Sunday, July 20, 2008

Middle Village Idiots


A video of an amateur boxing match apparently held in Juniper Valley Park – complete with a makeshift ring and several dozen spectators – was recently posted on YouTube and has gained the attention of residents and city officials.

The nearly eight-minute video has garnered nearly 1,000 hits since it was posted by user mikereka on June 23. It features a three-round fight between “Little Mark the Spark from Juniper Park” and “Brian the Abductor.” It opens with interviews of each conducted at the park by the referee, “Billy Bottles” using a beer bottle instead of a microphone.


Video of Juniper Park Boxing Match Draws Ire of Parks Department

They're engaging in public drinking and fighting and the morons not ony videotaped it but posted it on the internet... Geniuses!

41 comments:

Anonymous said...

What an emabarrassment.

Jesse Jackson said...

If these were black youths fighting and drinking in Juniper their would have been arrests. Glad to see thw 104 pct doing it's usual job.

Wade Nichols said...

Bunch of white idiots engaging in public drinking and fighting = gain the attention of residents and city officials

Immigrant activities such as: polygmy, cliterodectomy, overcrowded illegally sublet apartments, "working" off the books, etc. etc. = vibrant diversity, gorgeous mosaic, NY Times feature article, Pay no attention!!!

georgetheatheist said...

Shades of Kitty Genovese? What? The surrounding neighbors can't call 911?

Anonymous said...

Shades of Kitty Genovese

are you a moron? comparing these 2 incidents is stupid. These kids are trash no doubt but comparing idiots hitting each other while, drinking(oh my god) to a vicious murder shows why the people on this blog just bitch with no results

Anonymous said...

The surrounding neighbors can't call 911?

911 is for emergencies dipshit. This is nothing more than some dis-orderly conduct summonses. as stupid as this video shows out youth to be it's not a police emergency. BTW narrow minded asses like you created this problem by raising the legal drinking age to 21. What are 18-21 yr olds supposed to do these days? how many movies can they go to? If they could legally congregate in bars and clubs where they can be controlled like you were at their age this out in the public problem would not exist. You villify drinking in such a way that it makes it attractive for this age group to flaunt it, prohibition sparked a crime wave we still haven't put down 80 years later do you want to give it more force,

georgetheatheist said...

Were the NEIGHBORS asleep? How about the guy walking his dog? They were deaf or blind?

georgetheatheist said...

Numbnuts, two guys beating the shit out of each other in public IS an emergency.

Anonymous said...

"BTW narrow minded asses like you created this problem by raising the legal drinking age to 21. What are 18-21 yr olds supposed to do these days?"

You think these assholes are between 18 and 21 years old? Think again! These are burned out retards pushing 30.

Anonymous said...

Numbnuts, two guys beating the shit out of each other in public IS an emergency.

no it's not it's consensual, and at most mis demeanor dis orderly conduct

Anonymous said...

Were the NEIGHBORS asleep? How about the guy walking his dog? They were deaf or blind?

or like anyone else with a mind could care less if 2 assholes beat each other up. they effected no one but themselves.

Queens Crapper said...

A misdemeanor is a crime and therefore still a 911 call. Add in the public drinking and the fact that this took place in a public setting where people congregate and yes, this definitely should have been called into the police.

Ridgewoodian said...

I thought the first two rules of Fight Club are YOU DON'T TALK ABOUT FIGHT CLUB. You certainly don't do it in public and put it up on YouTube. Mr. Durden would be disappointed....

If they young men want to engage in human cockfighting there's probably not a lot that can be done to stop them. At least they're not beating up on anyone who doesn't want to be beaten up on. But they should probably find some bar basement somewhere for their nonsense.

As for the cops: the neighbors would have been well within their rights to call them if the kids were disturbing the peace. I've been to a couple of parties that have gotten a little loud and, even though no one was pummeling anyone, the cops have shown up. I doubt they would have done anything more than disperse the crowd but that probably would have been enough.

Anonymous said...

middle village where all intelligent life dies

what a bunch of losers

Anonymous said...

Don't think these guys were born with smarts.

Anonymous said...

wade nichols, or maybe I should call you WHINE nichols, because you CRY racism every chance you get.

These idiots commit a crime in public, videotape it, and nothing happens to them.

Things like polygamy, working off the books, illegal sublet apartments, are not crimes a street cop can easily prove. These crimes usually require an investigation - and it usually starts with someone reporting it and WILLING to go to court to TESTIFY against their neighbors.

Most people don't bother, leaving the DAs with very little to go to court with.

Instead of crying over at Kellsy's Bar, you should do something.

Truman Harris said...

