An Edgewater man has admitted to stabbing himself in the leg Monday night because he didn't want to go to work.
Aaron Seibers, 29, reported that he was stabbed on his way to work, a Blockbuster Video Store on Sheridan Boulevard.
He claimed that three skinheads or Hispanic males dressed in black tried to rob him and stabbed him in the lower left leg.
After reporting the stabbing at his job, he was taken to Saint Anthony's Hospital.
The Denver Channel reports:
Investigators reviewed surveillance video taken at a nearby business that failed to show an attack where Siebers claimed it had happened.
The Denver Post reports that after the man was released from the hospital, detectives confronted him with evidence that conflicted with his changing stories about the attack.
At that point, Siebers confessed and told them he stabbed himself because he didn't want to go to work, said the police spokesman.
Siebers had taken a bus from Denver to the Blockbuster store in Edgewater. The surveillance video from the Target store showed him walking from the bus stop to the store without any indication he was suffering from a deep stab wound.
Seibers was arrested and charged with false reporting and obstructing a police officer.
<classic.mr.h...@gmail.com> wrote: > An Edgewater man has admitted to stabbing himself in the leg Monday > night because he didn't want to go to work.
> Aaron Seibers, 29, reported that he was stabbed on his way to work, a > Blockbuster Video Store on Sheridan Boulevard.
> He claimed that three skinheads or Hispanic males dressed in black > tried to rob him and stabbed him in the lower left leg.
> After reporting the stabbing at his job, he was taken to Saint > Anthony's Hospital.
> The Denver Channel reports:
> Investigators reviewed surveillance video taken at a nearby business > that failed to show an attack where Siebers claimed it had happened.
> The Denver Post reports that after the man was released from the > hospital, detectives confronted him with evidence that conflicted with > his changing stories about the attack.
> At that point, Siebers confessed and told them he stabbed himself > because he didn't want to go to work, said the police spokesman.
> Siebers had taken a bus from Denver to the Blockbuster store in > Edgewater. The surveillance video from the Target store showed him > walking from the bus stop to the store without any indication he was > suffering from a deep stab wound.
> Seibers was arrested and charged with false reporting and obstructing > a police officer.
> "Yes ma'am, TITANIC sure was the *best* movie ever."
> "No sir. I agree that the guns in E.T. were way over the line."
> (I'm surprised he didn't cut his foot clean off...)
The guy wanted to get out of work, period. Blockbuster had nothing to do with it. My local Blockbuster has always looked like a fine place to work, because it has a good manager. And no one is expected to agree with customers about movies there.
(As for 'Titanic', it had some bad flaws, but still was a great movie, loved by billions around the world, not just by American teeny-DiCaprio-boppers, as the myth has it.)
> > "Yes ma'am, TITANIC sure was the *best* movie ever."
> > "No sir. I agree that the guns in E.T. were way over the line."
> > (I'm surprised he didn't cut his foot clean off...)
> The guy wanted to get out of work, period. Blockbuster > had nothing to do with it. My local Blockbuster has > always looked like a fine place to work, because it has > a good manager. And no one is expected to agree with > customers about movies there.
> (As for 'Titanic', it had some bad flaws, but still was a > great movie, loved by billions around the world, not just > by American teeny-DiCaprio-boppers, as the myth has it.)
My dislike of Blockbuster is residue from the days when they dominated the rental market, yet refused to carry 'NC-17' titles.
(TITANIC can be entered only in the 'Great Movie' contests that include, say, GONE WITH THE WIND or THE GREATEST SHOW ON EARTH... i.e., contests that, say, LAWRENCE OF ARABIA could also enter, but wouldn't...)
> > > "Yes ma'am, TITANIC sure was the *best* movie ever."
> > > "No sir. I agree that the guns in E.T. were way over the line."
> > > (I'm surprised he didn't cut his foot clean off...)
> > The guy wanted to get out of work, period. Blockbuster > > had nothing to do with it. My local Blockbuster has > > always looked like a fine place to work, because it has > > a good manager. And no one is expected to agree with > > customers about movies there.
> > (As for 'Titanic', it had some bad flaws, but still was a > > great movie, loved by billions around the world, not just > > by American teeny-DiCaprio-boppers, as the myth has it.)
> My dislike of Blockbuster is residue from the days when they dominated > the rental market, yet refused to carry 'NC-17' titles.
> (TITANIC can be entered only in the 'Great Movie' contests that > include, say, GONE WITH THE WIND or THE GREATEST SHOW ON EARTH... > i.e., contests that, say, LAWRENCE OF ARABIA could also enter, but > wouldn't...)
