• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Boy fatally shot after 'ding dong ditch' doorbell-ringing prank, police say

RF667799 said:
I don't see where there is a penalty.
Click to expand...


The EPA's penalties for contaminating a drainage ditch vary significantly based on the nature and intent of the violation, with potential criminal penalties including fines of up to $50,000 per day and imprisonment for knowing violations of the Clean Water Act, and civil penalties up to $66,712 per day per violation.

en.wikipedia.org

Clean Water Act - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
Allan said:
The EPA's penalties for contaminating a drainage ditch vary significantly based on the nature and intent of the violation, with potential criminal penalties including fines of up to $50,000 per day and imprisonment for knowing violations of the Clean Water Act, and civil penalties up to $66,712 per day per violation.

en.wikipedia.org

Clean Water Act - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...

Anywhere it is sprayed can contaminate a drainage ditch. You read the part on the hazmat label that says it's rainproof in a couple hours?

Regardless, nobody here who has been barking about being entitled to have their dog shit on someone else's property can say much about it.

Ain't that cool?
 
RF667799 said:
Anywhere it is sprayed can contaminate a drainage ditch. You read the part on the hazmat label that says it's rainproof in a couple hours?

Regardless, nobody here who has been barking about being entitled to have their dog shit on someone else's property can say much about it.

Ain't that cool?
Click to expand...
You think there is eqivalence between dog poop and Round Up?

This gets worse for you with every post.
 
Allan said:
The EPA's penalties for contaminating a drainage ditch vary significantly based on the nature and intent of the violation, with potential criminal penalties including fines of up to $50,000 per day and imprisonment for knowing violations of the Clean Water Act, and civil penalties up to $66,712 per day per violation.

en.wikipedia.org

Clean Water Act - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
Click to expand...

From your source:

As of the 2023 Supreme Court rule Sackett v. EPA, only "relatively permanent" waters (such as streams, oceans, rivers and lakes) connected to "navigable waters," and wetlands that are "indistinguishable" from such waters, are covered under the CWA.

Oh my. The roadside ditch was hardly a "stream, ocean, river, or lake" and certainly wasn't navigable except under certain conditions by a newspaper sail boat.

Struck out, Allan.
 
If any dog were to sully my lawn, they would meet certain legal action. My property values are extremely sensitive !

If any child were to ding dong ditch me, why I would consider their shooting partly their responsibility!

Betunia, get the gat!
Skrrrrr!

🔫👴
 
NolanVoyd said:
You think there is eqivalence between dog poop and Round Up?

This gets worse for you with every post.
Click to expand...

No, there is no equivalence. Trespassing to dump dog poop on someone's yard is a crime, aside from just not being very neighborly.

Maybe if you had used Round Up, you wouldn't have the rodent problem that attracts all those snakes up to your house.
 
Last edited:
RF667799 said:
No, there is no equivalence. Trespassing to dump dog poop on someone's yard is a crime, aside from just not being very neighborly.
Click to expand...
Ok, but we arent talking about tresspassing to dump poop on somones yard. We are talking about walking a dog down the sidewalk and it steps onto your lawn to relieve himself........
 
NolanVoyd said:
Ok, but we arent talking about tresspassing to dump poop on somones yard. We are talking about walking a dog down the sidewalk and it steps onto your lawn to relieve himself........
Click to expand...

Why can't it step out into the right-of-way on the other side of the sidewalk?

And if you're told by the homeowner to get your dog off his property, that's what you have to do immediately, else....
 
OrphanSlug said:
****ing idiots, all of them. The kids for following yet another TikTok trend / challenge and the home owner (or whoever) for opening fire on the kid running away and killing him.

All senseless stupidity.
Click to expand...

Kids ding dong ditching is not new... and nobody was shot and killed over it back in the day.
 
Since the thread is off the rails anyway, thought I might add something related and mildly off topic.

Kids harassing neighbors with Ring dong ditch games late at night are not the only humans to be confronted by an unhinged homeowner with an itchy trigger finger. A woman and her friend encountered such an ogre when they mistakenly arrived at the wrong house.

The victim told police she was driving to a friend's house for the first time at about 10 p.m. Aug. 31 when she got lost and ended up at Rawicki's house by mistake, police said in an arrest affidavit.

She started walking up the driveway when she realized she was at the wrong house, and Rawicki, who was outside at the time, attacked her, according to officers.

He's accused of grabbing her by the wrist and pinning her arm behind her back, but the victim called for her friend during the fight, and the friend ran over, police said.

Rawicki let go of the woman and threw her on the ground, then he went inside his house and grabbed his gun as the victim and her friend got in the victim's car, according to investigators.

He started shooting at the car as they fled, and investigators found 17 casings in front of his home, according to the report. Neither of the victims sustained gunshot wounds, police said

Rawicki's explanation for the assault is equally bizarre.

After his arrest, Rawicki told police he thought the woman was a sex worker when she approached them in the driveway, and he attacked her "out of fear for his wife's safety," officers said.

