Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-2.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 22:56:14 +0000 From: BTR1701 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Criminal Records Expunged for St. Louis Gun Couple References: User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b3 (Intel Mac OS X) Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 15:53:52 -0700 Message-ID: Lines: 84 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-hZVum7sxhXc5ToBgDtcz0VHXsaRIbr3+WAKAoD7xXQhOnWeBSLWtOJLfOGmE+74erSrgtaK243ziWJr!0+ilFSldpfxUbWLzkJ5mHM8L9DPcSXrKSRfiPIktEbalGQgONy7Zk8HsKIxb0Uv2INa5iBw2OJDt!bnw= 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: 5121 In article , moviePig wrote: > On 6/25/2024 3:48 PM, BTR1701 wrote: > > In article , > > moviePig wrote: > > > >> On 6/20/2024 10:24 PM, BTR1701 wrote: > >>> In article , FPP > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> On 6/20/24 9:35 PM, BTR1701 wrote: > >>>>> In article , FPP > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> On 6/19/24 3:09 PM, BTR1701 wrote: > >>>>>>> In article , > >>>>>>> moviePig wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On 6/19/2024 12:27 PM, BTR1701 wrote: > >>>>>>>>> In article , > >>>>>>>>> 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"? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> 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? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> 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. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> They were in the street, not on McClosky's property. > >>>>> > >>>>> The street was private property, too, smooth brain. > >>>>> > >>>>> And there's nothing wrong with indicating to a screaming mob that's > >>>>> already trespassed on private property what will happen to them if they > >>>>> trespass any further. > >>> > >>>> There certainly was something wrong, and they were charged based on the > >>>> law as written. > >>> > >>> But we don't care about the law as written, remember? It's only the > >>> spirit we should be concerned with. And the spirit of private property > >>> laws certainly does allow for warning off mobs of people in the middle > >>> of nationwide violent riots from trespassing on your land and doing you > >>> harm. > >> > >> Even if that were (absurdly) the "spirit" of private property > > > > Of course it's within the spirit of private property laws. Private > > property laws are meaningless if they provide you no remedy. > > It's in the spirit of private property to kill trespassers? Who killed (or even tried to kill) anyone here?