Spur Incident

Cray said:
It he had done what he did while the other kid was hitting his then i completely agree. However you can't defend your kid from something that has already happened.
Click to expand...

You can however, bring this to the attention of the other child's guardian (parent, minder). He did exactly that and instead of getting any satisfaction, she verbally abused him. Now how he brought this to her attention is another story and I bet he could have been more tactful, but that doesn't change the fact that 2 wrongs do not make a right and that she has to take some responsibility for the situation she helped create.
 
Cray said:
It he had done what he did while the other kid was hitting his then i completely agree. However you can't defend your kid from something that has already happened.
Click to expand...

He had no excuse for touching the other kid, but that woman did nothing to see things from his point of view before things escalated. What both parties should have done is immediately apologised for their kids behavior, then provided the appropriate discipline to their own kids themselves. That is what my parents did to me when I got into a fight (even though I didn't start it).
The point of virtue isn't who started the fight. The point of virtue is that kids shouldn't be fighting.
 
S7wede said:
You can however, bring this to the attention of the other child's guardian (parent, minder). He did exactly that and instead of getting any satisfaction, she verbally abused him. Now how he brought this to her attention is another story and I bet he could have been more tactful, but that doesn't change the fact that 2 wrongs do not make a right and that she has to take some responsibility for the situation she helped create.
Click to expand...

I do agree that she could have been punished with a suspended ban, the fact is she never got physical and he did - that is why he was banned..
 
Cray said:
I do agree that she could have been punished with a suspended ban, the fact is she never got physical and he did - that is why he was banned..
Click to expand...

Even the practice of banning people is pretty stupid. Spur isn't the law and cannot practice it fairly. If you go down that rabbit hole, should Spur ban anyone with a criminal record from attending their restaurants?

All Spur should have said is that both customers are welcome back, provided they behave better than their children.
 
C4Cat said:
Banned for defending a child? :wtf:
Click to expand...

There is something wrong with you, that we know, so there is no point in giving you any more of a response than this.

Spur can go kack, I won't go back. Not that I have been there in the past two years anyway.
 
everyone, you can now stop defending this twatnoodle.
News24 can reveal that the man, a car salesman based in Rustenburg, North West, had five cases against him between June 2005 and November 2011 which allegedly included assaulting his wife in public.
Click to expand...

he beat his wife, he deserves more than getting banned from spur, and he does not deserve your keyboard warrior aggression.

he is scum, and regardless if he was right or wrong if the ban was the right thing or not, he does not deserve any attention.

and just to make it clear, imho, if you defend him, you defend wife beating, an act of complete cowardase done only by spineless wurms who do not deserve being called human never mind being called a man. (I feel like this about any spousal abuse for the record)
 
Baxteen said:
everyone, you can now stop defending this twatnoodle.


he beat his wife, he deserves more than getting banned from spur, and he does not deserve your keyboard warrior aggression.

he is scum, and regardless if he was right or wrong if the ban was the right thing or not, he does not deserve any attention.

and just to make it clear, imho, if you defend him, you defend wife beating, an act of complete cowardase done only by spineless wurms who do not deserve being called human never mind being called a man. (I feel like this about any spousal abuse for the record)
Click to expand...

This is called polluting the well and it has no bearings on the matter we are discussing. It's a common logical fallacy.
 
Baxteen said:
and just to make it clear, imho, if you defend him, you defend wife beating, an act of complete cowardase done only by spineless wurms who do not deserve being called human never mind being called a man. (I feel like this about any spousal abuse for the record)
Click to expand...

Your opinion is wrong. Defending him in this situation does not mean you are defending wife beating.
 
S7wede said:
This is called polluting the well and it has no bearings on the matter we are discussing. It's a common logical fallacy.
Click to expand...

So he has demonstrated a pattern of behaviour (which is violence and aggression towards woman), which we should ignore?
 
