Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Gov. Katie Hobbs (D Arizona) vetoes bill allowing police to arrest trespassers falsely claiming to be tenants
Date: Wed, 1 May 2024 13:50:34 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <v0thb9$368n5$5@dont-email.me>
References: <v0orib$1tvca$1@dont-email.me> <2vl03jltkhjgbatrjvpa09fh5fkvcf3hne@4ax.com> <1606348247.736140320.899623.anim8rfsk-cox.net@news.easynews.com> <pkh33j5tu665j8t582gd3v58af2haa0jm4@4ax.com>
Injection-Date: Wed, 01 May 2024 15:50:34 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="06e47cabec362a3dfc407e21ed608b80";
	logging-data="3351269"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19eCfJfZvd9hq5pRjEljPCnEV+/CDl8FR8="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:/63iVtodu8vQGBDr2pIfhTgbHW0=
X-Newsreader: trn 4.0-test77 (Sep 1, 2010)
Bytes: 3750

The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>Mon, 29 Apr 2024 23:23:20 -0700, anim8rfsk <anim8rfsk@cox.net> wrote:

>>>>The governor claimed it "fails to leverage existing legal mechanisms,
>>>>respect the due process rights of lawful tenants, and minimize
>>>>unintended consequences such as for victims of domestic violence."

>>>>The bill's sponsor said it did not affect existing landlord-tenant law,
>>>>and it exempted family members and those agreeing to co-habitate.

>>>What the heck do issues of domestic violence have to do with squatters
>>>moving in when the homeowner is away and refusing to vamoose in near
>>>record time when found out?

>>>If >I< were Governor I'd work towards instant eviction 

>>Is it eviction? I mean these people are intruders. The cops should drag
>>them out by the scruffs of their necks on the spot, and straight to jail.

>OK fair enough on 'eviction' (a poor choice of words on my part)  -

It's the point I've been making all along. In the law, semantics matter.
In landlord-tenant law, both the landlord and tenant have specific
rights. If the tenant becomes non-cooperative, then there is an eviction
process which delays the judgment against the tenant but ultimately
forces them to vacate.

None of this has to do with landlord-tenant law. There is no "eviction"
to perform. These are trespassers who committed property crimes to enter
the property who then commit fraud -- another crimimal act -- in falsely
claiming tenancy.

Furthermore, they are NOT squatters. Again, in law, a squatter has taken
adverse possession of land THAT HAS BEEN ABANDONED after a minimum
period of time. Land hasn't been abandoned unless YEARS have gone by.

Simply leaving one's home, intending to return after a period of
absense which could be hours days or weeks, is NOT an act of abandonment
under the law of any state. Moving in to someone else's house by
breaking and entering while they are away then fraudulently claiming tenancy
is not an act of squatting in abandoned property.

>and while I don't consider myself a redneck I'd be quite content with
>the malcontents LITERALLY being dragged off to jail regardless of the
>injuries that might cause. (My home is about 4 miles from the police
>station and I'm pretty sure I understand what injuries a "drag" of
>that distance might cause)

Why do you keep bringing up "redneck"? Enforcing one's property rights
is what the person with the legal right is expected to do. If he doesn't
enforce his own rights, no one else will. Obviously the police are
refusing to protect his interest.

> . . .