Larry Baer

[TSwizzle]

Spouses are not strangers. There is certainly legal intimacy and a presumption of physical intimacy beyond a sexual relationship which may or may not (still) exist. Usually and as far as I can tell, in this case, the couple cohabitates and generally shares many if not all expenses, and property. Generally, one spouse is assumed to have the permission to touch the other person’s belongings. I doubt very much that the wife asks permission to touch her husband’s dirty laundry or that he objects to her taking it to the laundry room, washinging it and putting it away. Or taking it to the dry cleaners. Or picking it up after. She might even go through his pockets to ensure that there are no objects which might be ruined or ruin his clothing in the wash. Or flip genders. Even if each is responsible for their own laundry, one would presume that each had permission to go through pockets and desk drawers to locate misplaced keys or phones or eyeglasses, etc. this is not remarkable in any way. In fact, it is assumed. It is unusual and unexpected that one person would react violently if their spouse touched their belongings.

On the other hand, if a stranger were to go through someone’s pockets or laundry without express permission that would be unexpected and possibly criminal. It would not be unexpected to snatch ones belonging from a stranger even with sufficient force to knock them to the ground.

It is not expected or usual that if one spouse knocks the other to the ground that the spouse still standing does not express concern and contrition and offer to help their loved one as needed, profusely apologizing. Even if there had been a heated argument that caused the incident.

It's fascinating as to how far you will go to excuse her asshole behavior.

The video clearly shows the man’s body making contact with the seated woman. The woman cries out in alarm. The phone is wrestled away from her with such force that she falls from her chair to the ground.

The man clearly treats his wife violently in this instance. {snip}.

The video clearly shows an asshole trying to get his phone back from another asshole who refuses to give it up. One asshole ends up on the floor after losing her balance.

 

[untermensche]

Suppose I am on a subway and some woman grabs my phone.

And I grab it back with vigor.

Have I assaulted somebody?

someone bold enough to grab your phone on the subway is reasonably bold enough to knock you out... so proactively knocking the shit out of that person is completely justified. Deadly force is not, but sufficient non-lethal force to ensure no further harm could be done by that person at the moment is completely justified... and, in my opinion, encouraged.

Unless you actually train and practice to hurt somebody trying to do it will likely get you hurt.

Fights in real life are nothing like fights in the movies.

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

Y'all are acting as though he is retrieving his phone from a stranger.

In fact, it's his wife who picked up his phone when he was away from the table (or so it appears).

In all probability, the phones are under a joint account. It is likely that they simply decided one phone was his and one was hers. It is even possible she did not know when she picked it up that it was his and not hers. We don't actually know the ins and outs.

Damn, if I had known we could just make up shit based on "probability" and "possibillity", this thread could have been a lot more interesting.

What in the world does a joint account have to do with anything here? And yes, even with a joint account, a phone belongs to a particular person, with all of their personal contacts, emails, photos, and everything else that is private unless they decide otherwise.

As for her maybe accidentally picking up the wrong phone: how fucking desperate are you?

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

As for your continued ridiculous attempts to make this a gender issue, that's all on you 100%.

Oh, really?

The lengths some people will go to trying to excuse a man's violence

 

[Gun Nut]

Suppose I am on a subway and some woman grabs my phone.

And I grab it back with vigor.

Have I assaulted somebody?

someone bold enough to grab your phone on the subway is reasonably bold enough to knock you out... so proactively knocking the shit out of that person is completely justified. Deadly force is not, but sufficient non-lethal force to ensure no further harm could be done by that person at the moment is completely justified... and, in my opinion, encouraged.

Unless you actually train and practice to hurt somebody trying to do it will likely get you hurt.

Fights in real life are nothing like fights in the movies.

Yes, that is very true and very important to understand... medical consequences of even punching someone incorrectly can last for years, never mind getting punched. Although I would have said it as, "Training to deescalate or disable"... no responsible defender "trains to hurt".
My training is focused on deescalating and/or restraining. If you carry a gun for a living, you are ethically obligated to have multiple non-lethal options at your disposal.
Where I live today, there is almost no violent street crime... there is car theft and such, but according to many defense attorneys I have spoken to, the fact that you never know who might be carrying a gun, all but eliminates criminal activity directed at an individual... this is what the criminals themselves say... "you never know who is going to shoot you in the back if you try to run away with their shit".

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

If you carry a gun for a living, you are ethically obligated to have multiple non-lethal options at your disposal.

