Path: 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: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 17:47:09 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 98 Message-ID: References: <4enc7jp80vbphg0hc5iociurasnko1obk0@4ax.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, 26 Jun 2024 23:47:10 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d2d90a48413b38a40b2d22a00d23c588"; logging-data="2466643"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19ZbBqeg8bCwRclqXvPoSnD59hhZeE0SQ4=" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:Ry91A8Zscx35GwToIClM+X0teJQ= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: On 6/26/2024 5:04 PM, BTR1701 wrote: > In article , > moviePig wrote: > >> On 6/25/2024 11:13 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>> In article , >>> moviePig wrote: >>> >>>> On 6/25/2024 6:52 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>> In article , >>>>> moviePig wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On 6/25/2024 3:52 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>> In article , >>>>>>> moviePig wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 6/22/2024 1:20 AM, The Horny Goat wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Fri, 21 Jun 2024 23:13:14 -0400, moviePig >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> 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, there >>>>>>>>>> are other laws, including common-sense ones, whose "spirit" figures >>>>>>>>>> in, too. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Nevertheless there are few cases in law where a warning to the bad >>>>>>>>> guys is required. One of the key points in the Bouchie case was that >>>>>>>>> in was on a farm a minimum of 1/2 hour from the nearest police >>>>>>>>> station and where 4 drunken people came onto his farm, one >>>>>>>>> attempting to get into the farmer's locked truck. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> In such situations (particularly with no immediate expectation of >>>>>>>>> police attendance) I'm going to err on the side of the homeowner - >>>>>>>>> and I wouldn't impose any further burden on the homeowner because >>>>>>>>> he had reason to believe one or more of the 4 people in their truck >>>>>>>>> was inebriated or of a different ethnicity. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Colten_Boushie >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This particular verdict got roughly the same reaction as the OJ >>>>>>>>> Simpson case but on a smaller scale and I guarantee Rhino would >>>>>>>>> remember it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Here's an instructive (but fictional) example: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The trespasser steps off the sidewalk and sits down on your >>>>>>>> lawn. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You brandish your gun, saying, "Get off my lawn or I'll shoot." >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> He yawns and remains seated. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Comic-book fantasies aside, what do you do? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That's why you don't threaten deadly force unless you're willing to use >>>>>>> it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> However that's a separate issue from whether just holding a gun as a >>>>>>> screaming unruly mob-- which is already trespassing by its mere >>>>>>> presence-- marches up the street toward you in the middle of a >>>>>>> nationwide paroxysm of violence to which the police seem unwilling or >>>>>>> unable to stand in opposition is, or ought to be, a criminal act. >>>>>> >>>>>> In the circumstances you yourself paint, there's obviously no such thing >>>>>> as "*JUST* holding a gun". >>>> >>>>> Were the rooftop Koreans during the Rodney King riots criminals? >>>> >>>> I don't remember what you're talking about ...but possibly they were >>>> threatening deadly force. >>> >>> Google it. >>> >>> Theirs were among the only stores in those neighborhoods not looted >>> and/or burned, so apparently whatever they were threatening, it was >>> justified. >> >> Many obscenely wrong measures can be effective without being justified. > > So they should have just let their property and livelihoods be destroyed > to protect the poor wittle rioters from feeling skeered? > > What exactly is "obscenely wrong" about arming yourself in the middle of > a violent riot and defending yourself and your property? > > Why are you always on the side of the shitbags of this world? I'm not on anyone's "side" ...and, since I wasn't there, can't even rule out what I myself would or wouldn't have done. What I'm generally speaking up for is the last lost vestige of humanity that invariably gets trampled by macho revenge-movie fantasies of "cold justice".