|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
 
|
Hey LoveAnimals,
I'm very sorry to hear about this incident. I could not agree more with you that justice should be served. It looks like it will be served judging by the media reaction. This should not be allowed to happen ever, to anyone. If you are interested in a larger community approach to dog bite prevention Here is study done by the American Veterinary Medical Association called "A Community Approach to Dog Bite Prevention." http://www.avma.org/public_health/dogbite/dogbite.pdf It is just something to keep in mind during this debate about how to make sure this does not happen again.
Posted on: 2009/1/22 17:33
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Quote:
JennyMayla wrote: Ok. I'm cool with that. As are my battery of attorneys. And my good karma. See you at the dog park! (I actually think that my homeowners insurance covers it as long as it happens in my home. Fingers crossed.) I think homeowners covers you even if it is off your property in many cases. Anyway, I apologize for saying you were irresponsible personally. You probably are a highly responsible person, my point was to say we should make insurance mandatory and it is irresponsible for our society to allow dog bite victims to go uncompensated.
Posted on: 2009/1/22 4:42
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Quote:
r_pinkowitz wrote: because a person does not have dog insurance in no way makes them irresponsible....I feel really bad for the person attacked, feel the owner of those dogs is a real shit-head breeding them in her apartment....The end! Sorry, I wasn't being clear. It makes us irresponsible as a society for not requiring people to have insurance for dogs. Im not saying Jennymayls is irresponsible, just using that as an example of why we should make dog insurance mandatory. Also, it is the end, as you say, until someone else is bitten by a dog.
Posted on: 2009/1/22 4:25
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Quote:
JennyMayal wrote: Guess what? MY DOG BITES! She bit me twice in the almost eight years I have had her. Both times were specific incidents when she felt threatened and freaked out. She's a shelter girl and she has some issues. But she's gorgeous so she can deal with her personality disorder -- on a leash, with my supervision. I don't let her run around small people and I warn all people (casually so as not to create fear) when they meet her for the first time. That's my responsibility and that's the deal she and I made when I got her. 99% of the time she is the greatest dog in the world, but that 1% is something I take very seriously. The issue is not dogs biting as much as it is that the owners bear great responsibility for their pets. Oh, kids bite too. Adults even bite. Go figure. You write this, but don't have insurance? This is precisely why it should be mandatory for dog owners to have insurance. You have a dog you know bites people, then say you " owners bear great responsibility for their pets." Well, in the unfortunate and unlikely event your dog bites someone, that person will be SOL. They will have steep medical bills, pain and suffering, possible scarring and you probably have no way to compensate them. That is not taking responsibility for your pet, Im sorry.
Posted on: 2009/1/22 4:02
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Quote:
HudsonHorizones wrote: Hypocritical know-it-all fail. I love it when people put "fail" at the end of a sentence and think that makes it a solid point. I used the phrase, "facts are stubborn things" because I presented a series of facts, which people were disputing, but the facts remain the same, therefore, those facts are stubborn. Using that phrase does not mean you must use hard facts in every sentence you use. My reference to dogs "representing probably half the population of Jersey City" was not presented as a fact. I used the word "probably" for a reason. Of all the things I wrote, if that is what you can come up with, as a "fail", I will take that as a compliment. Understanding of the expression "facts are stubborn things" fail. Try again. Quote: JannyMayla wrote: MY DOG BITES! .... The issue is not dogs biting as much as it is that the owners bear great responsibility for their pets. Jenny, do you have insurance in case your dog bites someone?