Someone should tell Sacramento PD about that.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Spouses are not strangers. There is certainly legal intimacy and a presumption of physical intimacy beyond a sexual relationship which may or may not (still) exist. Usually and as far as I can tell, in this case, the couple cohabitates and generally shares many if not all expenses, and property. Generally, one spouse is assumed to have the permission to touch the other person’s belongings. I doubt very much that the wife asks permission to touch her husband’s dirty laundry or that he objects to her taking it to the laundry room, washinging it and putting it away. Or taking it to the dry cleaners. Or picking it up after. She might even go through his pockets to ensure that there are no objects which might be ruined or ruin his clothing in the wash. Or flip genders. Even if each is responsible for their own laundry, one would presume that each had permission to go through pockets and desk drawers to locate misplaced keys or phones or eyeglasses, etc. this is not remarkable in any way. In fact, it is assumed. It is unusual and unexpected that one person would react violently if their spouse touched their belongings.

On the other hand, if a stranger were to go through someone’s pockets or laundry without express permission that would be unexpected and possibly criminal. It would not be unexpected to snatch ones belonging from a stranger even with sufficient force to knock them to the ground.

It is not expected or usual that if one spouse knocks the other to the ground that the spouse still standing does not express concern and contrition and offer to help their loved one as needed, profusely apologizing. Even if there had been a heated argument that caused the incident.

It's fascinating as to how far you will go to excuse her asshole behavior.

As opposed to your efforts to present a false equivalence?

 

[Toni]

Spouses are not strangers. There is certainly legal intimacy and a presumption of physical intimacy beyond a sexual relationship which may or may not (still) exist. Usually and as far as I can tell, in this case, the couple cohabitates and generally shares many if not all expenses, and property. Generally, one spouse is assumed to have the permission to touch the other person’s belongings. I doubt very much that the wife asks permission to touch her husband’s dirty laundry or that he objects to her taking it to the laundry room, washinging it and putting it away. Or taking it to the dry cleaners. Or picking it up after. She might even go through his pockets to ensure that there are no objects which might be ruined or ruin his clothing in the wash. Or flip genders. Even if each is responsible for their own laundry, one would presume that each had permission to go through pockets and desk drawers to locate misplaced keys or phones or eyeglasses, etc. this is not remarkable in any way. In fact, it is assumed. It is unusual and unexpected that one person would react violently if their spouse touched their belongings.

On the other hand, if a stranger were to go through someone’s pockets or laundry without express permission that would be unexpected and possibly criminal. It would not be unexpected to snatch ones belonging from a stranger even with sufficient force to knock them to the ground.

It is not expected or usual that if one spouse knocks the other to the ground that the spouse still standing does not express concern and contrition and offer to help their loved one as needed, profusely apologizing. Even if there had been a heated argument that caused the incident.

It's fascinating as to how far you will go to excuse her asshole behavior.

The video clearly shows the man’s body making contact with the seated woman. The woman cries out in alarm. The phone is wrestled away from her with such force that she falls from her chair to the ground.

The man clearly treats his wife violently in this instance. {snip}.

The video clearly shows an asshole trying to get his phone back from another asshole who refuses to give it up. One asshole ends up on the floor after losing her balance.

I’m not the apologist here. I’m not at all amazed at the lengths you and others are willing to go to in condoning a man’s right to be violent towards his wife. I am certain we’d be reading pages from you about how abusive the woman was if the roles were reversed.

My post was to illustrate the differences between strangers and spouses since it seems a lot of people have no experience with spouses or intimate relationships. Or understand the difference between their ass and a hole in the ground.

 

[laughing dog]

Y'all are acting as though he is retrieving his phone from a stranger.

In fact, it's his wife who picked up his phone when he was away from the table (or so it appears).

In all probability, the phones are under a joint account. It is likely that they simply decided one phone was his and one was hers. It is even possible she did not know when she picked it up that it was his and not hers. We don't actually know the ins and outs.

Damn, if I had known we could just make up shit based on "probability" and "possibillity", this thread could have been a lot more interesting.

What in the world does a joint account have to do with anything here? And yes, even with a joint account, a phone belongs to a particular person, with all of their personal contacts, emails, photos, and everything else that is private unless they decide otherwise.

I don't think that is legally true.

As for her maybe accidentally picking up the wrong phone: how fucking desperate are you?

Not as fucking desperate as you are.

 

[TSwizzle]

It's fascinating as to how far you will go to excuse her asshole behavior.



The video clearly shows an asshole trying to get his phone back from another asshole who refuses to give it up. One asshole ends up on the floor after losing her balance.