Actually, I agree with Wade on this one. He didn't say anything about the cops, he said it about city officials and newspapers who have no problem digging up a victim of something or other for a feature story, to report on the very things Wade listed when it happens in a foreign land. When it happens in NYC, all of a sudden they turn blind, deaf and dumb.

Ridgewoodian said...

I've been wondering for a while now: What exactly is the problem with polygamy (provided it's consentual)?

Truman Harris said...

Creates all kinds of legal chaos with custody and inheritance issues.

italian girl said...

Ridgewoodian said...
"I've been wondering for a while now: What exactly is the problem with polygamy (provided it's consentual)?"

Are you serious? What normal woman would be happy to share a husband? Don't forget, many of the women who live this lifestyle were raised this way. Some are forced. Some are just plain brain-washed.

Let me ask you this. How would you like to be one of five husbands to one woman? And don't tell me it's different.

Even in a consentual situation, it's immoral and demeaning to women. Period.

georgetheatheist said...

Here's why you call the police.

Imagine one of these pugilists got seriously hurt or killed with a haymaker. His family will immediately SUE THE CITY AND US TAXPAYERS for permitting this activity to go on.

It's in your own economic interest to call 911.

Anonymous said...

It's in your own economic interest to call 911.

what part of for emergencies are you missing, besides anyone who would draw a comparison to Kitty Genovese is fool who should be parted from his money. Call the precinct yes, the emergency line NO. We get such bad response time as it is in the 104, why tie up an emergency run for idiots hurting themselves, the fear of lawsuits, there is NO precedent on this because they were not hurt with anything in the park, NO victim of a crime has ever won a suit against the parks dept. for a crime that happened inside a park with open access.

Ridgewoodian said...

TRUMAN HARRIS: Creates all kinds of legal chaos with custody and inheritance issues.

Maybe. But that could probably be rectified through changes in the law. When Utah – or should I say Deseret – was a virtually independent theocracy, they seemed to get along all right.

ITALIAN GIRL: Are you serious? What normal woman would be happy to share a husband?

Many Muslim women. Many traditional African and Asian women. Many Mormon women, both now and in the past. Many of the Biblical matriarchs. Many polyamorous women, if somewhat less formally. This might not be the way that most Western women choose to live their lives but does that really mean that monogamy – or serial monogamy, which seems to be accepted now, even if it wasn’t entirely fifty or a hundred years ago – is normal human behavior? What is “normal” anyway? Is it just what happens to be what is done in a particular place and time? Have we here in the United States in the year 2008 reached such a pinnacle of moral and intellectual development that we now know how everyone in the world should live their lives? There’s a passage from Nietzsche that goes something like this (I’m quoting from memory so I might not have the exact wording): “The girl who surrenders her virginity to a man who has not first sworn publicly before witnesses that he will not leave her again for the rest of her life is not only considered imprudent she is also called immoral. She did not follow the mores. Where the mores command differently the conduct of such a girl would not be considered immoral either. Indeed, there are countries where it is moral to lose one’s virginity before marriage.” So what makes our mores better than “their” (however you might want to define “their”) mores. At least on this question, and assuming always that all marriages are entered into by consenting adults (which I know is not always the case the world over).

ITALIAN GIRL: Don't forget, many of the women who live this lifestyle were raised this way. Some are forced. Some are just plain brain-washed.

My point exactly. Or Nietzsche’s. “Where the mores command differently the conduct of such a girl would not be considered immoral either.” And where does brainwashing end and culture begin?

ITALIAN GIRL: Let me ask you this. How would you like to be one of five husbands to one woman? And don't tell me it's different.

That would be an interesting situation. I don’t know how I would react but, interestingly, polyandry has been much less common than polygyny.

I’m not advocating for polygamy. (Christ knows I have a hard enough time getting along with just one woman sometimes, let alone two or three or four.) It’s just that it’s so often classed with other more obviously criminal and immoral activities – even in the 19th Century, when there were few scruples about demeaning women. I wonder why that is.

Queens Crapper said...

If you called 311 with this complaint they would direct you to 911. So you might as well just call 911 directly.

Anonymous said...

If you called 311 with this complaint they would direct you to 911. So you might as well just call 911 directly

so because a moron tells you to do something you do it? CALL THE PRECINCT.

Truman Harris said...

No, the 311 operator dials 911 and explains the situation to the operator before getting off the line.

Anonymous said...

"Hi this is the one-oh-four. We're busy in Ridgewood now. Call back later."

italian girl said...

ridgewoodian: Many Muslim women. Many traditional African and Asian women. Many Mormon women, both now and in the past.