Posted on: 2009/1/22 3:46
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Quote:
Ludo Wrote: Lets say you get your wish and dog owners have to be licensed and pay big bucks to do so. How do you plan on enforcing this law, when the city doesn't enforce the law currently on the books about licensing dogs until there is an incident or another law is broken? And you keep talking about cars being a necessary evil that is highly regulated, but there are plenty of people driving around without insurance or in some cases even a license. How would your law be any different? Honestly, I think any law would come about through a discussion between dog owners, non dog-owners, law enforcement, etc. I can't possibly know enough to write the law for you right now. But nothing is more annoying to me than "Group-Think", which is what happens on this board with the dog owners calling anyone who is concerned about dog bites "hysterical". Or suggest that you must hate dogs if you think something should be done to limit dog bites. It would be stupid for me to ask why these dog owners hate children, the most common victims of dog bites, but its the same silly implication? Its a problem, people are victims and the problem deserves to be addressed. The knee-jerk reaction from dog owners is that any suggestion of a problem or better regulation is heresy and anti-dog sentiments need to be crushed. But I can offer my personal suggestion. First, the big bucks people pay for licenses would be used to pay enforcement officers to patrol and respond to complaints. Perhaps there could be a hotline to report owners who leave dog shit on sidewalks, or whose dogs act threatening. etc. Now if your irresponsible dog owners is caught leaving shit on the sidewalk, well then an investigation might reveal the dog owner doesn't have a license. Im open to other ideas that anyone might have to improve dog-human relations, but with dogs representing probably half the population of Jersey City, this will be a recurring problem and deserves attention.
Posted on: 2009/1/22 2:09
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Man, you guys are really resistant to facts and information.
Here is a study done by the CDC entitled, "Dog Bites; How Big A Problem?" The Conclusion of which is pretty much exactly my recommendations. Stricter laws and enforcement and more education. The report concludes that dog bites are a serious problem. http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/dog4.pdf Here is another study done by the American Veterinary Medical Association called "A Community Approach to Dog Bite Prevention." http://www.avma.org/public_health/dogbite/dogbite.pdf Here is the first sentence of that study: "Dog bites are a serious public health problem that inflicts considerable physical and emotional damage on victims and incurs immeasurable hidden costs to communities" Funny thing is they suggest exactly what I was proposing, something led by some sort of advisory council. This was put together by a multidisciplinary task force, probably the most comprehensive study in the Country on the subject. I think you guys should do a lot less assuming and more research. You are just, plain wrong.
Posted on: 2009/1/22 1:37
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Man you guys are grasping for straws. Here is the same information, not from lawyers, but from the Center for Disease Control.
more than 4.7 million people a year 800,000 Americans seek medical attention for dog bites; half of these are children http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/duip/biteprevention.htm Quote: Skepticalhook wrote: Even the purported 365,000 bite victims allegedly treated in hospital sounds high. Skeptical, It might "sound high" to you, but you have absolutely no basis to say that outside of your own personal experience. Simply because you, personally, have not observed dog bites has no relationship to how often they happen. Sorry, facts continue to be stubborn things. You guys must hate children or something, look at these child bites that you don't care about! Why do you hate childrend so much?
Posted on: 2009/1/22 0:03
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Quote:
JimmyB wrote: The issue with these numbers Sorry Jimmy, no issue with the numbers. Facts are stubborn things. I don't think the stats are broken down every way you would wish. These numbers prove one thing, that your study with a sample of one, your dog, is incredibly misleading and useless. In fact, this story is likely under reported if anything due to the fact that most dog bites aren't reported. You can find a million reasons to justify the dog bites that do occur, but the fact is that they do occur, apparently, far more often than you thought.
Posted on: 2009/1/21 23:34
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Quote:
JimmyB Wrote: But pay less attention to the news and more attention to the countless responsible owners in this city. Maybe try counting how many times you get bitten while walking the streets. Fair question, so I decided to look it up. The results are worse than I thought: - there were 4.7 million dog bite victims annually in the USA. - 1,000 Americans per day are treated in emergency rooms as a result of dog bites. - In 2007 there were 33 fatal dog attacks in the USA. -Most of the victims who receive medical attention are children, half of whom are bitten in the face. (I personally have a fried who was sued, he was the dog owner, whose dog bit a 2 yr old neighbor in the face. Not good.) http://www.dogbitelaw.com/PAGES/statistics.html - Nationwide, U.S. Postal Service carriers suffered 3,423 dog attacks and bites in 2003. - According to the American Medical Association, dog bites are the second leading cause of childhood injury, surpassing playground accidents. http://www.dogexpert.com/Dog%20Bite%2 ... cs/DogBiteStatistics.html Those are the facts.