> --
Worse even still was when the began to carry reedited films or not at all; even more so when film makers began to get gun-shy from fear they'll not make the cut with the folks at BB.
> > > "Yes ma'am, TITANIC sure was the *best* movie ever."
> > > "No sir. I agree that the guns in E.T. were way over the line."
> > > (I'm surprised he didn't cut his foot clean off...)
> > The guy wanted to get out of work, period. Blockbuster > > had nothing to do with it. My local Blockbuster has > > always looked like a fine place to work, because it has > > a good manager. And no one is expected to agree with > > customers about movies there.
> > (As for 'Titanic', it had some bad flaws, but still was a > > great movie, loved by billions around the world, not just > > by American teeny-DiCaprio-boppers, as the myth has it.)
> My dislike of Blockbuster is residue from the days when they dominated > the rental market, yet refused to carry 'NC-17' titles.
Since I never heard of that, I don't know when those days were.
> (TITANIC can be entered only in the 'Great Movie' contests that > include, say, GONE WITH THE WIND or THE GREATEST SHOW ON EARTH... > i.e., contests that, say, LAWRENCE OF ARABIA could also enter, but > wouldn't...)
'Great' can cover a lot of ground. Of the four named above, I wouldn't include the DeMille one among the great except for the documentary scenes of setting up the circus, which he narrated.
>Worse even still was when the began to carry reedited films or not at
all; even more so when film makers began to get gun-shy from fear they'll not make the cut with the folks at BB.
That was the worst thing they ever did, IMO. Their sanitized version of "Deliverance" came close to making no sense at all. Prides goes before a fall and all that...
> <classic.mr.h...@gmail.com> wrote: > > An Edgewater man has admitted to stabbing himself in the leg Monday > > night because he didn't want to go to work.
> > Aaron Seibers, 29, reported that he was stabbed on his way to work, a > > Blockbuster Video Store on Sheridan Boulevard.
> > He claimed that three skinheads or Hispanic males dressed in black > > tried to rob him and stabbed him in the lower left leg.
> > After reporting the stabbing at his job, he was taken to Saint > > Anthony's Hospital.
> > The Denver Channel reports:
> > Investigators reviewed surveillance video taken at a nearby business > > that failed to show an attack where Siebers claimed it had happened.
> > The Denver Post reports that after the man was released from the > > hospital, detectives confronted him with evidence that conflicted with > > his changing stories about the attack.
> > At that point, Siebers confessed and told them he stabbed himself > > because he didn't want to go to work, said the police spokesman.
> > Siebers had taken a bus from Denver to the Blockbuster store in > > Edgewater. The surveillance video from the Target store showed him > > walking from the bus stop to the store without any indication he was > > suffering from a deep stab wound.
> > Seibers was arrested and charged with false reporting and obstructing > > a police officer.
> "Yes ma'am, TITANIC sure was the *best* movie ever."
> "No sir. I agree that the guns in E.T. were way over the line."
"No sir, sorry, Paranormal Activity isn't out on DVD yet. No, maam, sorry, This Is It isn't out on DVD yet. No, sir, sorry, the Jim Carrey Christmas Carol isn't out on DVD yet."
"If Burt Reynolds is in it, it has to be good!" (I overheard this from a Blockbuster clerk to a customer inquiring about some crap straight-to-DVD Burt Reynolds flick.)
> > "Yes ma'am, TITANIC sure was the *best* movie ever."
> > "No sir. I agree that the guns in E.T. were way over the line."
> > (I'm surprised he didn't cut his foot clean off...)
> The guy wanted to get out of work, period.
It reminds me of the short story by Bentley Little, where some guy gets carjacked by a fat redneck psychopath but after awhile he stops worrying about his situation because being carjacked by a fat redneck psychopath at least gets him out of work for the day.
all; even more so when film makers began to get gun-shy from fear
> they'll not make the cut with the folks at BB.
> That was the worst thing they ever did, IMO. > Their sanitized version of "Deliverance" came close to making no sense at all. > Prides goes before a fall and all that...
When did Blockbuster release a "sanitized" version of Deliverance? Blockbuster has a lot of faults--I've stopped going--but the whole censorship of movies thing is some leftover complaint from the 1990s.
> all; even more so when film makers began to get gun-shy from fear
> > they'll not make the cut with the folks at BB.
> > That was the worst thing they ever did, IMO. > > Their sanitized version of "Deliverance" came close to making no sense at all. > > Prides goes before a fall and all that...