Again, cultures where women are brought up in this manner and/or brainwashed.

ridgewoodian: So what makes our mores better than “their” (however you might want to define “their”) mores. At least on this question, and assuming always that all marriages are entered into by consenting adults (which I know is not always the case the world over).

Our mores ARE better then theirs. That is one of the many reasons we are far superior and prosperous as a people. Women are considered equal to men. Women in many of those cultures are considered to be inferior or property of their husbands. Do you also believe that these women love being covered from head-to-toe to ward off the leering eyes of men? When I see veiled women of any culture here, I pity them. That veil is a means of control exerted over them by their fathers and then husbands. The practice of polygamy is degrading to women because are not seen as equal. That is why I asked you the question if you wouldn't mind sharing a wife with 5 husbands. Most men COULD NOT do it.
In my view, whatever is good for men is EQUALLY good for women.

ridgewoodian: It’s just that it’s so often classed with other more obviously criminal and immoral activities – even in the 19th Century, when there were few scruples about demeaning women. I wonder why that is.

Good point. If the people involved are consenting adults, I don't agree but do not consider it a horrific crime. The issue of child-brides has recently come to the forefront. Some of the mormons have used "religion" in order to justify forcing a young girl, as young as 13, to marry some man much older. This is also practiced in those cultures you mentioned above. THAT is called rape.

I was a 13 year old girl once upon a time. I can tell you the only boys I had a crush on were boys my own age. I had zero interest in old men(at that time guys older than 17).

I truly wonder if the custom of polygamy involved multiple husbands as the norm, would it still be around today?
I think not. As I said before, men COULD NOT handle it.

Sorry, I couldn't stop typing.

Anonymous said...

That's ok, Italian Girl, Ridgewoodian is known for his diarrhea of the keyboard. It's a tidal wave compared to your little ripple.

Ridgewoodian said...

ANONYMOUS: ...Ridgewoodian is known for his diarrhea of the keyboard.

Blah, blah, blah, blah. I look forward to the day when you have something to contribute.

Ridgewoodian said...

ITALIAN GIRL: If the people involved are consenting adults, I don't agree but do not consider it a horrific crime.

Well then we're agreed. If consenting adults - and I emphasize that, not child brides - agree to enter a relationship it's no one's business but there's.

ITALIAN GIRL: Our mores ARE better then theirs. That is one of the many reasons we are far superior and prosperous as a people.

I think that's shockingly arrogant - but at least you're honest, and I can admire that.

ITALIAN GIRL: Do you also believe that these women love being covered from head-to-toe to ward off the leering eyes of men?

That's a complicated issue. I agree that the reason given for doing so - that men are too full of lust to see any part of a woman they're not married or related to - is pretty, well, lame. Men should control themselves. But there are Muslim feminists - seriously! - who have "reclaimed" the veil, or at least the headscarf. I France there has been a huge controversy about a law forbidding headscarves and other religious symbols in schools. So, yes, you're right - these things can be used to control women but it's not as simple as just that.

ITALIAN GIRL: I truly wonder if the custom of polygamy involved multiple husbands as the norm, would it still be around today?

There have been a few cultures with polyandry (Tibet apparently was one, until it was outlawed by the Chinese). Not nearly as many as ones with polygyny. Whether that's because men just like to get some and don't want to have to hide it or because it's more conducive to larger families and more children, or for some other reason, I'm not qualified to say.

italian girl said...

ridgewoodian:
Yes, I guess there are some things we will never have the answers to unless you become entrenched in that lifestyle yourself.

I enjoyed this dialogue. It's nice to discuss social issues once in a while. City politics and "tweeding" can be tiresome at times.

Sorry Crappy. You're doing a great job though. Keep up the good work!

Wade Nichols said...

I've been wondering for a while now: What exactly is the problem with polygamy (provided it's consentual)?

Simple: "Winner Takes All" - In societies that allow polygamy, for every guy with 4 wives, that means there's 3 guys out there who probably won't ever marry. Thus, if we allowed polygamy in the United States, alpha males such as the ever so humble Wade Nichols would have all the quality women. Loser dogs such as Ridgewoodian would have to sit home and be content with internet porn.

See here:

http://www.isteve.com/2002_Problem_
with_Polygamy.htm

Wade Nichols said...

Ridgewoodian loves to argue the "merits" of polygamy because he feels it proves his PC/multicultural/tolerant bona fides.

