bodhipooh wrote:
Quote:

I'm going to go out on a limb and say this driver was probably in a rush, didn't want to wait for a light or went around a slow car and ended up causing this.

Wow... talking about assuming too much, without any basis on fact related to this accident/event. As others have mentioned, the road conditions in this stretch are pretty poor. I actually know of someone who successfully petitioned city hall for reimbursement of a busted tire and rim due to a pothole right around that area.

Quote:

When I'm traffic and I see a motorcycle weave in and out of traffic or cut off cars, all I think is "please let someone open a car door or pull out in front of the motorcycle".

You are a sociopath. Plain and simple. I was behind you with regards to the complaints about dogs and people's failure to curb their pets. Then, you veered off into railing about choking dogs, then controlling them, and now this. I guess others were right in their assessment: you are a demented lunatic. To wish harm and pain onto others is the epitome of sociopathic behavior.

Quote:

Darwinism at its best. Driving a motorcycle is as moronic as smoking, or some other action resulting in totally preventable medical problems.

Another idiotic comment. You could easily argue that riding a bicycle is equally moronic (by your devious standard of "totally preventable medical problems") as well as riding a car (got into a nasty accident? How stupid! You could have prevented injury by not driving...) Got ran over while crossing the street? Idiot! You could have avoided a hospital trip by NOT WALKING. Talk about simplistic logic.

Vigilante wrote:
"Somehow" lost control? You mean on that long straightaway which invites bozos to speed and do the bidding of Darwin?

radryan03 wrote:
I say ticket away! There needs to be more punitive damage to disobeying the laws and regulations of JC.

I would feel lucky to have gotten away with it for a year... the somewhat backwards reality of this is I have been subsidizing someone's (or many people's) shitty parking with my tax dollars...

Tax gaps - lets step up vehicular fines... it's a treasure trove in JC.

jklm wrote:
http://statutes.laws.com/new-jersey/t ... 9/section-39-4/39-4-138-6

39:4-138.6 - Municipal authority to set certain permissible parking distances

2.A municipality may mandate by ordinance the permissible distance a person may park a motor vehicle from a crosswalk, side line of a street or intersecting highway, or "stop" sign. A municipality may not, however, permit parking within 25 feet of a crosswalk or side line of a street or intersecting highway or within 50 feet of a "stop" sign in a school zone during hours when school is in session.

CatDog wrote:
JC really needs to make some laws to override the state law, because 25-50 feet away from crosswalks and fire hydrants and stop signs is just not practical in a city like this. And the selective enforcement makes it all the more frustrating.

seanmichael425 wrote:
Oh - let's just leave her alone. She's probably like 23. Too young/dumb to know any better...

user1111 wrote:
Here is an older story of dude who spent some time in jail because he did had no ticket.

Skipped $1.90 Light Rail fare leads to night in jail

bjay wrote:
I don't understand the Booker-bashing here. The guy is smart, thoughtful, articulate, and responsive to constituents. Those are good traits in a Senator.

And from a national perspective, Booker will have no difficulty defeating a Republican. It is important to keep a Democratic majority in the Senate. If Mitch McConnell became majority leader, we would be in a heap of trouble.

Br6dR wrote:
Quote:

heights wrote:
Quote:

Dahood wrote:
Booker for senate!

Will CB be New Jersey's version of Obama ?

Yes.

Ted wrote:
There are plenty of off-leash dogs in the streets and sidewalks surround Morris Canal Park as well as in the Circular"lower" portion of the park (it's not just in the water or the end section of the park).

While the majority of these dogs are harmless or well-controlled, there is a significant enough minority (it only takes 5-10% given how many dogs there are) to have an impact on others. It's not always clear which dogs these are when you first encounter them.

I have had several unpleasant interactions (and it seems others have as well), this has become an issue. How does one legally distinguish a responsible dog owner from one who's not (set different laws /have different standards?).

It may fall to the dog-owning community to do more self-policing to prevent things like this from bubbling up. A fellow dog owner may be able to better "call out" irresponsible behavior with results.

I'm all for building a dog park section or even limited off-leash hours like Central Park.

mRanger48 wrote:
Are we really complaining about people unleashing their dogs out by the water...all the way at the end of Morris Canal Park? I get being pissed off about the dog crap...that's very annoying and irresponsible, as stated - and needs to be fixed. It's amazing, either stupid people have to ruin it for everyone or people always have to complain about something. Sounds like both situations are occurring here. Is it really that big of a deal that I go out and throw a frisbee to my dog out at the point of Morris Canal Park? I'm really trying to understand why we are focusing so much on this aspect. I'd like to take my dog out to an open park and play a simple game of catch w/ a ball or frisbee, yet b/c of crappy dog owners, now we have a vendetta ongoing against it. And yes, it's a vendetta when we have complainers, winers and bitchy people hiding behind computer screens threatening to choke and kick dogs. How about people pick up after their dogs? Also, how about if your dog is well trained (which isn't a hard thing to do if you are competent person) you can unleash him/her out to the point to run around and play catch, or go for a swim (insert dirty river joke here)? I mean c'mon...aren't we being a little over the top here?

heights wrote:
Quote:

rs9182 wrote:
What do you NOT understand about the fact that dogs do need exercise and need to run? It's really not a difficult concept to handle? Also, what is this crusade about to make life more miserable for the rest of us?

