Was i right or wrong

Ihatecuddles-old

TINA1984 wrote: »

What else should I call someone who assaults people over minor provocation?

Legend.

Galwayguy35

Specialun wrote: »

Herself isnt talking to me over this but i still think i was right

We were in the park this morning.we went early before the kids soccer matches kicked off.herself was running and I was playing with the dog.there was 3 dudes playing hurling.around 22ish.they hitbthe sliotar into middle of nowhere and my dog ran and nicked it. Ran after her and she ran.

One of the gus started running after her losing the plot.the asshole swung his hurley at her a few times.luckily she was too fast for him.he easily swung it at her 3 times

To cut the story short i caught the dog and went to give the sliotar back.i apolgised and said that he shouldnt swing the hurley atbthe dog as he would hurt the dog.he then says "f uck you mate.your c unt of a dog nicked my ball". Again i apolgised and said she was wrong to which he repled "if she does it again next time i wont miss" i lost it and punched him and he landed on his hole.

His mates walked over and i just strolled away

Im not too sure i i was wrong to hit the guy but he just ticked me off with his remarks.he shouldnt have swung the hurley at a young dog who was clearly messing

P.s before i get the smart comment i did boxing when i was in my teens so thats how ive a strong punch

Was I right or wrong AH

You were dead right, any scumbag that would try to hit a defenceless animal with a hurl deserves a wallop.

lorebringer

"If there were more bloody noses, there would be less war"

Sometimes, people need toi be taken down a peg or two... for their own bloody good. IMO - swinging at a dog (unless it is attacking you) is not ok and whatever that guy got, he deserved.

It's like when you hear about scumbags starting on people in the street and having their asses handed to them - you act like an ass and start things you shouldn't, you get whatever you deserve. Doesn;t matter if the outcome is not relative to the starting point, if you play with matches and such!

eviltwin

Specialun wrote: »

I said earlier that there was loads of dogs running around.if his afraid of dogs he should do his research on where he plays hurling.if he sees a lab puppy with her tongue sticking out running around in circles as aggressive then his confused big time

I hear ya, I know that my local park would be the same. I still keep mine on leads though. Its less hassle that way. As I said before there are plenty of dog parks around the place you can bring them too.

Its really not the duty of the public to leave parks if dogs are running free, parks are provided for people not pets.

I know dogs well, have kept them for years, but not everyone has so you can't expect joe soap to be able to read a dogs mood. A lot of people see a dog as a threat.

You know now the kind of dog you have so maybe its better to keep her on a lead in future. Your lucky it was just a ball this time, all you need is for your dog to jump on some toddler and you could be facing having her put down.

Specialun

TINA1984 wrote: »

there isn't really much difference. Cearly it doesn't take much provocation for you to start using your fists...

Tina are you on the wind up? Id hate to live with you.if I called a footie player an a sshole for missing a chance you would look for me to be baptised again or you would divorce me for being an animal

TINA1984

louthguy25 wrote: »

Your unreal calling the OP scummy, have you ever had a civilised conversation with anyone or do you live happily in your own lawful cloud

What would you call someone who uses his fists over minor provocation?

Not sure what you're banging on about "civilised" conversations for? what's that got to do with some scummer using his fists?

Suryavarman

TINA1984 wrote: »

You're obliged by law to keep your dog on a lead in a public place. So he's wrong there.

You do not have have the right to assault someone because they threaten to hit your precious fido. So he's in the wrong there too.

Both attempting and threatening to hit an animal tends to be frowned upon too.

No doubt though you'd consider things like laws obliging dog owners to keep their pets on a lead in a public place as intrusive statist inventions

:rolleyes: yawn.

lahalane

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

You were right to hit him, op.

But whats with all this 'moral do-gooder' crap from people on boards? You read it alot of here when the aspect of fighting someone is discussed - "Oh it's wrong to hit someone!" - "you just as bad" etc etc etc.

What was the op meant to do? take it up the hole?

So punching someone is a reasonable reaction to things like this? Ticket warden gives you a ticket while you leave your car outside post office while posting a letter? Punch the ****.

daithi1970

please don't feed the trolls..

TINA1984

Specialun wrote: »

Tina are you on the wind up? Id hate to live with you.if I called a footie player an a sshole for missing a chance you would look for me to be baptised again or you would divorce me for being an animal

I wouldn't want to live with someone who uses their fists to settle minor squabbles. Not sure what having a moan at a footballer has to do with anything?

lahalane

Specialun wrote: »

Tina are you on the wind up? Id hate to live with you.if I called a footie player an a sshole for missing a chance you would look for me to be baptised again or you would divorce me for being an animal

Would hitting the footballer who missed the chance be okay in your book too? Just wondering...

Systemic Risk

TINA1984 wrote: »

A) Why didn't you have your dog on a lead like the law says?

Why didn't you have your dog on a lead like the law says?

C) Why didn't you have your dog on a lead like the law says?

You are a broken record. I dont know the exact legislation but who cares if a 15 month old lab puppy isnt on a leash in a park. My sister met a busy body with a similar attitude to you, looked it up and there isnt any specific law on a leash, its about being able to keep the dog under control. Of course some areas and parks will have bye laws bit not all. Anyway Its not a dangerous breed and isnt going to do any harm. Have you ever broken any laws?

kingcobra

TINA1984 wrote: »

I wouldn't want to live with someone who uses their fists to settle minor squabbles. Not sure what having a moan at a footballer has to do with anything?

Oh so it's plural now? I could be wrong but I've only seen the OP mentioned in one squabble here. You're taking bigotry to the extreme. I do think the OP is in the wrong, and if he realises that he'll learn from it hopefully, as will a lot of us here. But you haven't posed your argument very well and you've made some lengthy assumptions about some people here and it really doesn't make you look like the noble sensible person you may think you are.

Specialun

eviltwin wrote: »

I hear ya, I know that my local park would be the same. I still keep mine on leads though. Its less hassle that way. As I said before there are plenty of dog parks around the place you can bring them too.

Its really not the duty of the public to leave parks if dogs are running free, parks are provided for people not pets.

I know dogs well, have kept them for years, but not everyone has so you can't expect joe soap to be able to read a dogs mood. A lot of people see a dog as a threat.

You know now the kind of dog you have so maybe its better to keep her on a lead in future. Your lucky it was just a ball this time, all you need is for your dog to jump on some toddler and you could be facing having her put down.

I wouldnt let her loose if kids were around

Systemic Risk

Systemic Risk wrote: »

You are a broken record. I dont know the exact legislation but who cares if a 15 month old lab puppy isnt on a leash in a park. My sister met a busy body with a similar attitude to you, looked it up and there isnt any specific law on a leash, its about being able to keep the dog under control. Of course some areas and parks will have bye laws bit not all. Anyway Its not a dangerous breed and isnt going to do any harm. Have you ever broken any laws?

http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/environment/animal_welfare_and_control/control_of_dogs.html

just saying there is laws in places and fines for 'dogs not kept under control'
which was clearly the case for the ops dog

TINA1984

Systemic Risk wrote: »

but who cares if a 15 month old lab puppy isnt on a leash in a park.

Other park users? as someone mentioned earlier, parks are for people, not for dogs.

Systemic Risk wrote: »

My sister met a busy body with a similar attitude to you, looked it up and there isnt any specific law on a leash, its about being able to keep the dog under control. Of course some areas and parks will have bye laws bit not all. Anyway Its not a dangerous breed and isnt going to do any harm. Have you ever broken any laws?

Your sister must not have looked very hard. All local authorities have bye-laws in place which deals with the control of dogs in public places. Clearly in this instance the scummy op didn't have the dog under control so you're kind of defeating your own point here.

Of course if the OP deemed to tell us exactly where this occurred then we might be better be able to divine what exact bye-laws are in place.

daRobot

The initial aggresseor here was the guy you hit.

Swinging at the dog with a hurley, for pinching a ball is totally not on, and reacting like he did to you verbally, is equally as aggressive.

You reacted with a similar level of aggression and thumped him. Totally just in my mind.

Specialun

TINA1984 wrote: »

I wouldn't want to live with someone who uses their fists to settle minor squabbles. Not sure what having a moan at a footballer has to do with anything?

Lets not exaggerate here.you keep calling me scum or scummer.are you doing so to exaggerate for emphasis.

somefeen

TINA1984 wrote: »

Other park users? as someone mentioned earlier, parks are for people, not for dogs.



Your sister must not have looked very hard. All local authorities have bye-laws in place which deals with the control of dogs in public places. Clearly in this instance the scummy op didn't have the dog under control so you're kind of defeating your own point here.

Of course if the OP deemed to tell us exactly where this occurred then we might be better be able to divine what exact bye-laws are in place.

Will you stop with the scummy OP crap?

gw80

AdamD wrote: »

Its a nonsense law.

what a stupid statment,

not so long ago, myself and the gf were walking on a beach there was a guy coming the other way with his dog(collie or sheepdog type yoke) off the leash, when all of a sudden the dog makes a beline for us both, now i could tell the dog was only being playfull,

i looked to the owner expecting him to call him back but he had a smile on his face and didnt open his mouth,thinking we were going to enjoy his dog as much as he does.

now my gf is nervous of dogs so i tried to intercept the dog by calling him and putting my hand out to pet him but he went straight to the gf and started jumping all over her, she was quiet scared, so the the dog got a boot in the neck, the owner wasnt too happy but he didnt really say anything.

The point being not everyone likes loose dogs even friendly looking ones, bring them to a field out the country somewhere you would,nt expect to come across people if you want to leave them off the lead to run around.

TINA1984

kingcobra wrote: »

Oh so it's plural now? I could be wrong but I've only seen the OP mentioned in one squabble here. You're taking bigotry to the extreme. I do think the OP is in the wrong, and if he realises that he'll learn from it hopefully, as will a lot of us here. But you haven't posed your argument very well and you've made some lengthy assumptions about some people here and it really doesn't make you look like the noble sensible person you may think you are.

My argument is perfectly valid. follow the laws and bye-laws and situations like this don't occur, that's the reason they're there.

As for my "assumptions" I don't think i'm wrong to assume that someone who uses there fists in a manner like this can be ascribed as anything other then a bit scummy.

Do you use violence to settle arguments?

daRobot

TINA1984 wrote: »

Other park users? as someone mentioned earlier, parks are for people, not for dogs.



Your sister must not have looked very hard. All local authorities have bye-laws in place which deals with the control of dogs in public places. Clearly in this instance the scummy op didn't have the dog under control so you're kind of defeating your own point here.

Of course if the OP deemed to tell us exactly where this occurred then we might be better be able to divine what exact bye-laws are in place.

A dog running after a ball is out of control?

Sounds pretty normal to me.

purpur1

TINA1984 wrote: »

Clearly in this instance the scummy op
.

This is idiotic - report this post

TINA1984

Specialun wrote: »

Lets not exaggerate here.you keep calling me scum or scummer.are you doing so to exaggerate for emphasis.

I consider someone who uses their fists to settle arguments, arguments where they're clearly in the wrong to begin with, as scummy.

What do you think a court of law would say in this instance?

TINA1984

daRobot wrote: »

A dog running after a ball is out of control?

Sounds pretty normal to me.

Someone else's ball?

crazygeryy

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Your post says you know you were wrong so the question is pointless.

nope not pointless your arguememt is pointless.maybe he wants a few opinions?

you were dead right.especially when there's a dog involvedand its yours.
BUT
public park dog should be on a lead.that's where your wrong.

daRobot

TINA1984 wrote: »

Someone else's ball?

Ah yeah, sure the dog would know the difference.

Ever owned an animal?

twinytwo

Fighting Irish wrote: »

You shouldn't have hit him, yes he was being a d1ck, but then again he shouldn't have to deal with your dog

Or your man could have taken a chill till they got the ball back.... instead of being a dick.... after all dog will be a dog

JonathanAnon

Specialun wrote: »

So he wasnt one bit in the wrong

A) he hit the slioter t least 20 yards from his mate.he had zero control of the ball.could he not have hit an innoceny bystander either?

he swung his hurley at least 3 times at a defenseless small animal.just because the dog nicked the ball that doesnt mean he can do what he wants

C) i pologised numerous times.i was orignally extremely polite to him.i didnt just walk up and smack him.he started the agressive tomne and continued after i apologised

There's really no point going down this route...

a) He DIDNT hit anybody with his sliotar, and if he did it's nothing to do with you (unless he hit's you)....
b) The dog took his property, and got fekn dog saliva all over something that he's gonna have in his hand. He probably over reacted, but he certainly had the right to be p1ssed off.
c) You were never gonna be friends, so I'm not really sure how you envisaged the interaction ending... a manhug? He was p1ssed off because of you and your dog. You should have just apologised (which was probably unlikely to be accepted), let him have his rant, and walk away..

Do yo have any idea if he's gonna press charges?

eviltwin

daRobot wrote: »

Ah yeah, sure the dog would know the difference.

Ever owned an animal?

The point is the other ball was being used in a game by other people, why should they have to deal with other people's dogs?

Zebra3

Specialun wrote: »

I wouldnt let her loose if kids were around

But there were kids around.

You said so in the OP. :rolleyes:

Cienciano

Yer man was a scumbag, but you were wrong too. First of all, dogs not on leads really annoys me. The law is there for a reason.
But yer man deserved something bad to happen to him

TINA1984

daRobot wrote: »

Ah yeah, sure the dog would know the difference.

And thats the problem in a public place.

daRobot

eviltwin wrote: »

The point is the other ball was being used in a game by other people, why should they have to deal with other people's dogs?

My heart would bleed for their 30 seconds of inconvenience while the owner returns the ball.

See the dog haters are arriving in droves.

Specialun

TINA1984 wrote: »

I consider someone who uses their fists to settle arguments, arguments where they're clearly in the wrong to begin with, as scummy.

What do you think a court of law would say in this instance?

Good grief.Would you put me up there with killers,rapists or paedo,s yeah?

This guy went to hurt a defenceless dog numerous times.the dog was wrong to nick the sliotar but she didnt just walk up and steal it.he has hit it miles away from his mates..i apologised numerous times..i was extremely polite before and after he BEGAN the aggression.

I would imagine if this reached a court of law it wouldnt go further than local court and 200 quid fine.neither you nor i know that for definate

daRobot

TINA1984 wrote: »

And thats the problem in a public place.

A real problem or a slight temporary inconvenience?

daithi1970

..I wonder would the aggressive hurler have had such a mouth on him if the ops girlfriend was there when it all happened??
IMO while the hurler was being a complete kn*bhead, the OPs actions could have had serious consequences..being beaten up, or being done for assault..the girlfriend is right to be mad at him for his impetuous actions..

daithi

eviltwin

daRobot wrote: »

My heart would bleed for their 30 seconds of inconvenience while the owner returns the ball.

See the dog haters are arriving in droves.

Dog hater? :rolleyes:

I'm not a dog hater, I love dogs and have kept them for years. Its because I love my dogs I don't put them at risk by letting them off the lead in public just in case they meet someone like the OP did or in case they jump on a kid and I have a hysterical parent demanding my dog being put down.

There are plenty of alternatives if the OP wants to walk them off lead, personally I use dog parks or I take them out at 6/7am when the park is empty or off the beaten track where they won't encounter walkers.

Specialun

JonathanAnon wrote: »

There's really no point going down this route...

a) He DIDNT hit anybody with his sliotar, and if he did it's nothing to do with you (unless he hit's you)....
b) The dog took his property, and got fekn dog saliva all over something that he's gonna have in his hand. He probably over reacted, but he certainly had the right to be p1ssed off.
c) You were never gonna be friends, so I'm not really sure how you envisaged the interaction ending... a manhug? He was p1ssed off because of you and your dog. You should have just apologised (which was probably unlikely to be accepted), let him have his rant, and walk away..

Do yo have any idea if he's gonna press charges?

So what if he didnt hit the dog..he certainly tried often enough..is that the same for humans..if i went to hit you its ok as i missed

I wiped the ball off my t shirt before handing it back.the dog didnt walk up and steal the ball.

I apoligised numerous times

lahalane

daRobot wrote: »

See the dog haters are arriving in droves.

Yeah anyone who disagrees with you obviously hates dogs...

blatantrereg

From a moral perspective you were right. But If you injured him he might report it to the guards. He would also probably lie about what actually happened. You could get a conviction, and it could be for something much worse than what you actually did. Not being alarmist here it doesn't sound like anything will come of it, but it's something to bear in mind if you're tempted to hit someone, especially if you're able to hurt them. Or he might seek revenge some other way against you or your dog. So you're best off not engaging in situations like that.

Personally, I wouldn't have apologised to someone who was trying to hit a dog with a stick.

eviltwin

Specialun wrote: »

So what if he didnt hit the dog..he certainly tried often enough..is that the same for humans..if i went to hit you its ok as i missed

I wiped the ball off my t shirt before handing it back.the dog didnt walk up and steal the ball.

I apoligised numerous times

Is this your first dog?

Specialun

Zebra3 wrote: »

But there were kids around.

You said so in the OP. :rolleyes:

Nope. I said i went to the park BEFORE the kids or soccer matches began.no kid in my sight

TINA1984

Specialun wrote: »

Good grief.Would you put me up there with killers,rapists or paedo,s yeah?

Don't know why you're mentioning this, it doesn't make you less of a scumbag just because these people exist.

Specialun wrote: »

This guy went to hurt a defenceless dog numerous times.the dog was wrong to nick the sliotar but she didnt just walk up and steal it.he has hit it miles away from his mates..i apologised numerous times..i was extremely polite before and after he BEGAN the aggression.

Where was this place? it it was a public park then you were in the wrong to begin with by not having your dog on a lead, do you care to even admit to that?

Specialun wrote: »

I would imagine if this reached a court of law it wouldnt go further than local court and 200 quid fine.neither you nor i know that for definate

Depends really, a poster earlier in the thread mentioned that his friend had serious brain injuries from a single punch on a night out.

it'd be some crack wouldn't it if something similar happened to the guy you hit? but hey he deserved it...

daRobot

eviltwin wrote: »

Dog hater? :rolleyes:

I'm not a dog hater, I love dogs and have kept them for years. Its because I love my dogs I don't put them at risk by letting them off the lead in public just in case they meet someone like the OP did or in case they jump on a kid and I have a hysterical parent demanding my dog being put down.

There are plenty of alternatives if the OP wants to walk them off lead, personally I use dog parks or I take them out at 6/7am when the park is empty or off the beaten track where they won't encounter walkers.

I'm not suggesting you directly. Look at some of the posts preceeding you.

I'd suggest you're overly cautious with your approach. It's not a panther you own. But that's your business.

TINA1984

daRobot wrote: »

A real problem or a slight temporary inconvenience?

A problem. Again you seem to have difficulty comprehending why these bye-laws are in place in the first place, its to prevent situations like the violent OPs occurring. Can you get your head around that?

daRobot

lahalane wrote: »

Yeah anyone who disagrees with you obviously hates dogs...

Basically, yeah.

Zebra3

Specialun wrote: »

Nope. I said i went to the park BEFORE the kids or soccer matches began.no kid in my sight

So they could've arrived at any stage while your dog was out of control?

daRobot

TINA1984 wrote: »

A problem. Again you seem to have difficulty comprehending why these bye-laws are in place in the first place, its to prevent situations like the violent OPs occurring. Can you get your head around that?

A bigger or smaller problem, than say : someone double parked and having to drive around them ?

kingcobra

TINA1984 wrote: »

My argument is perfectly valid. follow the laws and bye-laws and situations like this don't occur, that's the reason they're there.

As for my "assumptions" I don't think i'm wrong to assume that someone who uses there fists in a manner like this can be ascribed as anything other then a bit scummy.

Do you use violence to settle arguments?

I have never said you were wrong but the way you have posed your arguments has incensed quite a few people here because you're acting a little obnoxiously.

And those laws and bye-laws should be imposed by local authorities and never by slightly deranged people. The OP certainly shouldn't have punched the man but assuming he is scummy for one isolated incident about a pet he cared dearly for is going a bit too far.

And no I do not use violence to settle arguments? Why do you ask? Because I don't entirely agree with your argument?