bodhipooh wrote:
100% in agreement with feelngood!

There is ABSOLUTELY NO EXCUSE to ride on a sidewalk. I don't care what excuse you have. And, this is coming from a daily bike commuter. If the road conditions are such that you don't feel safe riding where you belong, get on the sidewalk, dismount and walk your bike. It is the right and decent thing to do. I find it funny that some of the people complaining about offleash dogs, and other "minor" crimes, find it convenient to excuse their transgressions. Just because you THINK you are being careful, it doesn't entitle you to break the law and ride on a sidewalk.

Piert1025 wrote:
Quote:

nyrgravey9 wrote:
But Pier, the larger point is that "I know my dog" is not a valid excuse. I don't know your dog. The cop doesn't know your dog. And even most owners don't truly know their dogs (they think they do, but they really don't).

The point is that the law wasn't written just for those people whose dogs are uncontrollable and wild beasts.

There are places where dogs are allowed, and places where they are not. The law can't be written any clearer.

It's like the old joke "something can't be sort of wet", it's either wet or dry. Black and white. It's pretty straightforward.

I'm trying to be as cordial and straightforward as I can as it relates to the dog issue, but you guys make it difficult sometimes. It's up to you to introspect and come to the realizations that rest of us already have.

And I do understand. That's your whole entire point.

But to be honest, the cops scared the crap out of my GF and my dog (not literally) when he suddenly drove up onto the field. When my dog is unleashed, and yes, I'm guilty of unleashing him as well, I make it a point to only do it when

1. There are no other people or dogs around.
2. When he's in a controlled environment , in which I can control his movements.
3. Only after he has 'done his business' (that's what I meant when I said 'I know my dog')
4. When others (children, adults or other pets) come within proximity of the area, I immediately re-leash him.

As I said, I'm a responsible dog owner. I do understand your point 'that few make it bad on everyone'. It's true. But 'they' are not the people who get ridiculous fines, such as this one. The responible owners do!

The cop was a douche and wanted to give her a second summons for having our other dog tied to the pole. He claimed '2 dogs, 2 summonses'! I got the impression like, 'Yes. I can fulfill my quota for the day'!

I can also assure you that the dog in question was back on the leash before the cop even got out of the car!

Piert1025 wrote:
Quote:

dtjcview wrote:

Take that argument to court. I'm sure the judge will assign the appropriate level of credibility to the excuse, and file it with all the other "I'm sure my Fido would never..." arguments.

Again, your point is baseless. I never said that she wasn't in the wrong. I never said that we wouldn't pay the fine.

Are you posting just to post?

Piert1025 wrote:
Quote:

nyrgravey9 wrote:
Buddy, you don't read very well. I've minded my business, for a long time. Until I was out there with kids (and no, im not one of those "think of the kids" people), and someone's dog was off leash and took a dump right next to us. My nephew almost fell right in it when chasing a frisbee. I approached the owner and politely asked them to pick up after their dog, and was summarily berated in front of other people and made to look like I was a bad guy. So game on.

Again, the few ruining it for the many.

And again, it's not important that it's a big open space. It's ILLEGAL TO DO IT. What part of this are you people having difficulty understanding?? Much like the OP complaining about being ticketed for things he should be ticketed for. What is wrong with you people??

You're of the typical "if it feels good to me, I'm going to do it" crowd. That's not how it works my friend.

I'm glad you had a positive experience with the dogs at the park, I truly do. Many of us haven't, when dealing with these few dog owners who feel entitled to do whatever they want.

And again, that's why they create dog parks and designated areas for dogs.

And again, if you're that concerned for your dogs exercise, it begs to ask why you bought one while living in such a densely packed neighborhood. It doesn't mean you just do what you want because of you're personal situation.

And yet again (see a theme here?), there are lovely, large dog runs in towns like Lyndhurst, Leonia, etc. Dogs can run wild and free all day.