Why don't you waste your energy on more pressing issues? The fact that you're currently directing your attention to this matter in such a vigilant manner is just pathetic.

Then your living arangements should be made accordingly knowing that you have a dog with an active lifestyle.
By the way each issue is pressing especially when liabilities are involved. It nothing till it hits the courts.

rs9182 wrote:
What do you NOT understand about the fact that dogs do need exercise and need to run? It's really not a difficult concept to handle? Also, what is this crusade about to make life more miserable for the rest of us?

Why don't you waste your energy on more pressing issues? The fact that you're currently directing your attention to this matter in such a vigilant manner is just pathetic.

JCParentingUnit wrote:
Quote:

rs9182 wrote:
To the original poster:

I'm very supportive of the dog owners on this thread and I think the op is out of his/her mind if they think the "majority" of dog owners are irresponsible. I see hundreds of people walking their dogs on leashes every day. I almost never see any dog poop on the street.

But Morris Canal park is not a dog park in any legal manner. Letting your dog off leash is a risk you take. Morris Canal park is also not a ball playing park, and so the wiffle ball, cricket, and volleyball players also take a risk.

I have seen out of control dogs at Morris Canal. Mine was one that as a puppy played merrily off leash with all his friends at Morris Canal, but after several confrontations, became less friendly. Now he stays on leash except when no one is around at all. I know my dog and know his limitations. I would say most people at Morris Canal know their dogs. There are a few who don't but you don't destroy the entire community for that.

The dog community is really great here. Since this thread started, I have already been asked about getting my building to sponsor a poop bag dispenser and engaged in many discussions on this matter. So thank you op.

This thread is really great as long as we stay a community. There's a lot of momentum for positive change here - off leash hours, a fenced dog park in Paulus Hook, more signage, bag dispensers. Thankfully we have very pro-active community organizers to help implement the change because threatening and shaming doesn't make people want to help.

rs9182 wrote:
To the original poster:

I apologize if a few negligent dog owners have soured your opinion towards dogs, but heres the thing, do you have the same opinion towards parents who don't parent? There are just as many obnoxious parents who don't control their children as there are dog owners who don't properly tend to their dogs.

That being said, Morris Cannel IS a dog park. Don't you DARE tell us that this "will" stop. Dogs need exercise and should be able to enjoy that activity. Furthermore, every time I have been there I have never seen a disobedient dog or negligent dog owner. I'm guessing you do NOT swim in the Hudson so what do you care if dogs are swimming there?

Finally, I know you claim that you didn't mean anything violent when you meant you will "control" my dog if I don't. But if I ever try to see you "control" my very well-behaved dog - or anyone else's - there *will* be an issue.

Get over your issues. Jersey City is a place where dogs are appreciated and loved. If you can't handle that, then move.

Area_Man wrote:
Quote:

nyrgravey9 wrote:
No, you're right, that was a bit strong. I'm not threatening violence.

Replace throat with collar and that's what I originally meant. I apologize for the strong image. I'm not going to slam dogs on the ground, but with bigger dogs in particular, yes, I will take control of the dog until its owner does so appropriately.

Again, I apologize for the strong language.

(insert smarmy picture/GIF/comment from vigilante now)

Hey booster, let me know how that works out for you.

Vigilante wrote:
I like how you guys imply that every person who walks their dog off-leash also doesn't pick up the poop. Spin doctors.

mdips wrote:
Jwave, if you don't think the comment, "I'll hold it down in the grass by the throat" doesn't sound violent you're just an ass. Even nyrgrave admitted that was a bit strong. However if you grab my dog by the collar and hold it until I retrieve it I'll apologize and thank you for getting my dog.

Also, for someone who's argued that he knows proper methods for dog training you should understand that pinning a dog to the ground is a dominant threat and more likely to cause the dog to react negatively.

I've already commented that I also agree to some degree that off leash dogs have become a nuisance and is a reason I do not bring my dogs off leash at the park anywhere near as often as I used to.

However, for all you people arguing that dog owners have a superior attitude do you just not recognize that you are claiming a moral superiority too? You feel that since we are breaking the law you are better than us? Think about that the next time you:

Jaywalk, roll through a stop sign, fail to wait 3 seconds at a red light before turning right, fail to yield to pedestrians in a crosswalk, fail to wait until pedestrian has completely cleared crosswalk and is back on sidewalk before proceeding, park too close to a crosswalk, double park(try driving on washington during school pickup at sussex), etc..

Again, I am in no way trying to argue that I am right, but all of those offenses are akin to off leash laws. So if you do any of the above please recognize that you also are not superior to someone who walks their dog off leash. We just happen to be breaking a law that inconveniences you personally.

jwave wrote:
I don't see anyone talking about violence. A reference was made to securing an off the leash dog until the owner (who by law should not have a dog off the leash) secures it him or herself.

If you don't like the idea of a stranger putting hands on your dog, obey the law. That's why it is there: to avoid unwanted physical contact between dogs and other people/dogs. This isn't rocket science.

You cannot flout the law and then expect people to behave in manner that accords with your own personal preferences. That doesn't mean somebody has license to harm an off the leash dog. It just means that if you don't restrain your dog in public you accept the risk that others will.