Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.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 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Criminal Records Expunged for St. Louis Gun Couple Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 18:19:09 -0400 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 80 Message-ID: References: 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 00:19:11 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d2d90a48413b38a40b2d22a00d23c588"; logging-data="1831021"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/QubZLQxZ4qBb2FWfwUvytAwz+v9sPxoM=" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:E0o5hlEBvzg25Byyi84oJuOfzjk= In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 4957 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?