• 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!

Virginia Beach Man Taunts Neighbors With Epithets, Cameras and Spotlights

yes you seem too based on the hilarious failed response you made 😂

dont need to your triggered deranged strawman is meaningless to the topic LAMO
quick post another failed triggered strawman!!!
🍿
Yes .. let's pretend that rap music isn't offensive .. unless you're a black American listening to it, where the language is more internal or tribal. Get real dude ..

This neighbor is a douche .. yet .. his message is centric on First Amendment rights and it's a beautiful thing we can do -- something no other country in the world can do.
 
Really? You think so? I think the word you are looking for is racist.

So you're telling me if you moved into a Black majority neighborhood and one of your Black neighbors setup a loud speaker motion triggered system. So every time you leave your house a splotlight highlights you, a big neon sign lights up saying "KILL YOURSELF " and a loud speaker blared "Whitey alert! Whitey alert! The Whitey has left his house; all POC are advised to take cover to avoid being shot." If that happened, you think that should just be allowed to continue indefinitely with no consequences?
Is this guy racist? Using the actual definition of racism - discriminating against a race because he/she feels they are not equal? Seems to be the case, and that's completely subjective. The broader and more holistic focus should be on the limitations of free speech rights (holistic) as opposed to a specific case (subjective and specific)
 
Yes .. let's pretend that rap music isn't offensive .. unless you're a black American listening to it, where the language is more internal or tribal. Get real dude ..

This neighbor is a douche .. yet .. his message is centric on First Amendment rights and it's a beautiful thing we can do -- something no other country in the world can do.
His "message" is directly targeted at a specific, individual family and is obviously intended as nothing but intimidation and harassment at that level. That isn't free political speech.
 
And, there we have it folks. Our first racist comment.
Rap music is racist? Many people are so laser focused on what is / isn't racism, and what it boils down to is .. I disagree with you on black / brown people and/or what your saying is bad.

Be an adult and think holistically .. this isn't a racism thing. This is a free speech topic, the scenario is offensive and how should this use case be used to guide free speech legislation? Stop being so triggered because you don't like the topic .. sheesh.
 
The broader and more holistic focus should be on the limitations of free speech rights (holistic) as opposed to a specific case (subjective and specific)
He didn't walk up to this guy, call him the n-word then walk away. Explain how shining a spotlight onto someone else's home like that is "free speech."
 
Yes .. let's pretend that rap music isn't offensive .. unless you're a black American listening to it, where the language is more internal or tribal. Get real dude ..

This neighbor is a douche .. yet .. his message is centric on First Amendment rights and it's a beautiful thing we can do -- something no other country in the world can do.
Who mentioned listening to music besides you, oh thats right NOBODY LMAO get real dude your retarded strawman completely fails. Get real dude
Post another one!!
😂 🍿
 
His "message" is directly targeted at a specific, individual family and is obviously intended as nothing but intimidation and harassment at that level. That isn't free political speech.
I'm still seeing subjective vs. objective language. It's objective to say, these neighbors have broken no laws, it's subjective to say what they are doing is offensive and douchbag-ish. What should the outcome be and how will that apply to other related scenarios / outcomes?

Think holistically instead of individual scenario as this WILL determine the final outcome on limitation of saying whatever we want to .. regardless if it's offensive or not. Today it may be .. "we don't want people to play offensive rap music from the black community ... with strobe lights and other offensive things ..." tomorrow .. it will continue to transform into .. we can't say bad or offensive things about X (e.g. politicians, groups, outcomes, etc.).

Choose your poison .. and to be clear... this neighbor is a douche and taking things to the extreme, and on the flip side .. offensive language / actions are a good thing for free speech.
 
Who mentioned listening to music besides you, oh thats right NOBODY LMAO get real dude your retarded strawman completely fails. Get real dude
Post another one!!
😂 🍿
Yes .. because the music, which called out "nigger" and other language was suppressed. C'mon man. Really? Do you agree or disagree that much of rap music includes lyrics with racial terms like "nigger?" Black Americans can call black Americans that .. and any other use is racist. Get a grip.
 
