Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: moviePig Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Criminal Records Expunged for St. Louis Gun Couple Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 15:21:14 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 42 Message-ID: References: <273351066.740513925.531451.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com> Reply-To: nobody@nowhere.com MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 21:21:14 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="5f6723e81ced72bfe713efc1ebd17bbb"; logging-data="2857345"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19HnDUR4953AImbRZA+Qeg8toXakg0qLic=" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:450IgyRzPoJjkdMx7dp7hMknjKg= In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 3032 On 6/20/2024 12:36 PM, BTR1701 wrote: > In article , > moviePig wrote: > >> On 6/20/2024 1:03 AM, anim8rfsk wrote: >>> moviePig wrote: >>>> On 6/18/2024 9:41 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>> In article , >>>>> "Adam H. Kerman" wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> ST. LOUIS (AP) - A judge has expunged the misdemeanor convictions >>>>>>> of a St. Louis couple who waved guns at racial injustice protesters >>>>>>> outside their mansion in 2020. Now they want their guns back. >>>>>> >>>>>> I had no idea that four years later, this still hadn't happened. >>>>>> >>>>>> It was a gated community, which are all over St. Louis. They were >>>>>> trespassing. >>>>> >>>>> Apparently 'trespassing' is a meaningless term when you're doing it for >>>>> 'social justice'. >>>> >>>> Don't you even *pretend* there's a built-in tug-of-war between >>>> "trespassing" and "peaceable assembly"? >>> >>> They broke through a locked gate to get into the neighborhood and >>> lied that it was simply their route to get somewhere else because >>> there's only the one way in and out of the community. So they weren't >>> passing through. They broke and entered. >> >> Then, sure, I'd be royally pissed, too ...but still must ask whether >> deadly force is an appropriate threat to protect one's lawn. > > We don't decide appropriateness in the criminal courts. We decide > whether conduct violates the law. Though not why I asked it, I think the question -- however phrased -- is indeed appropriate to a courtroom.