If you don't have the means to get to these places, then AGAIN, it begs to ask what decision making process went into the decision to buy the dog in the first place. Answer: you wanted a dog, so you bought one.

Lack of preparation on your part does not constitute me giving a sh*t about your problems. The difference here is that the law is on my side. Period.

[quote]
Area_Man wrote:
You could always take this route:

Mind your business and keep to yourself unless someone is directly bothering you.

I was down having a catch at the Colgate clock park over the weekend. There were dogs everywhere. One was even nice enough to return an errant throw that went over my head back to me. Thanks pup! How kind of you.

It's a large, self contained open space. It's a park. Let a dog be a dog and run around a little bit.

[quote]

You are ruining it for many.... You had a bad experience with one dog and now you feel that ALL dog owners are the same- after the many, many times that you've said so yourself.

It's not the few that a ruining it for the many. It's you, with you constant bitching and complaining... You want to talk about QOL issues, you are affecting my QOL, and every other dog owner's QOL, by not minding your own business!

Do I have the means to get anywhere I want to go? Absolutely. Not the point I was making. Why don't you get up and go volunteer if you are so worried about the QOL issues. I've thrown out there, many times, to start a neighborhood watch group. What was the result? People saying... "We don't have any authority so it's a waste of time." What did I hear? We are too damn lazy to start a neighborhood watch program so I'd rather go on JC List and bitch about it!"

I AM a responsible dog owner of two great bulldogs. I clean up after them when they go, I even carry extra bags with me, in case they go again. I am the epitome of what a responsible dog owner should be. But then people, with nothing better to do, complaining to city hall that my dog in a fenced in area, with no people around is ruining the QOL of the area because he may pee or poop at any given time. Do you not see how ridiculous that sounds?

You claim that you don't give a shit about my problems? Then explain why you've posted to this thread 15 out of 103 times... That doesn't sound like somebody that doesn't care to me!

The law may be on your side, great! But when, if ever, will you focus on a real issue? You've dedicated so much time and effort to the whole "dog leash" thing and if that's you're biggest concern about JC, I implore you to step away from you're computer screen and go out into the various neighborhoods of JC and see what the real issues are. You seem to be stuck in this bubble that all dog owners are specifically out to get you. Like we all have this secret vendetta against you to not clean up after our dogs to piss you off! Dude, enough. You've made your point; move on....

CuriousCat wrote:
"If you're a renter, do you honestly believe the mere presence of these towers is going to drive rents around JSQ up so dramatically that you'll be forced to move? That, to me, seems extremely unlikely. Sure, in a best case scenario, JSQ gets completely turned around and, inevitably, rents rise. But we're talking about a slow progression over years or a decade."

Yes, I believe that the rents will drive up dramatically. There is a lot of planned construction in the area.

Frank_M wrote:
Quote:

nyrgravey9 wrote:
The laws are not written to be selectively enforced.

That may be true, but here in consensual reality, laws and rules are selectively enforced. It has been that way for thousands of years, for better or worse. Human behavior is not driven by a computer program that operates on fixed if/then/else logic statements.

Binky wrote:
Quote:

nyrgravey9 wrote:
.. but the Shop Rite next to BJ's has surprisingly good fish, if you ask for it. I know it's in a rough area...
I hope that helps.

Lol. I think you have extremely limited life experience.

CatDog wrote:
Quote:

Piert1025 wrote:
A friend got stopped by JCPD for buying "loosies" (individual cigarettes) from a bodega....

you know that loosies are illegal, right?

