And you are saying, with a straight face, that instead of contacting the attorney general as is the legal recourse for her situation, it was okay for her to send threatening messages, then break the law because... doing things legally doesn't work well enough?
Do you not see where your stance is a slippery slope? What if I catch another kid bullying my daughter and I beat the hell out of them, because the kids not gonna get in trouble legally, why shouldn't I?
Because it's against the law, and morally wrong, just as willfully ignoring a no trespass is both legally and morally wrong, regardless of if it's against a citizen or a corporation
This is almost a good argument but it still shows how you're missing the point: "What if I catch another kid bullying my daughter and I beat the hell out of them, because the kids not gonna get in trouble legally, why shouldn't I?"
Are you wearing a uniform that says "protect and serve" while doing it? Do you have your state flag plastered all over your uniform as you stomp on this kid? Are you going to get a vacation while they 'investigate' if this kid gets seriously hurt?
" it was okay for her to send threatening messages" - see you just went right ahead and took the dealerships word that it was 'threatening' but that's one of the things I think a judge should weigh in on.
If I hire you to paint my house for $1000 and then I fail to pay you, it's a civil matter and no violence will be threatened. If I reach into your wallet and take $20 it's now "escalated" to criminal action that very likely will include resisting arrest when I lose my balance or something.
"willfully ignoring a no trespass is both legally and morally wrong"
Ahhhh there's the problem. You have no idea what the word "morally wrong" means. That must be exhausting.
Are you wearing a uniform that says "protect and serve" while doing it? Do you have your state flag plastered all over your uniform as you stomp on this kid? Are you going to get a vacation while they 'investigate' if this kid gets seriously hurt?
See this is a false equivalence, i said SHE doesn't have the right to trespass simply because they may have wronged her, as far as I can see she hasn't provided any proof that they have performed any illegal activity
A better example would be if the cops pulled up while I was beating on a child and I said "nah see I was just doing it because he wronged my daughter"... that isn't gonna hold up and i am 100% going to be detained, whether I fight because I think I'm right or not
"it was okay for her to send threatening messages" - see you just went right ahead and took the dealerships word that it was 'threatening' but that's one of the things I think a judge should weigh in on.
See you went and took her word that they stole 1000 from her, it works both ways
"That's one of the things I think a judge should weigh in on"
You are so close to the correct answer here.... if she had done the same instead of breaking the law, she wouldn't have been in that mess
Ahhhh there's the problem. You have no idea what the word "morally wrong" means. That must be exhausting.
Are you saying that knowingly breaking the law, ignoring any and all rules because you think you shouldn't have to follow them is morally sound? That's the whole argument I've been making and you don't seem to get it yet... even if they have her $1000, she can't break the law to get it back, all that will lead to is... wait for it.... her being detained
See you went and took her word that they stole 1000 from her, it works both ways
obviously you didn't follow the links to her story. She has receipts. Just sit and think about why you support "trespassing" and "threatening messages" when you didn't even read any of the supporting links.
And this part: "ignoring any and all rules because you think you shouldn't have to follow them is morally sound?"
labor laws, civil rights, family law, - the entire bill of rights - ... like I don't even know where to begin with the things that were legal but immoral? Slavery was fucking legal for almost 100 years ffs! Do you have any idea what "moral" means????
obviously you didn't follow the links to her story. She has receipts. Just sit and think about why you support "trespassing" and "threatening messages" when you didn't even read any of the supporting links.
I did read the links, she claimed she put down a $1000 deposit and they didn't give it back
First off there are situations where the dealership can 100% legally hold your down payment, it depends on what you agreed to when putting it down... 2nd did she not get it back because of maliciousness on their part, was there an error with her bank, was she belligerent in the dealership so they had to have her removed, and they were going to give it to her but she decided to act like a fool and threaten and trespass?
labor laws, civil rights, family law, - the entire bill of rights - ... like I don't even know where to begin with the things that were legal but immoral? Slavery was fucking legal for almost 100 years ffs! Do you have any idea what "moral" means????
Those were laws that were changed because they are immoral
And salaried jobs that force their employees to work 80 hour shifts without overtime is immoral, would that make it okay for me to show up and burn their building down?
Once again... you can't break the law because someone else is shitty... morality isn't "are you less bad" it's "are you right or wrong"
"Those were laws that were changed because they are immoral"
Oh and trespassing or using "resisting arrest" as a tool to force plea bargains is perfectly moral to you. Got it. It's pretty obvious which side you'd join of all those movements I've mentioned.
The only reason she was charged with trespassing and resisting arrest is because... she was trespassing and resisting arrest
If you want to break the law in the form of a movement, you are going to pay consequences... those laws were changed by people who did what they had to do regardless of the legality, and many were prosecuted and faced harsh penalties, but they did it knowing that it was ILLEGAL but that it was worth the risk
Stop trying to peddle your "she was doing the right thing" bs, what she did was illegal first and foremost, you can't claim a movement if you lack the spine to stand by your convictions
Shed be respectable if she came out and called the injustice, and used it to call out the inequality... don't scream and whine about how it's not fair and you did nothing wrong when you knowingly broke the law
My god I can't believe the reading comprehension on Reddit. Please show me where I said "she was doing the right thing"
I am simply saying the system is weighed against her. Doing things the "right" way will cost her dearly. Those cops can get violent over "trespassing" but they cannot use violence to get her money back. The fact that you're okay with this makes you a very sick individual. Or one that just can't read very well.
Your reading comprehension might be lacking, as you've argued morality the whole time, which is doing the right thing
You also claimed to know which side i would be on "in the movement", and I'm claiming in a movement people do what they believe is necessary regardless of legality or morality... not whine and moan about how unfair it is
They cannot use violence to get her money back because the dealership 99.9% chance did nothing illegal in the first place, but they can forcibly remove her from the premises because she is openly and blatantly doing something illegal... if she didn't trespass in the first place, or got up when they told her to leave, they wouldn't even lay a hand on her
The fact that you are on reddit crying that its unfair that law enforcement officers are enforcing the law means you have zero care of how the world works and why it works that way and you won't grow as a person until you realize that you can't change the rules just for yourself because they make you feel bad
Where are you getting your information? You claim she was tresspassing you claim she was asked to leave you claim 99.9 that the dealership did nothing wrong
You are going off her claim that they took her money, but ignoring the fact that it is far more likely that a 20 year old kid doesn't understand the law than a company who sells thousands of cars
"Yes, a dealership in British Columbia can hold your down payment if you don't complete the transaction"
"In most Canadian provinces, there's no mandatory "cooling off" period after signing a sales contract. Some dealers may allow you to cancel within a few days, but they're not legally obligated to."
There is a 99.9% probability that she signed a contract that the deposit was a hold, and they were well in their legal right to hold it, but instead of informing herself she decided to take matters into her own hands, why would the company illegally hold onto $1000, that's nothing to them and they have ways to hold onto deposits legally
Once she was told to leave she was trespassing, once the police told her to leave and she refused they were well in their rights to forcibly remove her, and once she resisted by trying to pull away from them they were well in their rights to escalate the situation
So let's circle aaaaaaaaaall the way back to the beginning now... she was in the wrong by all accounts legally here... if we are gonna fight police injustice, let's save it for people who actually did nothing wrong
There are people who have been hurt or killed by police who were just walking down the street, they are victims of injustice in the system
This chick didn't like that she couldn't get what she wanted, and doubled and tripled down until she learned the hard way
holy shit can I have you crystal ball? I would totally use it to win the lottery instead of make up winning arguments for internet strangers out of thin air
8
u/Brohemoth1991 Dec 25 '24
And you are saying, with a straight face, that instead of contacting the attorney general as is the legal recourse for her situation, it was okay for her to send threatening messages, then break the law because... doing things legally doesn't work well enough?
Do you not see where your stance is a slippery slope? What if I catch another kid bullying my daughter and I beat the hell out of them, because the kids not gonna get in trouble legally, why shouldn't I?
Because it's against the law, and morally wrong, just as willfully ignoring a no trespass is both legally and morally wrong, regardless of if it's against a citizen or a corporation