Is this a douchebag thing to do .. absolutely. I've had these type of neighbors who are obnoxious and don't care about being quiet. While First Amendment rights can lead to offensive language / encounters, my question would be .. Is this individual playing rap music lyrics, which tend to include these types of lyrics?
Figures YOU would go in that direction
disappointed_40x40.gif
 
and how will that apply to other related scenarios / outcomes?
Whataboutism gives a clue to its meaning in its name. It is not merely the changing of a subject to deflect away from an earlier subject as a political strategy; it’s essentially a reversal of accusation, arguing that an opponent is guilty of an offense just as egregious or worse than what the original party was accused of doing, however unconnected the offenses may be.

The tactic behind whataboutism has been around for a long time. Rhetoricians generally consider it to be a form of tu quoque, which means "you too" in Latin and involves charging your accuser with whatever it is you've just been accused of rather than refuting the truth of the accusation made against you. Tu quoque is considered to be a logical fallacy, because whether or not the original accuser is likewise guilty of an offense has no bearing on the truth value of the original accusation.

 
Yes .. because the music, which called out "nigger" and other language was suppressed. C'mon man. Really? Do you agree or disagree that much of rap music includes lyrics with racial terms like "nigger?" Black Americans can call black Americans that .. and any other use is racist. Get a grip.
"music"?
"Suppressed"?
"rap music"?
"Black Americans can call black Americans that .. and any other use is racist." ?
GRRRRRRRR Get a grip indeed LMAO
W2oQAXW.gif
 
I'm still seeing subjective vs. objective language. It's objective to say, these neighbors have broken no laws, it's subjective to say what they are doing is offensive and douchbag-ish. What should the outcome be and how will that apply to other related scenarios / outcomes?

Think holistically instead of individual scenario as this WILL determine the final outcome on limitation of saying whatever we want to .. regardless if it's offensive or not. Today it may be .. "we don't want people to play offensive rap music from the black community ... with strobe lights and other offensive things ..." tomorrow .. it will continue to transform into .. we can't say bad or offensive things about X (e.g. politicians, groups, outcomes, etc.).

Choose your poison .. and to be clear... this neighbor is a douche and taking things to the extreme, and on the flip side .. offensive language / actions are a good thing for free speech.
It is objective that he is intruding upon his neighbor's right to be free and secure in enjoying his own property.

How do you come to your claim that this guy has broken no law ? Noise and nuisance ordinances are a thing, at the very least.
 
Whataboutism gives a clue to its meaning in its name. It is not merely the changing of a subject to deflect away from an earlier subject as a political strategy; it’s essentially a reversal of accusation, arguing that an opponent is guilty of an offense just as egregious or worse than what the original party was accused of doing, however unconnected the offenses may be.

The tactic behind whataboutism has been around for a long time. Rhetoricians generally consider it to be a form of tu quoque, which means "you too" in Latin and involves charging your accuser with whatever it is you've just been accused of rather than refuting the truth of the accusation made against you. Tu quoque is considered to be a logical fallacy, because whether or not the original accuser is likewise guilty of an offense has no bearing on the truth value of the original accusation.

No Whataboustism included .. Do you support offensive language or not as free speech regardless if you don't agree with it? Obvious, there are limits and those have been established.

Many are to laser focused on a specific instance instead of thinking big picture on how this would / should be handled ... or ignored because this is the beauty of free speech.
 
It is objective that he is intruding upon his neighbor's right to be free and secure in enjoying his own property.

How do you come to your claim that this guy has broken no law ? Noise and nuisance ordinances are a thing, at the very least.
Perhaps .. because local law enforcement has said he's not broken any laws? I don't .. maybe?

Regardless .. if this douche is violating those ordinances, shouldn't the conversation be on that instead of his douche-bagness of engaging groups of people he apparently doesn't care for. Note .. we don't know WHY is he is doing this .. people are just focused on the subjective nature of race.
 
Here in PA this could easily be dealt with

Disorderly Conduct in Pennsylvania​

In Pennsylvania, disorderly conduct can include making obscene gestures, screaming, and urinating in public. Generally, disorderly conduct laws criminalize behavior that is likely to upset, anger, or annoy others. However, Pennsylvania's disorderly conduct law is not intended to criminalize any behavior that is irritating or obnoxious, but only behavior that disrupts the peace and quiet of the community. Pennsylvania also has laws against disrupting meetings and rioting

"Disorderly conduct' laws are getting struck down and gutted all over the country as "catch all" ordinances which basically affect poor people and people of color in selective prosecutions, so I find your quoting a disorderly conduct law here in this topic pretty ironic.

