Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Criminal Records Expunged for St. Louis Gun Couple
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2024 16:54:43 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <v4vgil$258cf$1@dont-email.me>
References: <B7WcnT_drY_sm-_7nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <v4t2ai$1imbc$1@dont-email.me>
 <atropos-1CD7DC.18410418062024@news.giganews.com>
 <v4uvta$21spc$2@dont-email.me>
 <atropos-DE6AC6.09273119062024@news.giganews.com>
 <v4v8ug$23o16$2@dont-email.me>
 <atropos-542467.12091619062024@news.giganews.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: Wed, 19 Jun 2024 22:54:46 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="8c64deeef54593d1938d941691bc3ec9";
	logging-data="2269583"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19NnOJqrA2VaK0qqlUkEEyRbJ7YtctVyPw="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ZBttB/ed85st0DeUjcgnciG45uE=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <atropos-542467.12091619062024@news.giganews.com>
Bytes: 3250

On 6/19/2024 3:09 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <v4v8ug$23o16$2@dont-email.me>,
>   moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 6/19/2024 12:27 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> In article <v4uvta$21spc$2@dont-email.me>,
>>>    moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 6/18/2024 9:41 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>> In article <v4t2ai$1imbc$1@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>     "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> BTR1701 <no_email@invalid.invalid> 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"?
>>>
>>> Maybe in a public place like a university quad, but not in a private
>>> residential neighborhood.
>>
>> Under the presumption that each point of view must give some ground
> 
> Why would you presume that?

Why would you presume I presume it, especially after I've explicitly 
labeled it a 'presumption'?


>> I'd say that the protesters' rights depend on history, geometry, etc.
> 
> I'd say (and I'd be right) that no protester has rights to come onto my
> private property at all. I'm the only one who gets to decide who's
> allowed and who isn't. It's pretty much in the definition.

So, e.g., we can suspend the right of peaceable assembly by temporarily 
transferring public property rights to some private party...