RunRyder RC
 10  Topic Subscribe
WATCH
 5 pages [ <<    <     1     ( 2 )     3      4     NEXT    >> ] 3798 views POST REPLY
HomeOff Topics › Fox news crew attacks neighbor of ballon boy
10-20-2009 03:05 AM  8 years agoPost 21
classic

rrElite Veteran

All over the place!

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=8862023

Fox isn't the only news agency now to not show the whole story.
ABC has also show a tainted version.

Which is worse, ignorance or apathy? I don't know and I don't care!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-20-2009 04:17 AM  8 years agoPost 22
FrankC

rrApprentice

Ocala, Florida

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

So, in reality the guy jumped out of his car and went after the news crews, and someone tried to hold him down and stopped the attack? But, the person who responded to the attack is the one who is in the wrong?? They all should have just stood there and not tried to defend themselves??? Let me guess, if it had been a cnn guy who did exactly the same thing you would call him a hero for defending his co-workers. YEP we definitely have slanted and biased reporting. HERE.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
10-20-2009 04:26 AM  8 years agoPost 23
FILE IFR

rrApprentice

Anytown, USA 01234

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

It's obvious the guy in yellow (a well suited color for him) has undersized testes, he tried to stop an attack (that didn't happen) by approaching from behind (probably feels more comfortable with this approach) then calls out for help to bail him out. Loser.

I hope he wrecked his shoulder during the first drop.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-20-2009 04:31 AM  8 years agoPost 24
Lomcevek1

rrApprentice

Eagle River, Alaska

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Yelling, screaming, threatening, name calling etc etc is one thing, and you are free and able to do that. When someone climbs on your back and throws you to the ground, well then that is a new ball game.

I think he had every right to be pissed and get in his face, and when attacked had every right to defend himself.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-20-2009 06:11 AM  8 years agoPost 25
GimbalFan (RIP)

rrProfessor

Big Coppitt Key, FL

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Yelling, screaming, threatening, name calling etc etc is one thing, and you are free and able to do that. When someone climbs on your back and throws you to the ground, well then that is a new ball game.
Exactly. Regardless of the circumstances that was an assault -- captured on camera for everyone including a jury to see. He'll have himself a lucrative lawsuit if he hires a competent attorney.

op-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-t

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-20-2009 08:16 AM  8 years agoPost 26
Lomcevek1

rrApprentice

Eagle River, Alaska

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

There might be grounds for a lawsuit but if it were me and dude could own up to making bad choice and a good apology I would let it go. However I was not there nor do I know the facts so this is really just all academic.

Entertaining though I have to admit that.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-20-2009 08:27 AM  8 years agoPost 27
GimbalFan (RIP)

rrProfessor

Big Coppitt Key, FL

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

If it was one guy protecting a friend it would still be an assault, but not a thing which would have to make its way through the courts. But since that reporter acted while on the job, while representing his employer -- fair game. I'd sue.

op-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-thwop-t

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-20-2009 08:43 AM  8 years agoPost 28
NZ_Nitro

rrVeteran

New Zealand

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

the guy in the white shirt lives there
the guy in the yellow shirt does not, the guy in the white shirt was trying to get back to his castle the "media" were trying to stop him....... I can totally understand why he was pissed, as for the guy in the yellow shirt he should consider himself lucky to get away from the other guy, a lot of folks would go after him and smash him for jumping on his back actually what would have been good is if ALL THE NEIGHBORS got together and kicked the medias arse right off that property now VIDEO THAT!!!

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
10-20-2009 08:43 AM  8 years agoPost 29
Lomcevek1

rrApprentice

Eagle River, Alaska

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

GimbalFan Touche

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-20-2009 08:51 AM  8 years agoPost 30
pseudonym

rrApprentice

Edmonton, Alberta

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

definatly sue.

Good example of how Fox doesn't care about the facts. Their "story" that was printed is complete fiction.

Sue sue sue and then sue some more. It is the Fox way!

unspelling the world one misprint at a time.

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-20-2009 12:47 PM  8 years agoPost 31
spaceman spiff

rrKey Veteran

Tucson

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

A lot of interesting dialog here.
Stay right there, you just did what i needed you to do.

You're endangering my safety

Did you just try that again? Did you just try that again? Did you just try that again? Did you just try that again? Did you just try that again? Did you just try that again? Did you just try that again?

From behind?, from behind?, from behind?, from behind?, from behind?, from behind?, from behind?, from behind?, from behind?, from behind?, from behind?, from behind?, from behind?, from behind?, from behind?, from behind?....
Sue sue sue and then sue some more
If it was one guy protecting a friend it would still be an assault, but not a thing which would have to make its way through the courts. But since that reporter acted while on the job, while representing his employer -- fair game. I'd sue.
Fair game? ummm... lets just call it like it is, the only difference in the two situations is it is a more exploitable opportunity.

Quite a lot of drama, distortion and exploitation going on around this story IMHO.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-20-2009 03:58 PM  8 years agoPost 32
LonR

rrElite Veteran

Macomb,Mi

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

He should have kept driving and run his azz over,theres no cross walk there.

600LE,OS55,OS PowerBoost pipe,Align 610's,Spartan

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-20-2009 04:50 PM  8 years agoPost 33
spaceman spiff

rrKey Veteran

Tucson

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Agreed, they would get out of the way, but it might be important to keep in mind that the guy the driver was chasing down wasn't in front of the truck. No doubt the camera folks were being a PITA, but he was looking to create some drama, and he wasn't going to leave till he had something big to regret. Seems to be a neighborhood ambition.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-20-2009 07:25 PM  8 years agoPost 34
Havoc

rrElite Veteran

Ky.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

You can commit assault without touching anyone.

1 an unlawful act that places another person, without that person's consent, in fear of immediate bodily harm or battery.

So the guy who ran out of his truck committed assault (the threat of violence). You can't just jump out of your car and charge after someone to the extent they believe you are about to attack them. The real world is not a playground. Playground rules do not apply. Now acting in defense of another (like the guy in the yellow shirt did) puts you into a fuzzy area and you can open up yourself to liability if you get the situation wrong. However the first guy could have defended himself against the guy charging at him without being hit first. You can't escalate the situation and then claim self defense. I'm not a lawyer but I play one in off topics.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-20-2009 08:16 PM  8 years agoPost 35
classic

rrElite Veteran

All over the place!

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I'm not a lawyer but I play one in off topics.
LOL!!

Which is worse, ignorance or apathy? I don't know and I don't care!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-20-2009 10:12 PM  8 years agoPost 36
jcrack_corn

rrVeteran

End of Time

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

you missed step 1. the media was impeding the guys progress down a public street. they DO know better and in nearly all cases of a camera guy getting punched, spit on, camera broken, etc, the courts have NOT sided with the media.

both sides are correct and must assume responsibility. The media CAN camp out and harass people in public (clearly they are allowed to do so), and they must also accept that if a *reasonable* person would feel threatened by their actions then they have a right to defend themselves (and chasing away someone with a camera, slaming a camera down that was in your face, 3 inches from it, etc are NOT assault in the eyes of *reasonable* people/jury).

The driver was right to chase people out of the street and allow him to pass (much better than running them over, and much better than wasting police time with this crap) and the yellow shirt guy was right to defuse the situation. I doubt EITHER party would win anything in court. But if i had to guess, I would say the driver has the better case.
You can commit assault without touching anyone.

1 an unlawful act that places another person, without that person's consent, in fear of immediate bodily harm or battery.

So the guy who ran out of his truck committed assault (the threat of violence). You can't just jump out of your car and charge after someone to the extent they believe you are about to attack them. The real world is not a playground. Playground rules do not apply. Now acting in defense of another (like the guy in the yellow shirt did) puts you into a fuzzy area and you can open up yourself to liability if you get the situation wrong. However the first guy could have defended himself against the guy charging at him without being hit first. You can't escalate the situation and then claim self defense. I'm not a lawyer but I play one in off topics.

------------------------------------------------------------------
do it inverted
------------

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
10-20-2009 10:38 PM  8 years agoPost 37
A. Bundy

rrElite Veteran

Aurora,IL. 30W/SW of Chicago

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I think I would have stayed in the car and just blasted the horn solid nonstop until they moved.And they would.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-20-2009 11:11 PM  8 years agoPost 38
Havoc

rrElite Veteran

Ky.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

you missed step 1. the media was impeding the guys progress down a public street. they DO know better and in nearly all cases of a camera guy getting punched, spit on, camera broken, etc, the courts have NOT sided with the media.

both sides are correct and must assume responsibility. The media CAN camp out and harass people in public (clearly they are allowed to do so), and they must also accept that if a *reasonable* person would feel threatened by their actions then they have a right to defend themselves (and chasing away someone with a camera, slaming a camera down that was in your face, 3 inches from it, etc are NOT assault in the eyes of *reasonable* people/jury).

The driver was right to chase people out of the street and allow him to pass (much better than running them over, and much better than wasting police time with this crap) and the yellow shirt guy was right to defuse the situation. I doubt EITHER party would win anything in court. But if i had to guess, I would say the driver has the better case
Sympathizing with the guy's problem still doesn't mean he didn't do anything wrong. He did more than chase the guy off the street. He chased him around the van. I'd be annoyed by all the press as well but you can't have a redneck moment and expect it to end well. You run at someone like that and you should at least expect a face full of OC spray. He called the police yet didn't even wait for them so he didn't feel he was in danger from the press. He even told the operator it would be him against 20 people if they didn't show up. He was looking for a fight. He got it. Everybody wins.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
10-21-2009 06:04 AM  8 years agoPost 39
NZ_Nitro

rrVeteran

New Zealand

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

well
Sympathizing with the guy's problem still doesn't mean he didn't do anything wrong
he lives there the media does not........ bloody political correct wowsers

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
10-21-2009 04:50 PM  8 years agoPost 40
Havoc

rrElite Veteran

Ky.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

he lives there the media does not........ bloody political correct wowsers
Now you are just trolling. Yes lets just attack anyone that inconveniences us. You would get tired quick.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
WATCH
 5 pages [ <<    <     1     ( 2 )     3      4     NEXT    >> ] 3798 views POST REPLY
HomeOff Topics › Fox news crew attacks neighbor of ballon boy
 Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 

 10  Topic Subscribe

Friday, June 22 - 8:08 pm - Copyright © 2000-2018 RunRyder   EMAILEnable Cookies

Login Here
 New Subscriptions 
 Buddies Online