Posted on: 2009/1/21 23:09
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Quote:
Elvis wrote: car comparison, which you either refuse to understand or just plain do not get, i Elvis, I fully understand the car example, but Im telling you it is a useless comparison. Cars are a necessary evil, they provide a critical social function. Dogs are not necessary and do not play a critical role in people's survival. So car dangers are much easier to accept than dog dangers. That is not to say that cars should not, and are not, strictly regulated and those regulations are enforced. Unlike dog laws. I also don't know what evidence you are using to come to the conclusion that I am in the minority in my views. If you took a poll in Jersey City that asked this question: "Would you support stricter dog control laws if it meant less shit on sidewalks and less dog bites?" I suspect I would be in the large majority. Your argument about priorities strikes me as very defeatist. I get it, it is not the main priority in people's lives. But are you saying that since we have large problems, we should not solve the small ones? Quote: Elvis wrote: you want to enforce a law that would inconvenience many people, so the few could feel safer Let me just add that I am not trying to enforce a law so that people FEEL safer, I want to enforce a law so people actually ARE safer. I mean its very easy to get away from the "HYSTERICAL" details, but we are talking about serious injuries to people. I mean if your child got attacked by a dog, I think you might find some inconveniences to dog owners would have been worth the effort. FINALLY, for the record....I do not hate dogs. That is a cheap shot. I like dogs and have had some great ones, but I just happen to like people also and think they have an ABSOLUTE right to be free of dog attacks outside their home.
Posted on: 2009/1/21 22:23
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Quote:
Vigilante Wrote: So you give dog owners every reason to flee the scene of an incident? Insurance is for covering medical expenses etc. but if you want to just "sue the shit" out of people it gives them every reason not to be responsible citizens. Vigilante, man, you could not be more wrong. Owners currently have every incentive to leave the scene regardless. With insurance, they have every incentive to stay because they are covered. Do you think having car insurance encourages people to leave the scene of an accident? Ofcourse not, they know that they are covered. Quote: Nikkiinnj wrote: They obviously choose not to follow rules to begin with so how will adding more rules help. I just don\'t see the point. We do agree that enforcing the current rules would be a start. I suppose the problem is there is no money for enforcement. What I am suggesting is a licensing requirement that would not only require more dog owner training, accountability, etc, but would also raise money for enforcement. In addition, increasing the penalties for any dog related offenses would go a long way towards achieving both of our goals. The money raised through increased penalties could also add more enforcement. BTW, I just went for a walk down my block and there was a massive, disgusting pile of dog shit in the middle of the sidewalk. (I'm not Kidding) Just thought Id share with you all!
Posted on: 2009/1/21 21:51
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Quote:
skepticalhook wrote: you intend to fund your programs with TARP money? Very funny....as I suggested I would charge high fees for licensing. In other words make dog owners pay for it. I was joking about sending dogs to a farm. My point was to make the penalties for ignoring the leash laws so harsh that no one will ever ignore them. For example, potentially lose your privilege, the license, to own a dog. And I agree there are more serious problems in the world, but this goes much further than just dog attacks. It is quality of life and worthy of some attention. I am not suggesting taking detectives off the beat, just set up a regulatory structure that works. Obviously the dog regulations we have were put in place before every other person in the city had a dog.
Posted on: 2009/1/21 19:19
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Quote:
Vigilante Wrote: Yes, hysterical. Get insurance so we can sue the shit out of you? You are obviously deluded. .... It's not just dog owners, it's everyone.....2006 Automobile fatalities in US 43,000+ 2006 Dog Attack fatalities 30. Vigilante, Sir, I said get insurance so that ,if your dog bites me, I can sue the shit out of you. Imagine the case where a dog bites someone and the dog owner has no insurance and no assets, the victim will be left uncompensated, likely with costly medical bills. Requiring the dog owners, the ones creating the danger, to carry insurance would ensure that dog bite victims are compensated. Can you please tell me what is "deluded" about that? Your vehicles statistics are so useless I don't know where to begin. Millions of people use cars everyday for essential processes of life, clearly there will be vastly more car associated deaths. What does that have to do with dog deaths? Dogs are a luxury or an amusement, not an essential mode of transport. I am actually surprised that 30 people die as a result, that is way too many. It also does not include tens of thousands of injuries, including permanent scarring, as a result of dog bites. Croft, You seem like a very responsible dog owner, and I commend you for that.