I’m not the apologist here. I’m not at all amazed at the lengths you and others are willing to go to in condoning a man’s right to be violent towards his wife.

I don't think anyone is being an apologist or condoning what happened, certainly not me. Everyone has acknowledged that Larry was over the top. But we also acknowledge that she held on to the phone when she should have let it go, she lost her balance and fell off the chair.

I am certain we’d be reading pages from you about how abusive the woman was if the roles were reversed.

I would treat the incident the same way, two assholes struggling over a phone.

My post was to illustrate the differences between strangers and spouses since it seems a lot of people have no experience with spouses or intimate relationships. Or understand the difference between their ass and a hole in the ground.

And you have been told time and time again, your judgement of their relationship as compared to others is irrelevant.

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

I don't think that is legally true.

You don't think what is legally true? That I have the right to keep info on my phone private, even from my wife? Unless she gets a court order for something like a divorce trial, she has no legal right to see it. And even then, a judge would limit what had to be shared.

 

[Toni]

As for your continued ridiculous attempts to make this a gender issue, that's all on you 100%.

Oh, really?

The lengths some people will go to trying to excuse a man's violence

Well some of you are much more concerned about the man’s right to grab his phone even it it means shoving his wife to the ground than whether it is right to use violence to retrieve a cell phone from one’s spouse.

Only one person acted with violence far in excess of what circumstances warranted. In this case, that person was male. Which is why you are so certain he was in the right.

 

[dismal]

Oh, really?

Well some of you are much more concerned about the man’s right to grab his phone even it it means shoving his wife to the ground than whether it is right to use violence to retrieve a cell phone from one’s spouse.

Only one person acted with violence far in excess of what circumstances warranted. In this case, that person was male. Which is why you are so certain he was in the right.

Perhaps you should try actually reading what people are saying instead of continually typing the same thing that people have already objected to over and over again.

Tip: people are not attempting to justify him shoving his wife to the ground, they are saying he didn't shove his wife to the ground.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Perhaps you should try actually reading what people are saying ...

I'm pretty sure that this means you have a fundamental lack of understanding about how internet conversations go.

 

[Gun Nut]

...even it it means shoving his wife to the ground

Your facts are wrong, which is what likely led you down the wrong road. The wife followed up to the report adding that she fell off of the chair trying to wrestle with him, due to a previous injury to her foot. Both parties took equal responsibility for the inappropriateness of that all.

 

[Toni]

Oh, really?

Well some of you are much more concerned about the man’s right to grab his phone even it it means shoving his wife to the ground than whether it is right to use violence to retrieve a cell phone from one’s spouse.

Only one person acted with violence far in excess of what circumstances warranted. In this case, that person was male. Which is why you are so certain he was in the right.

Perhaps you should try actually reading what people are saying instead of continually typing the same thing that people have already objected to over and over again.

Tip: people are not attempting to justify him shoving his wife to the ground, they are saying he didn't shove his wife to the ground.

So maybe they should watch the video before commenting.

 

[Toni]

...even it it means shoving his wife to the ground

Your facts are wrong, which is what likely led you down the wrong road. The wife followed up to the report adding that she fell off of the chair trying to wrestle with him, due to a previous injury to her foot. Both parties took equal responsibility for the inappropriateness of that all.

I read the wife’s statement. A lot of abused women take the blame for their hisband’s violence.

There is no way that an injured foot caused her to fall given that she was sitting in a chair. Especially when it is easy to see her husband’s body making contact with hers and him taking the phone violently. Rather she was trying to convince people that her husband did not cause the injury to her foot.

I also saw the video. It’s easy to see that her husband caused her fall.

 

[laughing dog]

Oh, really?

Well some of you are much more concerned about the man’s right to grab his phone even it it means shoving his wife to the ground than whether it is right to use violence to retrieve a cell phone from one’s spouse.

Only one person acted with violence far in excess of what circumstances warranted. In this case, that person was male. Which is why you are so certain he was in the right.

Perhaps you should try actually reading what people are saying instead of continually typing the same thing that people have already objected to over and over again.

Wow, the irony of that one is overwhelming.

 

[TSwizzle]

I also saw the video. It’s easy to see that her husband caused her fall.

her fall could have been prevented if she had returned the phone when he grabbed it of course but she didn't.

 

[Toni]

I also saw the video. It’s easy to see that her husband caused her fall.

her fall could have been prevented if she had returned the phone when he grabbed it of course but she didn't.

It’s good that you recognize that he caused his wife’s fall.

Baby steps.