Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: "Adam H. Kerman" Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Organized Gangs of Illegals Prowl Countryside for Homes to Steal Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2024 18:18:05 -0000 (UTC) Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 43 Message-ID: References: <95v50j968ssk1ke50k7pfkvbila40rh6fv@4ax.com> Injection-Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2024 18:18:05 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="3a1dca0f6cfcb209f610255b8ebeab74"; logging-data="2404262"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19FqFO9FPWAveoTgbI8iy5G9Frv7S4evmk=" Cancel-Lock: sha1://UFiTnjc5ChBcecaGn2AP+uusU= X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010) Bytes: 2961 shawn wrote: >Tue, 26 Mar 2024 16:10:16 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman wrote: >>BTR1701 wrote: >>>Ubiquitous wrote: >>>>ahk@chinet.com wrote: >>>>>>. . . >>>>>Neither are they "squatters" for the properties in question were never >>>>>abandoned. In your New York example, the criminal falsely told the >>>>>police he was a tenant. The police did not believe it. Strange, though, >>>>>that they failed to arrest him for making a false statement to the >>>>>police in a criminal investigation. Isn't that obstruction of justice? >>>>As I understand it, the squatter claiming to be a renter means it's no >>>>longer a police matter. >>>The police matter would be them responding to the fuckers I shot when I >>>came home and found them in my house. >>Let's ignore shooting anybody. >>I don't see why the police can't make an arrest of the criminals. The >>rightful occupant calls the police, demonstrates evidence of occupancy >>like a key to the lock, showing identification, mail with his own name >>on it, utility bills, possibly even finding his own lease. Maybe there >>is damage to a door or window. >>The criminal claiming to be the rightful tenant has lied. He can be >>charged with a crime for lying, for the breaking and entering, and for >>criminal trespass. >>Make the arrest. It is indeed a criminal matter. >That would be true in almost any other state. My only guess is the >police have become so unsure of any action being taken against >criminals now that if there is any doubt about the outcome they are >hesitant to go through the motions. Hard to otherwise explain why they >wouldn't take the obvious illegal occupants of the home into custody. To the extant that police refuse to protect and defend honest law-abiding taxpayers, I say "Defend the police." We don't need police who won't arrest criminals.