Posted on: 2009/1/21 19:12
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Quote:
Elvis: You do a good job of stating how you feel and the problem with other's solutions. What is your solution? Elvis, you must want to really see dog owners lose their minds because my solutions would be highly restrictive of dog owners rights. I would propose dog owners must get licensing, similar to a obtaining a car license. It would involve (1) basic dog owning knowledge test, (2) evidence of insurance so that, if your dog bites someone, the victim can sue the shit out you and (3) maybe some other requirements that would be useful. People keep saying dogs have to be licensed now and I know that, but as these dog lovers love to say, it is not the dogs its the owners. So owners should need a license, as well as the dogs. Also large fees should be charged for these licenses so that more money can be put into doggy law enforcement. As for urban areas, dog owning should be much more restrictive. In the suburbs or rural areas you can make a better argument for dog freedom, but not in a city. I would require a mandatory license to evidence that every single dog you own in a city has gone through some form of obedience training. A dog seen off a leash should be immediately confiscated and sent to live with a family on a farm. I would also only allow dogs in certain areas of the city, not on every street of the city. Some areas would be off limits to dogs. Thats what I can say Just off the top of my head...but any rules would best come out of a dialogue between dog owners and people like myself.
Posted on: 2009/1/21 18:25
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Quote:
greenville chick said: Which two tiny parks are you speaking of? I know of at least five in JC two of which are very big. Lincoln Park is huge.... and their dog run is all the way in the back across a bridge... so what math are you doing? As far as crap and piss on the sidewalk... ok I give you the crap part... clean up your crap! but piss?? I mean I dont allow my dog to pee in the middle of a sidewalk most dogs wont... but what should we carry a bottle of cleaner with us and spray the sidewalk while were at it? Dont just blame dogs for piss and feces in the water system thats the least of your worries... what about stray cats, birds, raccoons, possums, HOMELESS people.... your post was ignorant to say the least... and quite HYSTERICAL! I said two tiny parks in DOWNTOWN JC, Van Vorst and Hamilton. Lincoln park is not in downtown JC. (although, I love Lincoln park, its my favorite JC park!) I see dogs pissing on sidewalks all the time. Have you heard of the proverbial dog pissing on the fire hydrant? I know it is scary for dog owners to hear, but not everyone thinks dogs should run the universe. If by hysterical you mean, not wanting to be attacked by animals. Than yes, you are correct, I am hysterical.
Posted on: 2009/1/21 18:12
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Quote:
NikkinNJ wrote: Clearly you have a problem with dogs...bottom line is people just need to act right. Can we look at this from the perspective of a non dog owner for just one second? So that dog owners can have the amusement of a dog, (I exclude the case of seeing eye dogs or working dogs that serve an actual purpose) I have to deal with (1) shit and piss on sidewalks, which ultimately ends up in our rivers and streams, (2) much of the already scarce park space being reserved for or taken over by dogs, and (3) the risk, albeit small, of being attacked by someone's dog. Is that fair to me, the non dog owner? I mean seriously, there are two tiny parks for tens of thousands of people in all of downtown JC, and we dedicate a quarter of one of them to dogs? I don't dislike dogs, I am just resisting their take over of the universe. Someone has to represent non dog owners because dog owners do a superb job of representing their interests. (for example, calling anyone who describes dog attacks for what theyare is being hysterical. It must be a rather hysterical experience to be attacked by two massive dogs outside your home, don't ya think?) This idea that people need to act right, I mean, that is a wonderful thought, but that is your solution to dog bites? People need to act right? You are going to tell the victim of dog bites, well...we are encouraging people to act right? I guess you could say "Despite thousands of years of evidence to the contrary, eventually people will stop being irresponsible, reckless, or careless and our new policy of telling people to act right is going to work!"
Posted on: 2009/1/21 17:56
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Quote:
JennyMayla wrote: All dogs are not evil. Just like all JCList posters are not evil. I don't believe any Person nor any dog is evil. Dogs do what dogs do. Unfortunately dogs, from time to time, attack people and we can't change that. What we can change is where we let dogs go, when we let them go there, and who we let own dogs. No person in a modern city should be exposed to the risk of, of all things, being brutally attacked by a dog. This means some responsible dog owners will be inconvenienced or perhaps, in some cases, not permitted to own a dog in highly crowded urban areas. Sorry, it doesn't seem extreme to me that I don't think human beings should EVER be bitten or mauled by an animal so that someone else can have a dog for their personal amusement. Call me crazy.