In this Virginia Beach case I don't see anything that the homeowner is doing to be criminal, however I'm pretty sure the victims of his verbal attacks could find relief in a civil court in front of a jury, and very likely win a sizable punitive judgment as well. In a civil case all that needs to be proven is a perponderance of evidence that this man is not allowing his neighbors to enjoy their home and property without constant malicious harassment.
 
It is objective that he is intruding upon his neighbor's right to be free and secure in enjoying his own property.

How do you come to your claim that this guy has broken no law ? Noise and nuisance ordinances are a thing, at the very least.
Dont know what the laws are in VA nothing being done seems super shady if the story is accurate . .

in PA this would be disturbing the peace and harassment

Disorderly Conduct​

In Pennsylvania, a person commits the crime of disorderly conduct by:

  • fighting or engaging in threatening or violent behavior
  • making excessive noise
  • using obscene language
  • making an obscene gesture, or
  • creating a dangerous or physically offensive condition without good reason.
In order to be convicted of disorderly conduct, the prosecutor must show that the defendant intended to cause "public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm," or disregarded the risk of inconveniencing, annoying, or upsetting others. Under this statute, "public" refers to any place that is open to the public, such as a park, school, or business, or even the streets of a gated neighborhood. For example, a person who walks through a public park surrounded by homes at night, yelling obscenities and upsetting nearby residents, could be arrested for disorderly conduct. A fraternity member who plays loud music late into the night, intentionally inconveniencing his neighbors could also arrested. However, two people who get into a fight in their own home have not committed disorderly conduct so long as they do not disturb people outside of the home. Disorderly conduct is punished more severely if the defendant causes harm or serious inconvenience or continues in his or her behavior after being asked to stop. (18 Pa. Con. Stat. § 5503.)

It is also a crime in Pennsylvania to:

  • block a road, sidewalk, or other thoroughfare
  • refuse an official request to move away from the scene of an emergency or stop blocking a highway or sidewalk or other thoroughfare, or
  • disrupt or interrupt a lawful meeting or gathering.
Harassment
The first component of a harassment charge in Pennsylvania is proving that something was said or communicated. While in the past, this was based on verbal communication and phone conversations, today’s use of technology have led many statutes to now cover email, social media sites, texts and other telecommunications as well.

Secondly, the communication must provide evidence of intent to harass, annoy, torment or embarrass the victim. Each state provides examples of what may constitute as harassment under the law. In Pennsylvania, the following are sufficient for a misdemeanor conviction:

  • Engaging in a course of conduct or repeatedly commits acts which serve no legitimate purpose
  • Communicating to or about such other person any lewd, lascivious, threatening or obscene words, language, drawings or caricatures
  • Communicating repeatedly in an anonymous manner
  • Communicates repeatedly at extremely inconvenient hours
While the first example could possibly be graded as a summary offense depending on the extent of the situation, the following are explicit examples of a summary offense:

  • Violent striking, hitting or kicking of a person, or threatens to do the same
  • Following the other person in or about a public place or places
It’s important to note that this list is not all-inclusive. Threatening physical harm, making obscene proposals, stalking or any unwanted, repeated communication or actions all fall under the PA crimes code for harassment and could result in criminal harassment penalties.

And while some phrases like “I’m going to kill you” or “Do this or else” are used more casually today than they were in the past, they can be interpreted in different ways based on the intent and context of the comment. During a friendly soccer game where no other comments were made is one thing, while in the parking lot during a one-on-one confrontation after the game is another. In either situation, the state would have to present evidence that the comment was meant to harass ror alarm the victim and was likely to do so.
 
"Disorderly conduct' laws are getting struck down and gutted all over the country as "catch all" ordinances which basically affect poor people and people of color in selective prosecutions, so I find your quoting a disorderly conduct law here in this topic pretty ironic.

