In the WTF category

bobman1235

That's not paranoid, it's called nonviolent civil disobedience. Being a slave to that which you don't believe in takes away all that makes you a free human being.

I'm sorry to get so heated, but this stuff really gets on my nerves, and people who blindly accept it, or even worse support it, I just can't abide by. A society of laws also has to be a society of humans who understand that not every law has to be taken literally, and not every instance of a breach of law has to be treated the same. A child selling lemonade is not the same as an adult selling crack; a person jaywalking when there is no traffic is not the same as a person running out in front of a car. Yet in some jurisdictions, thanks to people who cannot discern the MEANING of the law in lieu of the LETTER of the law, these ARE treated the same.

PSOVLSK

bobman1235 wrote: »

A child selling lemonade is not the same as an adult selling crack...

Agreed, but a child selling lemonade on the sidewalk in front of the house is not the same as a child selling lemonade on a busy intersection.

I can't image code enforcement would have shut her down had she been in front of her house...or even in her neighborhood. If that had been the case then shame on them.

DarqueKnight

bobman1235 wrote: »

That's not paranoid, it's called nonviolent civil disobedience. Being a slave to that which you don't believe in takes away all that makes you a free human being.

I'm sure whatever officer is on the receiveing end of your torn up and thrown-in-the-face jaywalking citation will meekly accept it as a classic example of nonviolent civil disobedience.

bobman1235 wrote: »

I'm sorry to get so heated, but this stuff really gets on my nerves, and people who blindly accept it, or even worse support it, I just can't abide by.

What I accept is that, when a citizen is somewhere they shouldn't be and a law enforcement officer asks them to move along, courteously or not, they should move along. I do not accept the concept that a child or an adult should be allowed to set up a steet vending business at a busy and dangerous intersection just because the profit potential is high.

Going through life with this much pent up anger can't be any good for your heart and general outlook on life.

bobman1235 wrote: »

A child selling lemonade is not the same as an adult selling crack; a person jaywalking when there is no traffic is not the same as a person running out in front of a car. Yet in some jurisdictions, thanks to people who cannot discern the MEANING of the law in lieu of the LETTER of the law, these ARE treated the same.

If you calm down and re-read what I actually said, I never equated selling lemonade to selling crack. My implication was that unenforcement of the law in this location could lead to more serious infractions.

WilliamM2

Dude, it's a little kid selling Country Time. Get a grip. It's paranoid loonies like you that are the reason for this nonsense. You're not going to get poisoned by some 10-year olds selling lemonade.

You sure? How about 16 year olds selling lemonade?

http://www.foodpoisonjournal.com/lemonade-infosheet.pdf

NJPOLKER

WilliamM2 wrote: »

You sure? How about 16 year olds selling lemonade?

http://www.foodpoisonjournal.com/lemonade-infosheet.pdf

The kids probably put too much cheap vodka in it

cfrizz

THANK YOU, to the 3 of you that have been given a very high allotment of COMMON SENSE! The world needs more of you in it.

When civil disobedience, or making more money takes precedence over the safety of a child, the world truly will be going to hell in a handbasket.

Quite frankly some of the BS spouted in here in the name of liberty is just as bad when CL35 spouted the crap about parents shouldn't let their kids get immunization shots because of the threat of mercury!

DarqueKnight wrote: »

I just don't see this as the big bad officer picking on some poor little kid and neither does her father.

Most cities have some type of laws regulating street vendors. The age of the vendor is irrelevant. If the officer had observed an adult doing the same thing in the same location, he would have done the same thing.

If you want to sell on the street I think you should follow the law. There are public safety, and, in the case of food and beverage vendors, public health concerns. The child and her stepmother could have gotten injured. Accidents could have been caused. People could have gotten sick from contaminants in the lemonade. If this kid was allowed to do this on a busy intersection, what is to stop ten other people from setting up shop at the same intersection and selling everything from tee shirts to crack cocaine?

If this had been a kid on a quiet residential street selling lemonade to her neighbors, I doubt the officer would have said anything and indeed, a lot of cities have waivers/exemptions for these types of things (kids mowing lawns, garage sales, Girl Scout cookie sales, etc.)

If you want to live in an orderly and secure society, you can't be free to do whatever you want whenever you want. I willingly gave up the right to plant whatever type of grass, trees, and shrubs I want in my yard when I chose to build a home in a particular subdivision.

dragon1952 wrote: »

Opening a lemonade stand in front of your house is one thing. Traveling to the busiest intersection in town lacks some common sense. Where do you draw the line? What if it was an adult with a hot dog stand? You need to get permission at least, and yes, possibly a license or permit.