JCbiscuit wrote:
Quote:

corybraiterman wrote:
Quote:

I_heart_JC wrote:
Quote:

corybraiterman wrote:
Well, that particular place is not far from Healy's Bar, which would mean they'd get more business. I can only assume that they'd help get past the red tape since it would be a boon to them

whose bar?

http://www.yelp.com/biz/healys-tavern-jersey-city

Healy.....Healy......

nope. name doesn't ring a bell.

duh wrote:
I hear ya Piert1025. I actually find people cheering on their neighbors being fined and summoned, to be a compromise of the quality of life. Perhaps a little understanding, even if accompanied by criticism, would temper the complete self-satisfying douchebaggery typically displayed here. The issue is not the ordinances themselves, it is that they need not always be applied. The spirit of the law is to keep people, dogs - whatever - safe, clean, well maintained...civil. But the letter of the law can be used to punish someone drinking a beer on their steps (?work it out in court!?), or letting their dog run off the leash in an uninhabited place which does not pose a threat to dog or person. It is incredible that most of the people on this site, are able to ascertain such critical perspective, given the immeasurable height of the horse from which they view the situation. Forget about the horrid crumbling school system, shootings, murders, entrenched trans-generational poverty - it?s not drinking a beer on the street and leashing your dog that will save us all. I will cut this shorter than I'd like, as I know most of you have to get to planning your Friday night of washing the shart stains out of your underpants and listening to your neighbors with a decibel meter.

Vigilante wrote:
Cops were all over Hamilton Park tonight writing tickets. Oh wait, no they weren't nor will they ever be. Losers.

Vigilante wrote:
Your tactics have been tried before by other whiners. It got old fast then too. Fact is that my relationship with the local police has given me carte blanche in HP. I will never be fined for allowing my pooch to exercise. You can write all the letters you like but the cops don't care. I mean, are you not the one sitting all day on your balcony with binoculars and accomplishing nothing but raising your blood pressure? Meanwhile, the dogs swim and play unmolested.

Vigilante wrote:
I don't carry a gun, I don't patrol and I don't confront criminals as that's what cops are trained for. I do stay alert and I do get results. Batman is a fictional character. I am real and I watch out for neighbors and strangers alike. You guys bitch while I succeed. It's that simple. Gotta walk the dogs. See ya.

Vigilante wrote:
Quote:

nyrgravey9 wrote:
Depends on who is doing the drinking hahaha.

Either way, drinking alcohol is legal (within limits), walking your dog off leash is still illegal.

The fines they are a comin'!

Quote:

Vigilante wrote:
Meanwhile alcohol consumption is much more detrimental to the quality of life in our neighborhoods than any 1,000 dogs.

The DUI's, litter and noise etc. are not legal. The amount of death and destruction caused by booze is out of control. Shall we pull up all the drinking related accidents in this area alone over the past few years? And no, there are no fines coming for me, I promise. They will never get me. The cops love me for all the criminals I have helped put away over the years.

Vigilante wrote:
Meanwhile alcohol consumption is much more detrimental to the quality of life in our neighborhoods than any 1,000 dogs.

bodhipooh wrote:
It could be our very own beer summit! :)
I suggest the Zepp, which is my watering hole of choice.

bodhipooh wrote:
You came to the wrong place for sympathy (or, to vent) as very few people, if any, will feel anything but glee at the fact that basic, quality of life, issues are finally being addressed.

Instead of bitching, or complaining, about a friend being booted for unpaid fines, why don't you ask your friend why he (she?) has failed to pay three tickets? BTW, I say three, because I believe that is the standard for booting a car: three unpaid tickets. And, furthermore, that is what Fulop fought for some years ago: for strict adherence to the rule that allows booting if, and only if, a car owner has failed to pay the defined number of tickets (which, IIRC, is three). Don't get it twisted, or try and frame to your convenience.

As for the unleashed dog, I have to agree with nyrgravey9 (despite our differences in other threads) that this is also a QOL issue and that the police should be vigilant about enforcing these rules. As others have said in other threads, an off leash dog is unpredictable, even a perfectly, well behaved one.

About beer on a stoop, that's definitely BS. That one, if really happened the way you describe it, could/should be fought.

4thandjerz wrote:
Quote:

I'm doing quite well right now with Key Food, P&K, Grove Plaza Farmers' Market and WF Tribeca. A local WF would be great - but at least for me - a reliable fish store would be sufficient.

Fish fish fish! Yes! We've got pretty good access to almost everything else. We need fish.

ripple wrote: I think it's ambiguous as to whether "within" implies "within the confines of a dwelling" or "within property boundaries", and I can see how the police might use this ambiguity to justify harassing people on their stoops. Quote:

paulushooker wrote:

Looks like it's legal to drink on YOUR stoop:

Jersey City Municipal Code

§ 84-38. Definitions.

§ 84-38. Definitions.

As used in this Article, the following terms shall have the meanings indicated:

ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE - Any liquid intended for human consumption containing more than one-half of one percent (1/2 of 1%) of alcohol by volume.

PUBLIC PLACE - A place to which the public or a substantial group of persons has access, including but not limited to any highway, street, road, sidewalk, parking area, shopping area, place of amusement, playground, park or beach located within the city, except that the definition of a "public place" shall not include those premises duly licensed for the sale and consumption of alcoholic beverages on the premises or within their own private property.

mdips wrote:
Quote:

Bubble_Tea wrote:
Quote:

Piert1025 wrote:
Quote:

nyrgravey9 wrote:
Now we just need those cops to issue off leash tickets in Morris Canal, Hamilton and Van Vorst Park. Progress!

Totally stealing the violin video...

So you are the person that posted that thread a few weeks back on responsible dog ownership, right?

What do you think would degrade the quality of a grass field more (because that WAS the whole point of your post, right?)- a dog running on it or a car driving on it?

The cop drove onto the field to give a ticket to the owner of a leash-less dog....

Both degrade the quality of JC parks and both should not happen. But, generally, I am very happy to see police enforcing the leash rule. Hopefully, this is a sign of a change in enforcement policy!

JC parks need fenced in dog runs so dog owners have a space where they can let their dogs go free without risking a fine and so that everyone can enjoy JC parks without dogs damaging them.

'


Let's be fair, technically speaking an off leash dog does no more damage to a park than an on leash dog. As well as the fact that on vs off leash will do little to improve people cleaning up their dog poop. If someone is inconsiderate enough to not pick up after their dog, they're likely not going to do it whether the dog is off leash or not.

Saying off leash dogs damage the parks is a seemingly weak argument because there are much more damaging activities that happen on a daily basis. Take a look at the center of the Morris Canal park. That grass will never grow back because of the volleyball games every weekend. I'm not in any way arguing they shouldn't be allowed to happen, just pointing out that they've permanently destroyed the grass. In lincoln park, just stroll through the park on a sunday night or monday morning during the summer and see all the litter left after the big bbqs and parties from the weekend(not to mention the blatant public alcohol consumption that occurs).

Piert1025 wrote:
Quote:

nyrgravey9 wrote:
Now we just need those cops to issue off leash tickets in Morris Canal, Hamilton and Van Vorst Park. Progress!

Totally stealing the violin video...

So you are the person that posted that thread a few weeks back on responsible dog ownership, right?

What do you think would degrade the quality of a grass field more (because that WAS the whole point of your post, right?)- a dog running on it or a car driving on it?

The cop drove onto the field to give a ticket to the owner of a leash-less dog....

mwa7368 wrote:
I have no patience for motorcyclists who think they can act like Evil Knievel on the road but I have driven down that street 4-5 times in the past month and they is a HUGE depression and then a large raised ledge. It sends my SUV rocking back and forth like crazy, need to take it ridiculously slow. Motorcycle could easily hit that doing the speed limit or less and end up losing control.
I hope the city does get sued over it, maybe they will pay a little more attention to the road conditions.

bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

It's sarcasm, stupid.

So, sociopathic, and spineless. You spew some hostile nonsense, then retract it (by claiming sarcasm) when questioned about it. Keep on trolling, loser.