do you honestly believe the authorities recommend private citizens take matters into their own hands like that? Really? It’s the kind of thing that can easily trigger a confrontation that leads to injuries or worse.

This guy hasn’t been deputized to teach people lessons. Politely ask the owner to leash the dog, as he initially did. If the owner tells you to go pound sand then notify the authorities and let them handle it.
 
I had a buddy whose sicko neighbor fed his Black Lab broken glass mixed with hamburger, presumably.

I would never allow someone I am in a confrontation with feed my dog anything.

The crazy woman is totally wrong, but he should discontinue his little treat practice.
 
Do you honestly believe the authorities recommend private citizens take matters into their own hands like that? Really? It’s the kind of thing that can easily trigger a confrontation that leads to injuries or worse.

This guy hasn’t been deputized to teach people lessons. Politely ask the owner to leash the dog, as he initially did. If the owner tells you to go pound sand then notify the authorities and let them handle it.

There is only one behavior in this situation that is not only recommended but required and it has nothing to do with treats despite your dogged efforts.
 
Can you point to any place in any NYC Parks Department literature where they encourage private citizens to self-police leash law violators by trying to lure their dog away with treats? Because that doesn’t seem like the type of behavior that the authorities would condone.
I'm sure it doesn't. So? Again, what is the bigger point you think that makes?
 
I'm sure it doesn't. So? Again, what is the bigger point you think that makes?
My point is that it’s a really bad idea that one day will probably will get him into a fight. But several posters here think it’s a brilliant policy, so evidently I’m swimming against the current.
 
My point is that it’s a really bad idea that one day will probably will get him into a fight. But several posters here think it’s a brilliant policy, so evidently I’m swimming against the current.

I am sure he appreciates your concern for his safety.
 
She yelled “Don’t you touch my dog!” seconds before he started recording, and then while he was still recording she told the 911 operator twice that he was threatening her and her dog.

But in your tiny, f*cked up brain she wasn’t upset about “the dog treat thing” and was only upset about his phone based on the fact that she didn’t mention the dog during a very specific 5-second ‘diatribe’ snippet of the video.

It’s a shame that your pride precludes you from realizing just how stupid you sound, because right now you’re off the charts.
LOL...the video tells the tale no matter how much you try to spin it. When she sees him turn the camera on she jumps up dragging her dog by it's neck and repeatedly tells him to turn it off. And that's all she talks about. She emphasizes that it's not the dog when she threatens him with the call. No mention of the dog...only that he's somehow threatening HER life. Since we can attribute whatever we like to her based on our own desires, I'll say she mentioned the dog during the phone call only because it was thrashing wildly as she choked it. It certainly never occurred to her prior to that.

I know you're going to believe whatever you want regardless of the facts but you can't explain her actions captured on the video away. She wasn't concerned about the dog...she only cared that she was being videoed. Her words. Her actions. "Don't touch my dog!" even if I drag it by it's neck 20 feet to confront you.

Spin away, clown.
giphy.gif
 
LOL...the video tells the tale no matter how much you try to spin it. When she sees him turn the camera on she jumps up dragging her dog by it's neck and repeatedly tells him to turn it off. And that's all she talks about. She emphasizes that it's not the dog when she threatens him with the call. No mention of the dog...only that he's somehow threatening HER life. Since we can attribute whatever we like to her based on our own desires, I'll say she mentioned the dog during the phone call only because it was thrashing wildly as she choked it. It certainly never occurred to her prior to that.

I know you're going to believe whatever you want regardless of the facts but you can't explain her actions captured on the video away. She wasn't concerned about the dog...she only cared that she was being videoed. Her words. Her actions. "Don't touch my dog!" even if I drag it by it's neck 20 feet to confront you.

Spin away, clown.
giphy.gif
She objected to him trying to lure her dog away while he was trying to lure her dog away and she objected to him recording her while he was recording her. I'm not sure why this is beyond the scope of your comprehension.

At any rate, she expressed concern about her dog three times in less than two minutes - once directly to him moments before he started recording and then again twice to the 911 operator while he was still recording. But you inexplicably continue to insist that she wasn't upset about "the dog treat thing" because she didn't mention the dog during an extremely specific 5-second snippet of the video.

I don't have to spin anything. Your stupidity is on full display.
 
She objected to him trying to lure her dog away while he was trying to lure her dog away and she objected to him recording her while he was recording her. I'm not sure why this is beyond the scope of your comprehension.

At any rate, she expressed concern about her dog three times in less than two minutes - once directly to him moments before he started recording and then again twice to the 911 operator while he was still recording. But you inexplicably continue to insist that she wasn't upset about "the dog treat thing" because she didn't mention the dog during an extremely specific 5-second snippet of the video.

I don't have to spin anything. Your stupidity is on full display.
Good job...spinning like a top. And thanks again for proving my point. The best part is you don't even know it.
 
She objected to him trying to lure her dog away while he was trying to lure her dog away and she objected to him recording her while he was recording her. I'm not sure why this is beyond the scope of your comprehension.

At any rate, she expressed concern about her dog three times in less than two minutes - once directly to him moments before he started recording and then again twice to the 911 operator while he was still recording. But you inexplicably continue to insist that she wasn't upset about "the dog treat thing" because she didn't mention the dog during an extremely specific 5-second snippet of the video.

I don't have to spin anything. Your stupidity is on full display.

She's so concerned about the the safety of her dog that she lets it run around off leash illegally in a public park.
 
My point is that it’s a really bad idea that one day will probably will get him into a fight. But several posters here think it’s a brilliant policy, so evidently I’m swimming against the current.
You think this is an important point to establish in this case? That it's a bad idea to give a treat to someone else's dog? Do you have anything at all to say regarding how this point relates to the women's racist behavior? I'm dying to hear the punchline here.
 
Actually, it was. He never threatened her. He never approached her. She moved toward him. Pretty much her whole phone call was a false report.
ME: Look, if you’re going to do what you want, I’m going to do what I want, but you’re not going to like it.

HER: What’s that?

ME (to the dog): Come here, puppy!



That. Is. A. Threat.

Case dismissed.
 
ME: Look, if you’re going to do what you want, I’m going to do what I want, but you’re not going to like it.

HER: What’s that?

ME (to the dog): Come here, puppy!

That. Is. A. Threat.
Baloney.

She screeched like she was going to be attacked on her call.
Give the bitch the full justice system treatment. Li'l nugget on her resume to report for future job apps.
 
Baloney.

She screeched like she was going to be attacked on her call.
Give the bitch the full justice system treatment. Li'l nugget on her resume to report for future job apps.
Being nervous isn’t a crime. She told police that an African-American man was threatening her and her dog, and that’s exactly what was happening.

Think for a moment about the most important woman in your life. It could be your wife or your daughter or your mother or anyone close to you. Take your pick. Now imagine that she’s in a public park and a stranger tells her “I’m going to do what I want and you’re not going to like it,” then proceeds to try to lure her dog away with treats and records her with his phone despite her repeatedly asking him to stop.

Would you consider that threatening behavior?

Don’t even bother answering, because you know damn well you’d be lying if you said no.
 
  • Like
Reactions: The Tradition
Let’s make it posting privileges. How long are you willing to sit on the sidelines?
Well, that's pretty anti-climactic. Forever. This is but an idle amusement. Not that I think it will come into play.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT