Comments by "nexus1g" (@nexus1g) on "Dr. Todd Grande" channel.

@Ad-Lo Christian said (from his own posting), "If you're going to do what you want to do, then I'm going to do what I want to do, but you're not going to like it." At this time he wrote that he tried to call the dog to him. He wrote that she then said that the dog won't come to him. He said, "We'll see about that," then pulled the treats in his pocket which he wrote he carries "for such intransigence." Those actions after a vague threat would make any reasonable person believe he's about to do something harmful to the dog. I'm not saying Amy's justified in her actions by any stretch of the imagination, but that situations like this don't typically escalate to this level unless both parties involved feed into that escalation.
9
@chocolatewheelchair You have claimed to be a chocolate wheelchair, however. I want a bite. I'm going to take a bite. Don't bother struggling. There's nothing you can do to stop the inevitable.
6
You skipped a crucial part. After Christian said, "...then I'm going to do what I want to do, but you're not going to like it," and he wrote that he called the dog to him. That's clearly a vague threat followed by actions that would appear to a reasonable person an attempt to make good on that threat. She told him that her dog won't come to him, and then he pulled out treats he keeps in his pocket for "such intransigence." She at that point screamed to stay away from her dog, and then he began recording. Christian definitely doesn't appear to be an angel to me in this matter. Very rarely is a situation escalated to this level without both parties feeding into it.
2
Can a narcissist stop being a narcissist?
2
@ststammers2056 Exactly. While I don't think there's anything wrong with his initially saying she it's the rules that she have her dog leashed in that area, he needs to let that be it between the two of them. If she wants to argue from that point, there's nothing any citizen has authority to do to force the issue. There's also no sense in arguing with someone who looks at a sign after you point it out to them then continues to argue. You're not going to ever convince someone like that. It'd have to be taken up with police if he's that adamant about it, but nothing good comes from making vague threats.
2
Ha. If you were to only tell the truth, you'd be mute due an epistemological quandary. Never thought of that.
1
V J What's your point in asking this question?
1
@lizadeeza You're just trying to argue my point with a tu quoque and a straw man. I never said she was a reasonable person. I never claimed she was innocent, and, in fact, said exactly the opposite in my first comment for people exactly like you. But you can't read completely, comprehend completely and/or reason soundly through your emotions. That makes you an unreasonable person. Just because she's an evil, vindictive, idiotic, entitled, self-serving sack of flesh doesn't mean that he must be any better.
1
@zotaninoron3548 Is that appropriate conduct for every day citizens to use vague but direct threats and take actions which would lead a reasonable person to believe that they're going to make good on that threat in order to get people to follow the rules?
1
@chocolatewheelchair I've no idea what you're trying to reference.
1
@Taniesha_S You're showing a lack of nuance and reason. It's almost like you, and others who reason along the same lines, feel in order to sufficiently despise her actions, the person she acted against must be a pristine angel of goodness and law, or otherwise above reprimand for anything. Or, you feel threatened that it's in some way an attempt to lessen her poor actions. You attack anyone, even me just explaining what happened to someone who was unaware, for saying anything that disrupts that necessary delusion. It doesn't have to be the former, and I've no intent of the latter, hence my acknowledgement that this doesn't excuse her in any way at the end of my original post. It was put there specifically for people like you, but you can't even read it or you don't want to comprehend it. I was replying to someone who didn't understand where the threat was to explain that part to that individual. I get bombarded with ignorant comments from people like you who can't see past their own feelings.
1
@iamcasihart Thanks for sharing that, but that doesn't have to do with me or what I said at all.
1
@vercingetorixa7613 And yet another person who can't be bothered to read the context in which a comment is made comes in to assert their opinion... Next time, if you can't be bothered to take the time to understand what you're commenting on, save everyone the aggravation and just not reply. I know this is harsh, but I have already chastised about 3 different people already that you completely skipped over to write essentially the same damn thing as they did. Your reply has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with my comment. I NEVER said what she did or didn't feel. It's .... JUST READ THINGS and take a moment to COMPREHEND them.
1
@33johnson19 Borderline hate speech. Genetics does not create bias.
1