> When did Blockbuster release a "sanitized" version of Deliverance? > Blockbuster has a lot of faults--I've stopped going--but the whole > censorship of movies thing is some leftover complaint from the > 1990s.
Whatever BB did must have been in the 90s. I was renting VHS tapes from Turtles back then. But the DVDs that I've been renting from BB all through this decade, before switching to Netflix, certainly have not been censored.
It appears that BB is now suffering from some sort of customer hangover from the 90s, if what is being said in this thread is true. But it may not be true; eg: liberals have been unfairly on Wal-Mart's case for a long time, because Wal-Mart has not been unionized. One must beware believing liberals' complaints about businesses.
On Nov 4, 6:07 pm, "steve" <st...@steve.com> wrote:
> On 4-Nov-2009, william <wlahe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > One must beware believing liberals' complaints > > > about businesses.
> > But not anyone else's? Only liberals have hidden agendas, I guess.
> It's no hidden agenda, William. It's a hostility towards free markets, and > it's in plain view.
Netflix kicked Blockbuster's ass in the marketplace. People who don't like Blockbuster generally belong to Netflix or maybe now they're using Redbox or some other kiosk vendor, so where is the hostility towards free markets? Blockbuster was too expensive and they didn't adjust to the times. People went elsewhere. Capitalism worked.
> all; even more so when film makers began to get gun-shy from fear
> > they'll not make the cut with the folks at BB.
> > That was the worst thing they ever did, IMO. > > Their sanitized version of "Deliverance" came close to making no sense at > > all. > > Prides goes before a fall and all that...
> When did Blockbuster release a "sanitized" version of Deliverance? > Blockbuster has a lot of faults--I've stopped going--but the whole > censorship of movies thing is some leftover complaint from the > 1990s.
Whatever BB did must have been in the 90s. I was renting VHS tapes from Turtles back then. But the DVDs that I've been renting from BB all through this decade, before switching to Netflix, certainly have not been censored.
It appears that BB is now suffering from some sort of customer hangover from the 90s, if what is being said in this thread is true. But it may not be true; eg: liberals have been unfairly on Wal-Mart's case for a long time, because Wal-Mart has not been unionized. One must beware believing liberals' complaints about businesses. ----------------------------------------------------------------- The last time I patronized BB WAS back in the 90s when movies still were on VHS. The VHS version of "Deliverance" I rented from them was sanitized down to a "G" rating (for all I could tell, Ned Beatty and the hillbilly played spin the bottle!). That's when I stopped renting movies from them, so I have no idea what they are doing now (nor do I care since Netflix gets 100% of my rental business) Maybe you'd like to explain why you think any business complaint by a liberal is somehow invalid?
On Nov 4, 7:04 pm, "The Giant Brain" <gi...@brain.invalid> wrote:
> ... Maybe you'd like to explain why you think any business > complaint by a liberal is somehow invalid?
Not invalid, just suspect. I was at Wal-Mart today, and as always before, I saw nothing but happy campers among the (non-unionized) employees.
If they were unionized, then they sure would be worried about the Obama administration's efforts to make union ballots non-secret. What a joke; no secret ballot here in the USA. No secret ballot in institutions famous for intimidation, even outright thuggery, against those who don't toe the union line.
On Nov 4, 6:07 pm, "steve" <st...@steve.com> wrote:
> On 4-Nov-2009, william <wlahe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > One must beware believing liberals' complaints > > > about businesses.
> > But not anyone else's? Only liberals have hidden agendas, I guess.
> It's no hidden agenda, William. It's a hostility towards free markets, and > it's in plain view.
Since I raised the issue here of BB's censorship: Yes, it was way back when (afaik)... but it was sufficiently repugnant that the taint lingers in memory. Yes, BB had every legal right to do it... as well as every social responsibility not to. And, yes, if a slightly less free market means I can drive a stake through the heart of mass censorship, then pass me the hammer...
On Nov 4, 7:28 pm, moviePig <pwall...@moviepig.com> wrote:
> On Nov 4, 6:07 pm, "steve" <st...@steve.com> wrote:
> > On 4-Nov-2009, william <wlahe...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > One must beware believing liberals' complaints > > > > about businesses.
> > > But not anyone else's? Only liberals have hidden agendas, I guess.
> > It's no hidden agenda, William. It's a hostility towards free markets, and > > it's in plain view.
> Since I raised the issue here of BB's censorship: Yes, it was way > back when (afaik)... but it was sufficiently repugnant that the taint > lingers in memory.