George Grand wrote: »

You do that in downtown Waikiki, and you're going to lose at least 24 hours of exciting vacation time. They don't play games with jaywalkers, and they love to make an example, of someone who is trying to set an example. Just saying.

F1nut

Some like and/or are willing to accept rules, regulations and big brother governement almost without question even when they defy logic. I'm proud to say that will never be me.

bobman1235

DarqueKnight wrote: »

I'm sure whatever officer is on the receiveing end of your torn up and thrown-in-the-face jaywalking citation will meekly accept it as a classic example of nonviolent civil disobedience.

NOr do I expect them to.

What I accept is that, when a citizen is somewhere they shouldn't be and a law enforcement officer asks them to move along, courteously or not, they should move along. I do not accept the concept that a child or an adult should be allowed to set up a steet vending business at a busy and dangerous intersection just because the profit potential is high.

Again, the officer did not ask them to "move along", and they did not resist. If you go back and read what I said, I think the officer should have said "you're ina busy intersection, get your **** out of here", he should NOT have taken the issue BEFORE A COMMITTEE and forced them to get a PERMIT to sell lemonade. Again, and for the THIRD time, to those like you and Cathy who don't read, I'm not against them being forced to move to a safer area; I AM against them being forced to have a permit to sell in a new, safer location. TWo separate issues. YOu guys are focused on the location, which I agree with; I am focused on the part where these guys were so gung-ho about the law that they forced a bunch of kids to get permits to sell lemonade.

Going through life with this much pent up anger can't be any good for your heart and general outlook on life.

My anger is NOT pent up, it's expressed, and I'm a very happy and calm person. Just because I get into a passionate debate does not make me an angry person.

If you calm down and re-read what I actually said, I never equated selling lemonade to selling crack. My implication was that unenforcement of the law in this location could lead to more serious infractions.

And I whole-heartedly disagree. And again you're focusing on the location, which I conceded to numerous times.

WilliamM2 wrote:

You sure? How about 16 year olds selling lemonade?

http://www.foodpoisonjournal.com/lemonade-infosheet.pdf

Well, if it happened once, OUTLAW IT. How about the hundreds of millions of cups of lemonade that have been sold that DIDN'T cause an outbreak of a virus? Find me ANY single endeavor in the world that doesn't have at least one case of a freak occurrence like this; it proves nothing.

George Grand

I jaywalked (bless me Father..) in downtown Waikiki with 2 other guys. Immediately got pounced on by a petite, Asian-American cop who demanded to see ID. No problem with me. You got a stupid ****-law that I just broke in front of you? ID time. Same thing with one of the other guys. The third guy hands her a Sears charge card which goes over like a lead balloon with her. She asks him again for proper ID, or if he'd like to elevate the entire affair? He reaches into his wallet and pulls out something equally preposterous and hands it to her. Not feeling like going to talk to a desk sergeant, I nudge this spoiled punk who thinks it is fun to be doing this and tell him "The next thing that comes out of that wallet son better be proper ID. I'm not going to jail for you over this."

Does this make me subservient? I still jaywalk in New York and Jersey.


The Little Rascals had a good lemonade episode.

DarqueKnight

bobman1235 wrote: »

If a cop ever tried to cite me for something as stupid as jaywalking (provided I didn't cause a car to skid to a stop or crash into a telephone pole to avoid me), I promise you I would get arrested for tearing the ticket up and throwing it in his face.

bobman1235 wrote: »

I'm not against them being forced to move to a safer area; I AM against them being forced to have a permit to sell in a new, safer location.

bobman1235 wrote: »

I am focused on the part where these guys were so gung-ho about the law that they forced a bunch of kids to get permits to sell lemonade.

OK. Thanks for the clarification. I now understand that:

1. You have anger management issues.

2. You have issues with authority figures.

3. You believe that children going into business on public property should not be subject to the same business permit laws as adults.

4. You believe that law enforcement officers and city code enforcement officials should not be gung-ho about enforcing municipal statutes.

Ricardo

I don't know about you guys, but I wouldn't want my 8 years old daughter selling lemonade in the busiest intersection of this city; I would personally thank that cop.

Crime

---

Tulare, CA, violent crime, on a scale from 1 (low crime) to 10, is 6. Violent crime is composed of four offenses: murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. The US average is 3.

Tulare, CA, property crime, on a scale from 1 (low) to 10, is 6. Property crime includes the offenses of burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson. The object of the theft-type offenses is the taking of money or property, but there is no force or threat of force against the victims. The US average is 3

snow

F1nut wrote: »

I wouldn't call requiring an 8 year old to have a business license for the purpose of selling lemonade at a temporary stand even close to reasonable

I agree there should be exclusions for 8 year olds selling lemonade cookies brownies or the like.

I cant fault the officer for doing his job that is what he gets paid for and the laws should be enforced equitably, the problem lies not in the officers actions but the way the laws are written.



REGARDS SNOW

wizzy

Oh yeah, let's just allow anyone to roll down to the most busy, accident prone intersection in town and set up a booth selling whatever.

I haven't read enough of the story to know if it was "handled well" or not, but what she was doing definitely sounds sketchy.

F1nut

There's a whole lot of folks here that seem to have forgotten what it was like to look at the world thru a child's eyes and what really is important in life. I feel sad for you.

bobman1235

DarqueKnight wrote: »

OK. Thanks for the clarification. I now understand that:

1. You have reading comprehension issues.

2. YOu're just trying to provoke me rather than have a serious discussion. Mature.

obieone

Isn't a business license a contract between a municipality and a business?

Are 8 year olds authorized to sign contracts?

tommyboy

Though I usually agree with you guys when threads are posted about how children are treated nowadays, this is one time I stand by the government for what they did.

I can tell this has nothing to do with money or permits, or even the law. Having a young child sell lemonade at a major intersection is not only extremely dangerous for the child, but for everyone else on the road. Think about it, everyone trying to make a right turn but slam on their breaks cause one person wants to buy 50 cent lemonade...

When you find me a link that says police took down a lemonade stand in front of kids house because they didn't have a proper permit, I promise you I be the first to **** about it.

cfrizz

Agreed & so would I.

Children are the responsibility of the ADULT PARENTS who are supposed to have the mental capacity to know what's in the best interest of the children. Obviously the father is mentally deficient if he is going to let his child risk her life to make a few bucks for a trip.

As I said, let him get a 2nd job to pay for; but don't put the kids life in mortal danger to do so.

tommyboy wrote: »

When you find me a link that says police took down a lemonade stand in front of kids house because they didn't have a proper permit, I promise you I be the first to **** about it.

obieone

LMAO! Y'all need to get a grip. Is this child in the middle of the TRACK @ Darlington?
She's on the sidewalk for God's sake!
Some of you are acting like it's a scene out of 'Airplane' or something, with cars driving up on the sidewalk

DarqueKnight

bobman1235 wrote: »

YOu're just trying to provoke me rather than have a serious discussion. Mature.

Your implication that I have displayed immaturity in this discussion is without evidence or merit. On the other hand, you have displayed a high degree of immaturity as your second post in this thread was a personal attack on me. You went further and promised that you would assault an officer and get arrested if you ever received a citation for jaywalking:

bobman1235 wrote: »

It's paranoid loonies like you that are the reason for this nonsense.

bobman1235 wrote: »

And then there should be human beings enforcing those laws who have the presence of mind, unlike someone like you, to tell the difference between crack and lemonade.

bobman1235 wrote: »

If a cop ever tried to cite me for something as stupid as jaywalking (provided I didn't cause a car to skid to a stop or crash into a telephone pole to avoid me), I promise you I would get arrested for tearing the ticket up and throwing it in his face.

bobman1235 wrote: »

My anger is NOT pent up, it's expressed, and I'm a very happy and calm person.

Let's recap:

1. Name calling and personal attacks.
2. Anger.
3. Disrespect for lawful, non-abusive authority.

Yet, I'm supposed to be the "immature" person. You should take your own advice and:

bobman1235 wrote: »

Get a grip.

bobman1235

DarqueKnight wrote: »

Your implication that I have displayed immaturity in this discussion is without evidence or merit.

Just because you express yourself eloquently does not make you mature.

On the other hand, you have displayed a high degree of immaturity as your second post in this thread was a personal attack on me.

My second post in this thread was :

Me wrote:

Moving the kids for safety - a reasonable city ordinance.

Requiring children to obtain a permit to sell lemonade? Indicitive of the decline of common sense.

I assume you're referring to the post where I called you a paranoid loonie, but of course that was like 3 words in a post that made other points that you have continued to ignore in favor of just quoting the parts of my posts that make me look bad.

