Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 21:16:55 +0000 From: BTR1701 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Criminal Records Expunged for St. Louis Gun Couple References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=fixed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Usenapp/0.92.2/l for MacOS Message-ID: <1oucnSudyL3aAen7nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@giganews.com> Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 21:16:55 +0000 Lines: 46 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-3uFRuO9MC+SaUHaYU+nEv1o/CDh+f42+gZJrXIhzomznWN9DBRqOy/HacdUU/VdHn9jE12Gddy2TCeN!jNkrWAjN/o2eQrxTWmfoyfb5X7VZC/n2yJxX3h3uqTtBC0ravz9jsJ+HHxJMyLcPE2Y7MMIlJgWr X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 Bytes: 3167 X-Original-Lines: 45 On Jun 20, 2024 at 12:21:14 PM PDT, "moviePig" wrote: > 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. Courts are obligated to issue rulings based on the law, not on whatever feelings of societal etiquette a particular jurist may have.