Emjay said:
So he has demonstrated a pattern of behaviour (which is violence and aggression towards woman), which we should ignore?
Click to expand...

if this wasa case demanding a judgement of his past I would agree with you, but this is not such a case. We are discussing whether the punishment handed down by Spur, in this single example, was warranted. I'm arguing that it both was and wasn't, and that it should have been universally issued to both guilty parties.
 
let me spell it out for you.

he beats his wife.
he is a POS.
he has anger issues.

because we know he has anger issues, we can safely say he did not handle the situation correctly. so there is no valid reason to defend him.

and I say again, you defend him, you are pro spousal abuse, you are then also a POS, and you are also too small minded to realise it.


I want to also state, that by no means was the women in spur in the right here, she also handled the entire thing incorrectly and she should at the very least ALSO be banned.
but there is no way you can defend this twatnoodle with a clear conscience.
 
Baxteen said:
let me spell it out for you.

he beats his wife.
he is a POS.
he has anger issues.

because we know he has anger issues, we can safely say he did not handle the situation correctly. so there is no valid reason to defend him.

and I say again, you defend him, you are pro spousal abuse, you are then also a POS, and you are also too small minded to realise it.


I want to also state, that by no means was the women in spur in the right here, she also handled the entire thing incorrectly and she should at the very least ALSO be banned.
but there is no way you can defend this twatnoodle with a clear conscience.
Click to expand...

I am telling you that I can say with a clear conscience that I am not defending spousal abuse.
 
Slootvreter said:
I am telling you that I can say with a clear conscience that I am not defending spousal abuse.
Click to expand...

he is still a twatnoodle, and due to his past actions, Karma came his way, he should have a more severe punishment than being banned from a bad restaurant. he should have his arms cut off, but then again, I am a fan of a preventative punishment.

the sad thing is, what are the odds that he beat his wife that night after that incident?
what about beating his kid for not standing up for himself?
 
Baxteen said:
he is still a twatnoodle, and due to his past actions, Karma came his way, he should have a more severe punishment than being banned from a bad restaurant. he should have his arms cut off, but then again, I am a fan of a preventative punishment.

the sad thing is, what are the odds that he beat his wife that night after that incident?
what about beating his kid for not standing up for himself?
Click to expand...

KARMA? :crylaugh: You believe that kack?
 
Baxteen said:
let me spell it out for you.

he beats his wife.
he is a POS.
he has anger issues.

because we know he has anger issues, we can safely say he did not handle the situation correctly. so there is no valid reason to defend him.

and I say again, you defend him, you are pro spousal abuse, you are then also a POS, and you are also too small minded to realise it.


I want to also state, that by no means was the women in spur in the right here, she also handled the entire thing incorrectly and she should at the very least ALSO be banned.
but there is no way you can defend this twatnoodle with a clear conscience.
Click to expand...

What we have here folks, is somebody who can't discern between 2 completely different things. like most SJW's he can't see that if you don't condemn somebody because of XYZ in every circumstance, it means that you are a supporter of every nasty thing they espouse, support or have perpetrated in. Don't be like this man.
 
konfab said:
What evidence? 5 cases and no convictions?
Click to expand...

because the wife keeps withdrawing the case, because as you may already know, victim blaming is a massive thing, and abused parties do not want to be blamed.

but hey, you are clearly pro spousal abuse, so why am I even conversing with you?
 
S7wede said:
What we have here folks, is somebody who can't discern between 2 completely different things. like most SJW's he can't see that if you don't condemn somebody because of XYZ in every circumstance, it means that you are a supporter of every nasty thing they espouse, support or have perpetrated in. Don't be like this man.
Click to expand...

listen dude, I am by no means a SJW. but I am also capable of seeing the difference between a keybaord warrior like yourself, who thows around SJW like its an insult.

you are kind of missing the point.
so carry on defending a wife beater.
because regardless if the case in question is relevant to the punishment he received, he is a POS, and you are defending him.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X