You went further and promised that you would assault an officer and get arrested if you ever received a citation for jaywalking:

This is where I believe your "immaturity" is. YOu exaggerate my claims to make me appear as a villain, which I am not.

1. Name calling and personal attacks.

You were being a paranoid loonie, it's not name-calling, it's an accurate description. ANd your next quote isn't an attack at all, in the prior post you drew a connection between allowing lemonade to be sold and an intersection and allowing crack to be sold at the same intersection. So yes, "people like you" who draw those parallels are completely out of touch with reality. Again, not an attack, a statement of fact.

2. Anger.

You mistake passion for anger. THis is a text conversation and therefore visual and aural cues are often lost, but I promise you at no point during this discussion have I become angry, as, again, I've said about a dozen times now. You can quote me but can't read? Cathy comes of just as angry as I do, but she's on your side so you conveniently ignore that.

3. Disrespect for lawful, non-abusive authority.

I have all the respect in the world for lawful, non-abusive authority. ANd I would never "assault" an officer. The few times I've ever been pulled over I've been nothing but respectful and polite. I think cops put their asses on the line and deserve respect. But if I crossed a street when no cars were coming and was harassed for it? I wouldn't dream of assaulting the cop but I would stand up for myself rather than just take it and let the world turn into an authoritarian dictatorship. Yeah it's obviously a small deal but it's something I believe in. Sorry for having strong beliefs, apparently this in your eyes immediately translates into an angry, disrespectful name-caller.

DarqueKnight

DarqueKnight wrote: »

From the Fresno Bee newspaper:

"Richard Garcia, a Tulare code enforcement officer, happened to be at the same intersection to remove illegal signs left behind by someone selling tetherball poles.

Garcia told Daniela and her stepmother that their lemonade stand -- on the northwest corner of the busy intersection -- was not safe, and also that they needed a business license to sell lemonade.

He helped the pair load their ice chest and equipment into their car and then called city planners to find out where they could relocate."

Notice that the news article nowhere states that the child and her stepmother were marched down to city hall and forced to obtain a business permit.

The implication is that the officer called city planners to find a suitable location for the lemonade stand. In other words: ONE THAT WOULD NOT REQUIRE A BUSINESS PERMIT.

If the officer was so "gung-ho" about the girl obtaining a business permit, he would have shut them down and told them to go downtown and get a permit. It appears to me that the officer's focus was on RELOCATION rather than forcing the child to obtain a business permit.

I understand the girl's stepmother wanting a high traffic area for the lemonade stand. Optimum cash flow would not likely result from setting up in front of their home. However, setting up at a busy intersection was not the answer. I'm sure a manager at Walmart, or a manager at a popular supermarket, or a manager at a shopping center would have been happy to help out. I see kids selling candy, hot dogs, hamburgers, soft drinks, LEMONADE, and Girl Scout cookies at such locations all the time.

Where I live, we have farmers who set up temporary produce stands on the side of the road. Due to the transitory and often seasonal nature of their business, they don't need a business permit, but they do have to abide by certain rules:

1. They can't be at intersections.
2. They have to be in a location where customers can safely pull off and back into traffic.
3. They cannot be near a competing permanently established business such as a farmer's market, supermarket, grocery store, etc.
4. They cannot operate at the same location for over a set period of time, usually one or two days. If a produce vendor wants to operate at a specific location for a long period of time, then they must obtain a business permit.

snow

DarqueKnight wrote: »

Notice that the news article nowhere states that the child and her stepmother were marched down to city hall and forced to obtain a business permit.

The implication is that the officer called city planners to find a suitable location for the lemonade stand. In other words: ONE THAT WOULD NOT REQUIRE A BUSINESS PERMIT.

If the officer was so "gung-ho" about the girl obtaining a business permit, he would have shut them down and told them to go downtown and get a permit. It appears to me that the officer's focus was on RELOCATION rather than forcing the child to obtain a business permit.

I understand the girl's stepmother wanting a high traffic area for the lemonade stand. Optimum cash flow would not likely result from setting up in front of their home. However, setting up at a busy intersection was not the answer. I'm sure a manager at Walmart, or a manager at a popular supermarket, or a manager at a shopping center would have been happy to help out. I see kids selling candy, hot dogs, hamburgers, soft drinks, LEMONADE, and Girl Scout cookies at such locations all the time.

