By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 on 14 February 2014
Edit Thread
HylianSwordsman said:
Kasz216 said:
HylianSwordsman said:

The fact that they weren't breaking the law.   Your entire post here is going into hypotheticals that don't exist.   Which generally is what happens when you are against something, but the actual facts on the ground don't allow you to make an arguement.


As for your example... the difference between a 3 year old and Scroggins is that Scroggins is an adult.

If an adult with the strength of a 3 year old started hitting (and hurting) a body builder, the body builder totally should hit back.  There should be no reason he should have to allow himself to be hit and hurt just because the jackass who is doing it is hiding behind their own weakness.

 


You've stopped reading my responses, I think it's time I stopped reading yours.

Not sure where you got that from, since I keep directly responding to your points.

 

I mean, it seems pretty simple...

You are argueing that they might hypothetically abuse their power to do something that they could of done more eaisly and legally another way... which would be the case for any oil company.

Which is the point you seem to miss.    It would be like if you broke into my house, and then I let it go, and just filed a restraining order for my house and buisness so i could bust you for breaking an entering again.


Not exactly... a machivellian corporate dictatorship so much as a roundabout way to do something that you could of did in the first place, except now people hate you a lot more, since instead of arresting someone for tresspassing on to your land endagering their lives and your workers lives, your arresting them for being at a grocery store...  after they did all that stuff.

 

Except actually, the penalty for violating this order isn't jail.  Instead it's simply having to pay lawyer fee's and likely an an additional fine while being told not to do it again.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/197400716/Court-Order-10-22-13-New-Date-1-2-14-Next-Court-Day

 

So really, it'd be a machivellian plan to abuse something to cause less damage then they originally could have.   Not sure i get the real potential for abuse here as far as intimidation goes.

Hell, considering she's still doing this and they haven't arrested her yet... it makes "abuse" seem even less likely.