Lenin's alleged statement about "useful idiots of the West" comes to mind when I read Ridgewoodian's screeds that he tries to pass off as some sort of intellectual brilliance. Osama bin Laden doesn't have to so much as lift a finger, he has his willing quislings such as Ridgewoodian do the work for him! Ridgewoodian fails to realize that if that "religion of peace" that practices polygamy were ever to take over, Ridgewoodian would be one of the first ones to be publicly stoned by the morality police.

Ridgewoodian would probably try to justify human sacrifice by the Mayans if it would win him points with our "uninvited guests from south of the border".

Anonymous said...

maspeth moms says..

So what is the bottom line,, are the police going to investigate??

Street Fighting Man said...

Maspeth Mom: Go back to eating your way into "wide load" status and leave the fighting to us.

Ridgewoodian said...

ITALIAN GIRL: I enjoyed this dialogue. It's nice to discuss social issues once in a while. City politics and "tweeding" can be tiresome at times.

We obviously disagree on our outlooks on the world but at least we can disagree civilly and reasonably intelligently. Alas, not everyone can be like you. Viz.:

WADE NICHOLS: Thus, if we allowed polygamy in the United States, alpha males such as the ever so humble Wade Nichols would have all the quality women.

So what have you done since Spitzer ruined the Emperors Club for you? Have you found some seven-diamond honeys for sale somewhere else? I take it you’re not relying on your charm, wit, and intelligence. Because if so my heartfelt condolences on your enforced celibacy.

The rest of your insane rantings don’t even merit a response.

Wade Nichols said...

So what have you done since Spitzer ruined the Emperors Club for you? Have you found some seven-diamond honeys for sale somewhere else? I take it you’re not relying on your charm, wit, and intelligence. Because if so my heartfelt condolences on your enforced celibacy.

Spitzer and the Emperor's Club have no impact on my love life. I don't have to pay for much of anything in life, that includes drinks as well.

The joke is on you actually. Your phoney attempts at chivalry vis–à–vis "Italian Girl" are quite laughable! It wouldn't surprise me if "Italian Girl" is in fact my aforementioned person sitting at home with a bag of Doritos and a can of Coke, and is very much a GUY, not an "Italian Girl"!!!!

But of course, not that there's anything wrong with your proclivities, Ridgewoodian!!!

italian girl said...

Hey Wade Nichols:

It is very clear you and ridgewoodian have an ongoing dispute. I don't know what it's about but I hope you can resolve it.

"It wouldn't surprise me if "Italian Girl" is in fact my aforementioned person sitting at home with a bag of Doritos and a can of Coke, and is very much a GUY, not an "Italian Girl"!!!!"

But now you've insulted ME! What have I done?
First of all, I HATE Doritos. I don't drink any soda whatsoever. And the last time I checked I am very much a girl. Otherwise buying high heels and skirts all these years has been a huge mistake. Lastly, I'm pretty sure I'm Italian because most of my family seems to still live there.

Wade Nichols said...

But now you've insulted ME! What have I done?
First of all, I HATE Doritos. I don't drink any soda whatsoever. And the last time I checked I am very much a girl. Otherwise buying high heels and skirts all these years has been a huge mistake. Lastly, I'm pretty sure I'm Italian because most of my family seems to still live there.


I'll take your word that you are indeed who you say you are. I merely wished to point out Ridgewoodian's obvious phoney attempts at chivalry, and the fact that we all can't be 100% sure of someone's identity on the internet (without tracing IP addresses). Do you really think my name is Wade Nichols?

In fact, I often get tired of flaunting my mastery of the English language and my humility, and enjoy reading other people throwing verbal metaphorical left hooks in Ridgewoodian's direction!

Ridgewoodian said...

WADE NICHOLS: I don't have to pay for much of anything in life, that includes drinks as well.

What are you saying, exactly? That you’re a spoiled brat? A welfare queen? A freeloading alcoholic? These things do you no credit. Get a job and go to AA.

WADE NICHOLS: Your phoney attempts at chivalry vis–à–vis "Italian Girl" are quite laughable! It wouldn't surprise me if "Italian Girl" is in fact my aforementioned person sitting at home with a bag of Doritos and a can of Coke, and is very much a GUY, not an "Italian Girl"!!!!

I’d hardly call it chivalry, merely good manners towards one with whom I disagree but who has not made a full bitch of herself. I know that’s a foreign concept to you, good manners, and, as this site has shown time and time again, all foreigners are bad, Bad, BAD. Whether she’s really a he a she or an it I have no information – and I doubt you do, either – and even less interest. (I do hear, though, that there’s plenty of gender bending going on around here. Oooooh! Kinky!)

WADE NICHOLS: …not that there's anything wrong with your proclivities, Ridgewoodian!!!

You have no idea about my proclivities, as you have no idea about much of anything else.