Posted on: 2009/1/21 4:48
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
I don't get this leash talk.
Believe me, I am sympathetic to responsible dog owners, but we cannot regulate dogs with the responsible owners in mind, we have to regulate dogs with the irresponsible owners in mind. Leashing is better than not leashing dogs, but its like saying we should only let people walk around with guns if they are holstered. You are asking for trouble. These animals are dangerous and we need more control as a society over their involvement in society. Owners should have to be licensed and dogs should not be allowed to be taken all over the city at all hours shitting, pissing and attacking people. Quick story: I worked with a quadriplegic woman in a govt office. She got a helper dog that cost her like 30K and was trained for years to be her arms and legs. It was an enormous scary looking German Shepard that I never trusted. One week into this arrangement the dog bit person. Wanting to be understanding the person let it go and didn't make a fuss. The next day the dog bit another person. Game over, 30K down the drain. So don't tell me it is about the owner, training or anything else. Dogs are dangerous.
Posted on: 2009/1/21 3:52
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Who here really, really hates Comcast?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Question:
I have cable internet through Comcast, no tv or phone. My bill is now $62.95/month just for internet service. Is this the going rate for internet service? Seems really steep to me. Are there any cheaper high speed options in JC?
Posted on: 2009/1/20 23:50
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Quote:
Croft said: nor do I approve of others who walk their dogs unleashed at night Just curious, what is the difference between walking the dog unleashed at night vs. day? I think this attack happened at 7 in the morning or something.
Posted on: 2009/1/20 4:54
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Vigilante Wrote:
Quote: Many more dogs I'd rather hang with than all the useless whiners around here. This comment is entirely consistent with your apparent discomfort with critical thinking. Dogs are social sluts... they are non-judgmental and lack the ability to think critically. I can see why this type of creature would appeal to someone with your worldview. Dogs are not inherently evil, but the fact that one human is maimed by a dog, that is one person too many. Therefore, dogs have to be regulated in accordance with the danger that they POTENTIALLY pose, rather than the danger that they ACTUALLY pose. Not all drivers are bad, but they still need to pass a test and get a license to drive. Often it is the "bad actors" that spoil it for everyone and in this case, as it relates to regulation, the good dog owners are lumped in with the bad.
Posted on: 2009/1/20 3:53
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Quote:
Vigilante wrote: Except most dogs are more like water-pistols but, like guns, the owner should be held responsible. Meanwhile, the most dangerous weapons in JC, cars and their drivers, are allowed to speed, run Stop signs and put everyones lives at risk. Point taken Vigilante, however there are two major distinctions between the dangers of cars and that posed by dogs. First, cars are actually heavily regulated. You need a license and insurance to operate one and there are fines for just about everything you do wrong with a car. Not the case with dogs. If you want to own a dog you should have to be licensed and hold insurance. Second, cars serve a social good. They provide critical transportation which serves many social and economic needs. Dogs, in most cases, serve as simple entertainment for their owners. So they don't have the critical social, economic and public safety role of cars. Cars are a necessary evil if you will. Dogs are not a necessary evil.
Posted on: 2009/1/20 3:37
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Unleashed Mastiffs Attack JC Man Downtown this Morning
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Dogs should be regulated very heavily, similiar to guns. Guns and dogs make much more sense in rural areas. I can see looser gun laws in Vermont than in Jersey City, and the same should go for dogs.
In an urban environment dogs are as dangerous as guns and owners should need have to be licensed, only permitted to bring dogs in limited areas, and face serious penalties for attacks like these. No one should be harmed like this as a result of someone else's form of entertainment, in this case dogs. Its as if I was strolling down the street spinning my gun on my finger and it "accidentally" goes off and shoots someone. It should not be permitted.
Posted on: 2009/1/20 2:44
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: PLANE CRASH IN THE HUDSON RIVER
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Quote:
injcsince81 wrote: Unfortunately the odds facing that plane are similar to the odds facing the U.S. economy. No one says you have to like the odds, but that is what they are. What the pilot's training provided him with was judgment under pressure to fly a plane. Obama has stellar academic credentials, a gift for rhetoric and solid political and life experience all created out of his own talents and effort. I ask you what better training to "protect and defend the Constitution of the United States," which is the oath of the Presidency, than to be a Constitutional Law Professor? In the same way that pilot has wonderful training for his profession, Obama has impressive training for his profession. When the pilot was put to the test, he succeeded as a result of training, competence and luck. I hope, now that Obama is being put to the test, that his training, competence and a lot of luck carry the day.
