| Deutsch English Français Italiano |
|
<17daf59b2ed0f322$518541$1616079$c8d58268@news.newsdemon.com> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 02:50:54 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: Criminal Records Expunged for St. Louis Gun Couple Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv References: <B7WcnT_drY_sm-_7nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com> <v51hle$2kkd7$1@dont-email.me> <atropos-295153.09363520062024@news.giganews.com> <v51vfa$2n6c1$2@dont-email.me> <1oucnSudyL3aAen7nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@giganews.com> Content-Language: en-US From: trotsky <gmsingh@email.com> In-Reply-To: <1oucnSudyL3aAen7nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@giganews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 50 Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!diablo1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.iad1.usenetexpress.com!news.newsdemon.com!not-for-mail Nntp-Posting-Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2024 07:50:54 +0000 X-Received-Bytes: 2854 Organization: NewsDemon - www.newsdemon.com X-Complaints-To: abuse@newsdemon.com Message-Id: <17daf59b2ed0f322$518541$1616079$c8d58268@news.newsdemon.com> Bytes: 3236 On 6/20/24 4:16 PM, BTR1701 wrote: > On Jun 20, 2024 at 12:21:14 PM PDT, "moviePig" <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: > >> On 6/20/2024 12:36 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>> In article <v51hle$2kkd7$1@dont-email.me>, >>> moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote: >>> >>>> On 6/20/2024 1:03 AM, anim8rfsk wrote: >>>>> 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"? >>>>> >>>>> 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. Well horseshitted and Oath Keeper'd.