In this Virginia Beach case I don't see anything that the homeowner is doing to be criminal, however I'm pretty sure the victims of his verbal attacks could find relief in a civil court in front of a jury, and very likely win a sizable punitive judgment as well. In a civil case all that needs to be proven is a perponderance of evidence that this man is not allowing his neighbors to enjoy their home and property without constant malicious harassment.
you are free to find it ironic, in PA this fits and it should, it would also be harassment which it also should be
 
I dont think mental issues, the guy is just a piece of shit.
 
Perhaps .. because local law enforcement has said he's not broken any laws? I don't .. maybe?

Regardless .. if this douche is violating those ordinances, shouldn't the conversation be on that instead of his douche-bagness of engaging groups of people he apparently doesn't care for. Note .. we don't know WHY is he is doing this .. people are just focused on the subjective nature of race.
Local law enforcement too often is ignorant of the law, or highly selective in enforcement.

This guy isn't engaging groups of people. He's targeting a specific family, and it seems obvious his intent is harassment. The poster who suggested a civil complaint as perhaps the best course is probably right.
 
Local law enforcement too often is ignorant of the law, or highly selective in enforcement.

This guy isn't engaging groups of people. He's targeting a specific family, and it seems obvious his intent is harassment. The poster who suggested a civil complaint as perhaps the best course is probably right.
Okay .. free speech and offensive behavior aside .. what has this guy done wrong?
 
Police have been called multiple times and state that no laws are being broken. The neighbor has been publically identified as an unemployed 47 yo living with his mother. Wonder what his next gig will be?

Reminds me of the movie "Pacific Heights", only with a Klan flavor enhancer.

 
Okay .. free speech and offensive behavior aside .. what has this guy done wrong?

For starters, his neighbor claims he can't enjoy the use of his own property due to this guy's deliberate campaign of harassment. Looks to me that is the intent of the guy.

What would you make his intention as?
 


so i found VA law on harassment and disorderly conduct
---------------------------

HARASSMENT: DEFINED

Harassment, as it is generally understood, is repeated and aggressive action that annoys or intimidates a person or group of people, thereby causing anxiety or fear. Looking at criminal law in the Commonwealth of Virginia, the five most common statutes that punish harassing behavior that crosses the line into criminal activity are phone harassment laws, computer harassment laws, obscene harassment laws, threat harassment laws, and privacy intrusion laws.
--Obscene Harassment
Definition: “
Use of profane, threatening, or indecent language over public airways or by other methods.” You are not allowed to threaten or harass anyone via any method—including but not limited to CB radio, video chat, and telephone (whether it’s a smart phone or not).


Disorderly Conduct

A Virginia Disorderly Conduct charge under §18.2-415(A) occurs when a person intentionally or recklessly causes public inconvenience, annoyance, or harm by engaging in conduct that has a direct tendency to cause acts of violence by the person at whom the conduct is directed.

----------------------------

how did the police determine this is a non issue?
seems shady to me. like i said in PA this guy would be in legal trouble for sure
 


so i found VA law on harassment and disorderly conduct
---------------------------

HARASSMENT: DEFINED

Harassment, as it is generally understood, is repeated and aggressive action that annoys or intimidates a person or group of people, thereby causing anxiety or fear. Looking at criminal law in the Commonwealth of Virginia, the five most common statutes that punish harassing behavior that crosses the line into criminal activity are phone harassment laws, computer harassment laws, obscene harassment laws, threat harassment laws, and privacy intrusion laws.
--Obscene Harassment
Definition: “
Use of profane, threatening, or indecent language over public airways or by other methods.” You are not allowed to threaten or harass anyone via any method—including but not limited to CB radio, video chat, and telephone (whether it’s a smart phone or not).


Disorderly Conduct

A Virginia Disorderly Conduct charge under §18.2-415(A) occurs when a person intentionally or recklessly causes public inconvenience, annoyance, or harm by engaging in conduct that has a direct tendency to cause acts of violence by the person at whom the conduct is directed.

----------------------------

how did the police determine this is a non issue?
seems shady to me. like i said in PA this guy would be in legal trouble for sure
In Virginia, it’s illegal to spotlight deer. I guess neighbors is ok?

🤷
 
Back
Top Bottom