Posted on: 2009/1/18 19:52
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: PLANE CRASH IN THE HUDSON RIVER
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
Quote:
Yes I am happy that DHS and FEMA were not in charge of the response, but at the same time, let's not even compare the two. Clearly the scale and the type of the responses required to manage the Katrina response vs. a plane crash are vastly different. I didn't think I needed to state that because it is so obvious. The only thing I was comparing were competence vs. incompetence. Katrina has become a symbol of incompetence. This plane crash is a symbol of competence.
Posted on: 2009/1/18 17:18
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: PLANE CRASH IN THE HUDSON RIVER
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
I think the reason this event reminds us of Obama is that it is so refreshing to see competence on display, something Obama has come to symbolize. We have suffered so many years of total incompetence viz a vis Bush and Company, particularly in the case of Fema and Iraq.
This is the anti-Katrina if you will. The pilot, the rescue workers, everyone did their job and the result was great. This reminds me of Obama in a few ways. Similar to that pilot Obama is steering the Country, which is facing seemingly insurmountable challenges as if he were flying with no engines and no where to land. Hopefully Obama can defy the odds and steer the Country in for a soft landing. At the very least it will be refreshing to see the results of competence in Washington.
Posted on: 2009/1/17 23:06
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: JC - Some positive things...
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
1. Nah Tran on Newark Ave - Awesome, cheap Vietnamese food. And the owner, well lets say, he is energetic in a great way!
2. The Brownstone Diner for an abundant Breakfast. 3. Presto for the greatest Italian comfort food at a reasonable price. 4. The variety of small markets; the one on Grove, a few on Newark Ave, Subia's on Jersey Ave. All have decent organic and fresh food options. 5. The abundance of shoe repair places, which I have never used, but its nice to know that they are there in case I pop a tread or something. 6. The light rail, which I also never use, but looks really cool when you show out of town guests. 7. The Library, which not only has a beautiful building, but in the areas not taken up by its incredibly bloated city political machine patronage staff, is also filled with a solid selection of books. 8. The bizarre array of characters that frequent my block and make it an "experience" every time I come home! 9. The eclectic assortment of sleepy watering holes like Skinner's, LITM, Barrow St., the Lampost. 10. And finally, the reason why Jersey City is the most livable area this side of the Hudson; The Parks! Liberty State Park, Van Vorst, Hamilton and my personal favorite, the stepchild of the Jersey City parks that is often overlooked and incredibly underrated, Lincoln Park. This is not say we don't need more Parks! (I'm looking at you 6th st embankment!) 11. And just to round out my list with a bonus favorite: How about the ever vigilant Jersey City Parking Authority who do an incredible job of penalizing errant, as well as innocent, Parkers, thereby keeping the JC streets clean and functioning at peak efficiency! And lets not forget their judicial tag-team partner, the Jersey City Municipal Court! Thanks Guys!
Posted on: 2009/1/17 6:17
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: Who here really, really hates Comcast?
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
I hated comcast. Notice...... past tense.
We got rid of cable altogether about 8 months ago. It was the best thing I have ever done. 1. We save money because we have no cable bill. 2. We spend more time doing constructive things like reading, talking, cooking dinners (which also saves money, not going out!). 3. I have noticed a distinct reduction in my desire to buy things. Not having commercials in your life will change your world view. 4. Many shows and movies are available on-line or through netflix, just without the commercials and the cost of cable. I highly recommend getting rid of cable! It is very liberating.
Posted on: 2008/12/12 3:08
|
|||
|
||||
|
Re: PATH Service - Action Needed
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Quite a regular
|
More frequest service on nights and weekends is a must!!!!
The PATH is atrocious on the weekends. Waiting in the path stations is torture. It is inhuman to make people wait as long as they do! It would make living in JC so much more tolerable. Improved PATH service is the only thing between JC sucking and being really great. So lets be great!
Posted on: 2008/10/8 23:36
|
|||
|
||||