Where I live, we have farmers who set up temporary produce stands on the side of the road. Due to the transitory and often seasonal nature of their business, they don't need a business permit, but they do have to abide by certain rules:

1. They can't be at intersections.
2. They have to be in a location where customers can safely pull off and back into traffic.
3. They cannot be near a competing permanently established business such as a farmer's market, supermarket, grocery store, etc.
4. They cannot operate at the same location for over a set period of time, usually one or two days. If a produce vendor wants to operate at a specific location for a long period of time, then they must obtain a business permit.

Raife logic and reason has no place or effect in this disscussion between yourself and Bobman, he is looking for something to rant and rave about simple as that. He appears to enjoy this type of thing considering his blog titled Bobmans rants. Some people enjoy being outraged by little things it gives them a purpose in life that they wouldndt otherwise have and makes them feel important.



REGARDS SNOW

DarqueKnight

bobman1235 wrote: »

You mistake passion for anger.

Really? Is this a figment of my imagination or did you actually write this?:

bobman1235 wrote: »

My anger is NOT pent up, it's expressed...

---

bobman1235 wrote: »

I have all the respect in the world for lawful, non-abusive authority. ANd I would never "assault" an officer.

Really? Do you know the legal definition and standard of assault in your jurisdiction? What about battery? You might want to brush up before you throw that ticket back in the officer's face. Do you think an officer, or any other reasonable person would classify this (assured) behavior as respectful civil disobedience?:

bobman1235 wrote: »

If a cop ever tried to cite me for something as stupid as jaywalking (provided I didn't cause a car to skid to a stop or crash into a telephone pole to avoid me), I promise you I would get arrested for tearing the ticket up and throwing it in his face.

DarqueKnight

snow wrote: »

....he is looking for something to rant and rave about simple as that. He appears to enjoy this type of thing considering his blog titled Bobmans rants. Some people enjoy being outraged by little things it gives them a purpose in life that they wouldndt otherwise have and makes them feel important.

I know. One term for it is "majoring in the minors". Otherwise he would be focused on the discussion topic rather than me.

My post that you quoted was not directed toward Bobman per se, but toward the discussion participants who have managed to engage without resorting to hysterics and personal attacks, regardless of their position.

snow

DarqueKnight wrote: »

I know. Otherwise he would be focused on the discussion topic rather than me.

My post that you quoted was not directed toward Bobman, but toward the discussion participants who have managed to engage without resorting to hysterics and personal attacks, regardless of their position.

Ah I see. I thought you were still attempting to have him see through logic and reason the whole story.

No one here is heartless enough that we dont want to see Danielle go to Disney but most of us care enough that we dont want to see her get hurt either while selling lemonade.

REGARDS SNOW

Face

http://www.apa.org/topics/controlanger.html

snow

Face wrote: »

http://www.apa.org/topics/controlanger.html

But But..... im not angry im just frustrated and misunderstood



REGARDS SNOW

DarqueKnight

obieone wrote: »

LMAO! Y'all need to get a grip. Is this child in the middle of the TRACK @ Darlington? She's on the sidewalk for God's sake!
Some of you are acting like it's a scene out of 'Airplane' or something, with cars driving up on the sidewalk

There don't appear to be any sidewalks or road shoulders at this intersection. It appears to be a two-lane intersection in an agricultural and residential area.

I was curious about the intersection where this took place. I obtained these photos of the intersection of Cartmill Ave. and Hillman St. from Google Earth. According to the news article, Danielle's lemonade stand was located at the northwest corner of the intersection of Cartmill and Hillman.


This is an aerial view of the intersection of Cartmill Ave. (east-west) and Hillman St. (north-south) in Tulare, California.


This is the northwest corner of Cartmill and Hillman where Danielle's lemonade stand was located.


This is the northeast corner of Cartmill and Hillman, directly across from Danielle's location. Notice that there appears to be
some type of mobile vending business at this location and that there appears to be a dirt road extension leading to it.


This is the southeast corner of Cartmill and Hillman.


This is the southwest corner of Cartmill and Hillman.

obieone wrote: »

Isn't a business license a contract between a municipality and a business?

No. A business license or permit is an authorization to conduct business at a particular location or throughout a particular area. A contract is a legally binding agreement between two or more parties to provide goods or services on certain terms for a specified length of time.

obieone wrote: »

Are 8 year olds authorized to sign contracts?

I don't know of any municipality that gives minors the right to enter into contracts. However, a business license or permit is not a contract.

DarqueKnight

Face wrote: »

http://www.apa.org/topics/controlanger.html

What is anger?



Anger is a path to the dark side.

Fear leads to anger.
Anger leads to hate.
Hate leads to suffering.;)