Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<v51j7g$2kkd7$3@dont-email.me>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!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 <nobody@nowhere.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv
Subject: Re: Criminal Records Expunged for St. Louis Gun Couple
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 11:52:17 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 67
Message-ID: <v51j7g$2kkd7$3@dont-email.me>
References: <B7WcnT_drY_sm-_7nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com>
 <v4t2ai$1imbc$1@dont-email.me>
 <atropos-1CD7DC.18410418062024@news.giganews.com>
 <v4uvta$21spc$2@dont-email.me>
 <atropos-DE6AC6.09273119062024@news.giganews.com>
 <v4v8ug$23o16$2@dont-email.me>
 <atropos-542467.12091619062024@news.giganews.com>
 <v4vgil$258cf$1@dont-email.me>
 <atropos-393657.16151819062024@news.giganews.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: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 17:52:17 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="5f6723e81ced72bfe713efc1ebd17bbb";
	logging-data="2773415"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19AoEAJwIaDpEIKt4ASuFNJPhkQJeBCnhg="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:FMATtPuqm/gpojoqkQrMtELRNsk=
In-Reply-To: <atropos-393657.16151819062024@news.giganews.com>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 4282

On 6/19/2024 7:15 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> In article <v4vgil$258cf$1@dont-email.me>,
>   moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 6/19/2024 3:09 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>> In article <v4v8ug$23o16$2@dont-email.me>,
>>>    moviePig <nobody@nowhere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 6/19/2024 12:27 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>> In article <v4uvta$21spc$2@dont-email.me>,
>>>>>     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"?
>>>>>
>>>>> 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?
>>
>> Why would you presume I presume it, especially after I've explicitly
>> labeled it a 'presumption'?
> 
> If you're not presuming it and I'm not presuming it and the courts
> hearing the case in St. Louis didn't presume it, what was your point in
> bringing it up here?
> 
>>>> 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.
>>
>> So, e.g., we can suspend the right of peaceable assembly by temporarily
>> transferring public property rights to some private party...
> 
> What does such a fanciful scenario have to do with what's under
> discussion here? St. Louis didn't temporarily sell a public
> street/neighborhood to the residents of the neighborhood for purposes of
> thwarting the BLM protest. That neighborhood had always been private
> property, including the streets, since it was built decades ago.

The 'fanciful scenario' illustrates that (as usual) absolutist positions 
on non-mathematical issues are untenable.  To afford protesters *and* 
property owners meaningful rights, something's eventually gotta give.