I didn't like the censorship, if you can call it censorship, since it was more about the willing capitulation of spineless film studios, the same as making "clean versions" of rap CDs available to Walmart or allowing the "Make a Porno" to be taken away from Zack and Miri. Speaking of porn . . . the first Blockbuster I ever went into, I was walking in circles inside the store trying to find the porn section. I didn't want to ask anyone. I'd never been in a video store without a porn section before. At the time, it was unthinkable. Around that time Blockbuster was notorious for refusing to carry The Last Temptation of Christ.
That was always my main objection to Blockbuster--those hideous sterile buildings with an atmosphere that made you want to get in and out as quickly as possible. It was such a comedown from the funky eccentricities of the porn-pushing locally owned mom and pop neighborhood video stores that made watching movies in the 80s such a discovery-filled adventure. It was less about censorship and more about bad vibes.
> I didn't like the censorship, if you can call it censorship, since it > was more about the willing capitulation of spineless film studios, the > same as making "clean versions" of rap CDs available to Walmart or > allowing the "Make a Porno" to be taken away from Zack and Miri. > Speaking of porn . . . the first Blockbuster I ever went into, I was > walking in circles inside the store trying to find the porn section. > I didn't want to ask anyone. I'd never been in a video store without > a porn section before. At the time, it was unthinkable. Around that > time Blockbuster was notorious for refusing to carry The Last > Temptation of Christ.
> That was always my main objection to Blockbuster--those hideous > sterile buildings with an atmosphere that made you want to get in and > out as quickly as possible. It was such a comedown from the funky > eccentricities of the porn-pushing locally owned mom and pop > neighborhood video stores that made watching movies in the 80s such a > discovery-filled adventure. It was less about censorship and more > about bad vibes.
Seems strange that you make porn a central part of your argument. My experience with Turtles for renting VHS tapes in the 90s was that it didn't 'push' porn, but it had an 'alternate lifestyles' section, or something like that.
On Nov 4, 6:07 pm, "steve" <st...@steve.com> wrote:
> It's no hidden agenda, William. It's a hostility towards free markets, and > it's in plain view.
So according to your yahoo fringe politics anyone who complains about any store (read participator in the "free" markets) is a latent Marxist ready to take your guns, burn your Bibles and make the Girl Scouts handmaidens to the abortionists. Once again you're jimmying a conversation to spout more of your silly politics. All politics is silly as far as I'm concerned and nowhere is that more apparent is when someone tries to turn a complaint against Block Buster into a soapbox for something entirely different. It's sooooooo transparent as to be funny. Trust me, Steve. I'm laughing on the inside.
nick <nickmacpherso...@AOL.com> wrote: >Speaking of porn . . . the first Blockbuster I ever went into, I was >walking in circles inside the store trying to find the porn section.
Nick!! Your mind is in the cinema gutter!!
>That was always my main objection to Blockbuster--those hideous >sterile buildings with an atmosphere that made you want to get in and >out as quickly as possible.
My favorite video outlet for shopping around -- not a rental outlet, btw -- was DVD Planet on Beach Boulevard. Man, they had everything, all perfectly arranged on the shelves, category by category. And every category under the sun: TV, European, Japanese, Hollywood Golden Age Studio, Special Interest (you know, the discs most people aren't interested in), Sports, Teleplays, everything. Oh, & porn.
____ On the question of playing continuo during a Mozart concerto, I can only reaffirm my belief that it is perfectly fine as long as it is inaudible.
calvin <cri...@windstream.net> wrote: >Seems strange that you make porn a central part of your >argument. My experience with Turtles for renting VHS tapes >in the 90s was that it didn't 'push' porn, but it had an 'alternate >lifestyles' section, or something like that.
"Alternate lifestyle" I guess applies only to bisexual, whereas gay & les has to be "alternative lifestyle." That's the joke among grammarians, anyway.
____ On the question of playing continuo during a Mozart concerto, I can only reaffirm my belief that it is perfectly fine as long as it is inaudible.
> ... Maybe you'd like to explain why you think any business > complaint by a liberal is somehow invalid?
Not invalid, just suspect. I was at Wal-Mart today, and as always before, I saw nothing but happy campers among the (non-unionized) employees.
If they were unionized, then they sure would be worried about the Obama administration's efforts to make union ballots non-secret. What a joke; no secret ballot here in the USA. No secret ballot in institutions famous for intimidation, even outright thuggery, against those who don't toe the union line. ---------------------------------------------------
There, there Cal. Drink your milk, put on your tinfoil hat and don't worry about the big bad liberals.
|