Woman walks up to wrong house, then man shoots at her 17 times, Florida cops say, The State Columbia, SC via MSN, 9/4/2025
 
Geoist said:
Dogs crapping on lawns is a fact of life. If you can't handle that reality then I suggest starting a petition to ban dogs.
Click to expand...
Some truth to that. Without dogs, you wouldn't have or need the ASPCA, or the many dog shelters that can't house dogs from irresponsible dog owners, not to meant dog fights wouldn't be a thing, or random bites, or euthanizing.

Shoot, we should be looking into the actual net positives that a dog ban could have.

Easier to do than a gun ban, for sure and to more actual benefit.
 
Cope said:
Some truth to that. Without dogs, you wouldn't have or need the ASPCA, or the many dog shelters that can't house dogs from irresponsible dog owners, not to meant dog fights wouldn't be a thing, or random bites, or euthanizing.

Shoot, we should be looking into the actual net positives that a dog ban could have.

Easier to do than a gun ban, for sure and to more actual benefit.
Click to expand...
Wow.

How do you figure it would be more of a benefit?

Dogs and humans have been living together for thousands of years.

Dogs are far better for Home defense then alarms or guns.plus fogs just make life better.
 
NolanVoyd said:
Wow.

How do you figure it would be more of a benefit?
Click to expand...
NET benefit. Something it behooves all of us to do.

Cost benefit analysis.

Healthcare needs them. Immigration needs them. Any governmental agency needs them.

Why would dogs not need them?
NolanVoyd said:
Dogs and humans have been living together for thousands of years.

Dogs are far better for Home defense then alarms or guns.plus fogs just make life better.
Click to expand...
Not likely.

Objective measures aside, subjectively I like dogs. My post was a bit tongue in cheek simply designed to make people THINK about the NET benefits, and the detraction to owning a dog.

If you are a dog person, the benefits far outweigh the costs. If you aren't they don't.

It's akin to gun proponents and detractors. Or immigration, or really any decision where you have distinct differences of opinion on the word NEED.

This thread has evolved to show that stark contrast. Dog owners want the freedom to poop and pee on others property (and clean it up) which by the way is the compromise not the right.
Having your dog, or yourself on someone else's property entitles you to NO rights. If you or your dog pee on that property, YOU are deemed liable for damages. End.

Most people find a middle ground, but don't get entitled to the fact that it is the norm around where you live. That's the compromise.
 
Cope said:
Some truth to that. Without dogs, you wouldn't have or need the ASPCA, or the many dog shelters that can't house dogs from irresponsible dog owners, not to meant dog fights wouldn't be a thing, or random bites, or euthanizing.

Shoot, we should be looking into the actual net positives that a dog ban could have.

Easier to do than a gun ban, for sure and to more actual benefit.
Click to expand...

I seriously cannot tell anymore with you MAGAs whether you're joking or serious.
 
Cope said:
Some truth to that. Without dogs, you wouldn't have or need the ASPCA, or the many dog shelters that can't house dogs from irresponsible dog owners, not to meant dog fights wouldn't be a thing, or random bites, or euthanizing.

Shoot, we should be looking into the actual net positives that a dog ban could have.

Easier to do than a gun ban, for sure and to more actual benefit.
Click to expand...
I would like to sign up to be your mortal enemy.
 
hecatmoggie said:
so more people have guns now, is that what you're saying ?
Click to expand...
More people have guns, and more innocent people are killed; and their more guns killing in 50 States everyday.

The 2nd Amendment has four words - "shall not be infringed" - when these words in the Bill of Rights on December 15, 1791.

The Private citizens have the right under the Second Amendment to possess an ordinary type of weapon and use it for lawful - historically established situations such as self-defense in a home.
 
Wry Catcher said:
More people have guns,
Click to expand...
but truthfully, factually ... they don't, do they ? (give me a link showing what you say)

Wry Catcher said:
and more innocent people are killed;
Click to expand...
actually wasn't crime/murders was worse in the 70's and 80's ? if you can show it wasn't ... I'm all ears

Wry Catcher said:
and their more guns killing in 50 States everyday.
Click to expand...
see above - prove what you say

Wry Catcher said:
The 2nd Amendment has four words - "shall not be infringed" - when these words in the Bill of Rights on December 15, 1791.
Click to expand...
as were all the other words in the Constitution yes .... you discount them all ? or cherry pick the ones you don't like ?


Wry Catcher said:
The Private citizens have the right under the Second Amendment to possess an ordinary type of weapon and use it for lawful - historically established situations such as self-defense in a home.
Click to expand...
in 1791 what were the top of the line weapons? Did the constitution allow people to own them ?

a free country means people have a responsibility to NOT do evil things .... 99.9% of us follow that, don't we ?

also, historically, kids were allowed to carry guns to school and people open carried ... and there wasn't a bunch of mass shootings were there? guns didn't change - people did
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom