PDA

View Full Version : Suspected flag burner pilloried



megimoo
09-26-2009, 02:40 PM
"The ACLU is going to be all over this !
"That kids will be forced to leave town before this is over. "

VALLEY FALLS -- The young man was given three choices: get turned over to the police, go one-on-one in a fight with a seasoned war veteran, or be duct-taped to a flagpole for six hours with a sign around his neck identifying his alleged crime: flag burning.

It was the third option that would still have the small town buzzing a week after a 21-year-old was hunted down and forced to endure a public humiliation with its roots dating to the Middle Ages. Members of the Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 1938 were incensed enough to tie up the man..

http://www.timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=846181

stsinner
09-26-2009, 03:24 PM
Just as with any other 'right,' if you choose to exercise it, you'd better be prepared to pay the price.

JB
09-26-2009, 06:01 PM
Just as with any other 'right,' if you choose to exercise it, you'd better be prepared to pay the price.Not following you.

If I freely exercise my first amendment rights I should be prepared to be turned over to police, fight someone or be taped to a flagpole?

Since I am a fan of street justice, I would advocate this course of action for his real crime of stealing the flag in the first place. If it was his own flag and he burned it he should just tell those guys to go F themselves.

stsinner
09-26-2009, 06:58 PM
Not following you.

If I freely exercise my first amendment rights I should be prepared to be turned over to police, fight someone or be taped to a flagpole?

Yes.. Just like if you exercise your right to walk up to me and call my wife a whore.. You have the right to do that, but be prepared for me to knock your teeth out.. Rights require a little bit of common sense and decency, lest you feast on your teeth or find yourself taped to a flag pole.. Many people died for that flag, and especially relatives and members of the VFW where this asshole pulled this stunt.

stsinner
09-26-2009, 06:59 PM
Not following you.

If I freely exercise my first amendment rights I should be prepared to be turned over to police, fight someone or be taped to a flagpole?

Since I am a fan of street justice, I would advocate this course of action for his real crime of stealing the flag in the first place. If it was his own flag and he burned it he should just tell those guys to go F themselves.

They said he cut the rope holding the flag on the VFW flag pole and burned their flag-a flag that flew over soldiers in Iraq. It was a special flag.

JB
09-26-2009, 07:12 PM
Yes.. Just like if you exercise your right to walk up to me and call my wife a whore.. You have the right to do that, but be prepared for me to knock your teeth out.. Rights require a little bit of common sense and decency, lest you feast on your teeth or find yourself taped to a flag pole.. Many people died for that flag, and especially relatives and members of the VFW where this asshole pulled this stunt.What's funny is that if I call your wife a whore and you knock my teeth out, you'll be the one getting locked up.

What really got me about your post is the part about rights requiring common sense and decency. Who decides where that line gets drawn? You? How about if we let radical muslims draw that line. That is, if I decide I want to post a picture of Mohammed in this thread, it should be removed or I should go to jail because someone thinks it is indecent? You may want to live in that world. I don't.

Posting pics of Mo and burning flags is first amendment protected. That's what those guys fought for and I thank the hell out of them for it.

stsinner
09-26-2009, 07:41 PM
What's funny is that if I call your wife a whore and you knock my teeth out, you'll be the one getting locked up.

What really got me about your post is the part about rights requiring common sense and decency. Who decides where that line gets drawn? You? How about if we let radical muslims draw that line. That is, if I decide I want to post a picture of Mohammed in this thread, it should be removed or I should go to jail because someone thinks it is indecent? You may want to live in that world. I don't.

Posting pics of Mo and burning flags is first amendment protected. That's what those guys fought for and I thank the hell out of them for it.

Responding as those psychos do to Muhammad in a cartoon is not sane or rational.. Calling ones wife a whore is a little more fight-worthy, as is burning a flag that veterans actually died under in Iraq.

In order for your argument to stand up, we'd have to take all 1 billion or so possibilities of when one could exercise and prescribe a reaction.. What I'm saying is use your head.. Burning the VFW (Veterans of Foreign Wars) flag on their property wasn't a well thought out exercise of free speech.

JB
09-26-2009, 08:14 PM
Responding as those psychos do to Muhammad in a cartoon is not sane or rational.. Calling ones wife a whore is a little more fight-worthy, as is burning a flag that veterans actually died under in Iraq.You keep applying what you believe is rational to the incidents under discussion. I'd rather not live under your interpretation. The muslims wanted to beat the crap out of people that published pictures of Mo. You want to beat the crap out of a guy that burned a flag. Some might say you're both rational, some might say you're both insane.
In order for your argument to stand up, we'd have to take all 1 billion or so possibilities of when one could exercise and prescribe a reaction.. What I'm saying is use your head.. Burning the VFW (Veterans of Foreign Wars) flag on their property wasn't a well thought out exercise of free speech.My argument stands up. It will stand up against infinity possibilities. Let's separate the crimes from the non-crimes in this story and see if you agree.

Stealing a flag. Crime.
Burning a flag on someone else's property. Crime but not because it was a flag.
Burning a flag, that I own, on my property, regardless of where it came from or where it flew. Not a crime.
You knocking my teeth out as a result of my burning that flag. Crime.

stsinner
09-26-2009, 10:33 PM
You knocking my teeth out as a result of my burning that flag. Crime.

I didn't say that them taping the guy to the flag pole was legal, just as knocking your teeth out wouldn't be, but if you choose to exercise your right to free speech in such an undignified and insulting way, be prepared for the emotional consequences, which generally aren't legal.. There's a big difference between exercising your right to free speech and just being a stupid asshole and deserving some street justice, as you put it.

Sonnabend
09-27-2009, 04:36 AM
What gets me is "they hunted him down"

Vigilantes....if they knew where this kid was, then call a cop. Basically they gave him a choice

1. Be seen by the cops, who would have called it a misdemeanour.

2. Go one on one with a combat vet...hey great choice, volunteer to be beaten half to death.

3. Be publically humiliated

I wonder....what if he had said no to all three...what would they have done,. beaten him up anyway? The kid had left the premises and they went after him.

Assault, false imprisonment...EXTORTION.

FELONIES.

If it's a legal issue CALL A COP, and if there are no ground to arrest then leave him the fuck alone because you and your ilk are not fucking judge and fucking jury.


I didn't say that them taping the guy to the flag pole was legal, just as knocking your teeth out wouldn't be, but if you choose to exercise your right to free speech in such an undignified and insulting way, be prepared for the emotional consequences, which generally aren't legal.This vigilante mentality makes me sick. Coming from a Truther, why am I not surprised?

Those involved should be arrested and charged, I dont give a fuck what you think you are doing, you do not EVER have the right to take the law into your own hands.


There's a big difference between exercising your right to free speech and just being a stupid asshole and deserving some street justice, as you put it.And it is called THE LAW.

"Street justice"? I suppose you're sad they didnt just shoot the kid.

Jerk.

noonwitch
09-28-2009, 09:04 AM
They said he cut the rope holding the flag on the VFW flag pole and burned their flag-a flag that flew over soldiers in Iraq. It was a special flag.



Then he should have been charged with theft and destruction of private property. He would have had to pay restitution and probably have had to spend some Saturdays cleaning up the trash off the sides of the freeways.

Now he's going to sue and probably win.

AlmostThere
09-28-2009, 02:51 PM
Not following you.

If I freely exercise my first amendment rights I should be prepared to be turned over to police, fight someone or be taped to a flagpole?

Since I am a fan of street justice, I would advocate this course of action for his real crime of stealing the flag in the first place. If it was his own flag and he burned it he should just tell those guys to go F themselves.

I think the problem is that a good number of Americans don't believe burning a U.S. flag is a matter of free speech. Just because the holy 9 say it's so may make it law but it doesn't necessarily make it the right decision.

FlaGator
09-28-2009, 03:49 PM
Responding as those psychos do to Muhammad in a cartoon is not sane or rational.. Calling ones wife a whore is a little more fight-worthy, as is burning a flag that veterans actually died under in Iraq.

In order for your argument to stand up, we'd have to take all 1 billion or so possibilities of when one could exercise and prescribe a reaction.. What I'm saying is use your head.. Burning the VFW (Veterans of Foreign Wars) flag on their property wasn't a well thought out exercise of free speech.

Keep in mind that sacred tends to be in the eye of the beholder. What is sacred to some is is toilet paper to another. Is burning a flag worse than flushing the Koran? Each hold a certain aura of the sacred to some but not to others. When does the sacrisity of one trump the other and what makes an American flag more sacred that a Koran, or a Bible or a cow in India?

Speedy
09-28-2009, 04:10 PM
If I freely exercise my first amendment rights I should be prepared to be turned over to police, fight someone or be taped to a flagpole?

Just because you exercise your First Amendment rights freely does not mean that you are free from any consequences of exercising those rights. Consequences do not have to be legal but the posibility that they are there should be taken into consideration.

Sonnabend
09-28-2009, 04:35 PM
Consequences do not have to be legal but the posibility that they are there should be taken into considerat

Ah yes, the old "the hell with the law, lets string him up anyway" mentality.

If the consequences are not legal then they are ILLEGAL and what you are doing is breaking the law. And YOU should be charged and jailed.

Full-Auto
09-28-2009, 05:12 PM
I see nothing wrong here.

He stole private property. He destroyed that private property. He was given 3 choices; be turned over to police, fight with a vet, get taped to a chair for 6 hours.

He choice door #3 over being taken to the police station.

I would say this was settled in a a fair way and I have no problem with it.

JB
09-28-2009, 05:22 PM
Consequences do not have to be legal but the posibility that they are there should be taken into consideration.So if your 95 pound wife wipes her ass with pages from the Koran in front of 30 muzzies and they proceed to give her a beating and rape her unmercifully for hours on end and the cops finally break it up but didn't press charges against any of them, you'd be fine with it because hey, she suffered the consequences. That's basically what you're saying.

Oh, and (hypothethically) you can do nothing about it because unfortunately you're doing a 10 year bit for burglary at the time so there's no way for you to extract your revenge.

Goldwater
09-28-2009, 05:24 PM
So if your 95 pound wife wipes her ass with pages from the Koran in front of 30 muzzies and they proceed to give her a beating and rape her unmercifully for hours on end and the cops finally break it up but didn't press charges against any of them, you'd be fine with it because hey, she suffered the consequences. That's basically what you're saying.

Oh, and (hypothethically) you can do nothing about it because unfortunately you're doing a 10 year bit for burglary at the time so there's no way for you to extract your revenge.

My advice is to get a thinner, smarter wife.

JB
09-28-2009, 05:28 PM
My advice is to get a...smarter wife.Is that code for "she should capitulate to the muzzies because they don't understand the tenents of the 1st amendment"?

JB
09-28-2009, 05:37 PM
I see nothing wrong here.

He stole private property. He destroyed that private property. He was given 3 choices; be turned over to police, fight with a vet, get taped to a chair for 6 hours.

He choice door #3 over being taken to the police station.

I would say this was settled in a a fair way and I have no problem with it.I didn't have a problem with it either. My problem in this thread is the people who think I should be punished when I didn't commit a crime.

OT: You or Sonna needs to change your av lest you be mistaken for each other and I don't think you want that.

Full-Auto
09-28-2009, 05:55 PM
I'm not changing jack! I had it first! :D

Sonnabend
09-29-2009, 01:05 AM
If you insist.....:)

NJCardFan
09-29-2009, 12:23 PM
Here's my deal on flag burning. It's said to be a sign of protest that is protected by the 1st amendment, correct? Well, there's a section of the 1st amendment that seems to be forgotten. Ask anyone to recite the 1st amendment and chances are they'll forget the last line of it:

"...or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Everyone, even those who aren't well versed in that this great document, can tell you that the 1st amendment protects your right to free speech, free press, freedom of religion and some may know the right to assemble but few know or understand the line I quoted. The argument is made that flag burning is a sign of free speech. True to a point. However, flag burning is usually done in protest(grievance) of the government. Then by that point, setting fire to something is not peaceful. This also goes for burning someone in effigy, something that was done en masse during the revolution(the burning of King George effigies). The right to peaceably assemble is just that, to assemble peacefully. Burning a flag, IMO, is an act of violence hence it should not be condoned.

Full-Auto
09-29-2009, 01:09 PM
Hey, if you own the flag you should be able to do with it as you see fit. It's when you burn someone else's flag, like in this article, that I have a problem with it.

If you have laws against burning things in the street, that should be enforced. But if there's no law against setting fire to things in your town, and you own the flag in question, burn away.

If you get your ass beat by a vet who just returned from the war, I'll turn the other way. Sure, that might make me a bastard in the eyes of some, but I don't care. If you're man enough to piss on a mans shoes, you better be man enough to deal with the consequences.

djones520
09-29-2009, 01:16 PM
Hey, if you own the flag you should be able to do with it as you see fit. It's when you burn someone else's flag, like in this article, that I have a problem with it.

If you have laws against burning things in the street, that should be enforced. But if there's no law against setting fire to things in your town, and you own the flag in question, burn away.

If you get your ass beat by a vet who just returned from the war, I'll turn the other way. Sure, that might make me a bastard in the eyes of some, but I don't care. If you're man enough to piss on a mans shoes, you better be man enough to deal with the consequences.

Damn straight.

lacarnut
09-29-2009, 01:59 PM
If you get your ass beat by a vet who just returned from the war, I'll turn the other way. Sure, that might make me a bastard in the eyes of some, but I don't care. If you're man enough to piss on a mans shoes, you better be man enough to deal with the consequences.

Correct. He is damn lucky he was given a choice rather than a good ass whipping.

stsinner
09-29-2009, 02:27 PM
Hey, if you own the flag you should be able to do with it as you see fit. It's when you burn someone else's flag, like in this article, that I have a problem with it.

If you have laws against burning things in the street, that should be enforced. But if there's no law against setting fire to things in your town, and you own the flag in question, burn away.

If you get your ass beat by a vet who just returned from the war, I'll turn the other way. Sure, that might make me a bastard in the eyes of some, but I don't care. If you're man enough to piss on a mans shoes, you better be man enough to deal with the consequences.

Agree 100%.

Sonnabend
09-29-2009, 07:31 PM
Correct. He is damn lucky he was given a choice rather than a good ass whipping.

And when his bruised and battered body walks into a police station, and swears out a warrant for assault and battery occasioning serious bodily harm, will you laugh then?

No?

Didnt think so.

lacarnut
09-29-2009, 11:44 PM
And when his bruised and battered body walks into a police station, and swears out a warrant for assault and battery occasioning serious bodily harm, will you laugh then?

No?

Didnt think so.

I will say; I have never seen this guy. Where is the proof officer. Sounds like you never got into a fist fight.

Lanie
09-30-2009, 12:28 AM
A flag is an object. The person who burns it is a human being. Wanting to physical hurt somebody for burning a flag and so forth gives a bad name to the flag they claim to represent.

Of course, stealing a flag is a crime and he should be in police custody.

Rockntractor
09-30-2009, 12:34 AM
A flag is an object. The person who burns it is a human being. Wanting to physical hurt somebody for burning a flag and so forth gives a bad name to the flag they claim to represent.

Of course, stealing a flag is a crime and he should be in police custody.
If no one was looking I would Knock the snot out of them!

Oh by the way how is the CU article coming along for Wiki?

Sonnabend
09-30-2009, 07:08 AM
I will say; I have never seen this guy. Where is the proof officer. Sounds like you never got into a fist fight.DNA swabs,tissue samples, fibre transfers. You think that you leave nothing behind if you assault someone? All you have to do is leave one fibre or one hair on your victim, and you're NAILED.

All they have to do is arrest you and get a court order for a DNA swab.

Defensive wounds = DNA of the attacker = CONVICTION.

"So tell me sir, if you have never seen this man before, how did your blood get on him?"

Oops.

lacarnut
09-30-2009, 12:28 PM
DNA swabs,tissue samples, fibre transfers. You think that you leave nothing behind if you assault someone? All you have to do is leave one fibre or one hair on your victim, and you're NAILED.

All they have to do is arrest you and get a court order for a DNA swab.

Defensive wounds = DNA of the attacker = CONVICTION.

"So tell me sir, if you have never seen this man before, how did your blood get on him?"

Oops.

First off. The perp broke the law. You come on my property and vandalize it; you just might get your ass whipped. Secondly, I don't know too many criminals that would report if to the police. Thirdly, 99 % of DA's would not prosecute. Fourthly, if they did, I would state I was trying to make a citizens arrest and the perp took a swing at me. Case dismissed. You can take your DNA and shove it because the police in the state I live in would not even bother.

BTW, you break into my house or my car, the hearse might be picking you up.

djones520
09-30-2009, 12:32 PM
A flag is an object. The person who burns it is a human being. Wanting to physical hurt somebody for burning a flag and so forth gives a bad name to the flag they claim to represent.

Of course, stealing a flag is a crime and he should be in police custody.

The Flag is not an object Lanie. It is a symbol. One you would do well to acquiant yourself with before saying something like that again.

lacarnut
09-30-2009, 02:10 PM
The Flag is not an object Lanie. It is a symbol. One you would do well to acquiant yourself with before saying something like that again.

Correct. The flag is also tangible personal property. In other words, you can not steal it or burn it when it belongs to someone else without suffering consequences.

Sonnabend
10-01-2009, 08:00 AM
First off. The perp broke the law.So is criminal duress, assault and battery. One is a misdemeanour, the other a felony.


You come on my property and vandalize it; you just might get your ass whipped.The man had LEFT the property and they went AFTER him...hours later.


Secondly, I don't know too many criminals that would report if to the police.Oh, I think I would and so would a lot of others.


Thirdly, 99 % of DA's would not prosecute.All it would take is the photos of the damage they did and yes they would,.


Fourthly, if they did, I would state I was trying to make a citizens arrest and the perp took a swing at meFour on one would make a poor case for self defence. The fact that they went after him is proof of premeditation.


Case dismissed. You can take your DNA and shove it because the police in the state I live in would not even bother.Four men go after a man and beat him up. Yes, they would.


BTW, you break into my house or my car, the hearse might be picking you up.Except he did neither.


The flag is also tangible personal property. In other words, you can not steal it or burn it when it belongs to someone else without suffering consequences.

So call a cop. You do not excuse one illegal act with another.

lacarnut
10-01-2009, 03:39 PM
So is criminal duress, assault and battery. One is a misdemeanour, the other a felony.

The man had LEFT the property and they went AFTER him...hours later.

Oh, I think I would and so would a lot of others.

All it would take is the photos of the damage they did and yes they would,.

Four on one would make a poor case for self defence. The fact that they went after him is proof of premeditation.

Four men go after a man and beat him up. Yes, they would.

Except he did neither.



So call a cop. You do not excuse one illegal act with another.

What I would do and what the 4 men did to the perp are not interchangeable. No one got beat up. On the other hand, if I caught him on my property, the outcome might have been different. Comprehend. However, the 4 men could be charged with kidnapping and assault by hunting him down. Got news for you. Stick to nursing cause you do not know squat about law in this country.

Sonnabend
10-02-2009, 04:26 AM
What I would do and what the 4 men did to the perp are not interchangeable. No one got beat up. That, dear lacarnut, was one of the options he was "offered". Can we spell DURESS?


On the other hand, if I caught him on my property, the outcome might have been different.They sdawe him do it, did not detain him and he left, the property.,..they went after him a lot later...which throws that excuse out the window. He was NO LONGER on their property, and unless they are police officers, they have NO legal right to "hunt anyone down"


Comprehend. However, the 4 men could be charged with kidnapping and assault by hunting him down. Got news for you. Stick to nursing cause you do not know squat about law in this countryI left nursing in 1990. am now a commercial agent / investigator, come from a family of cops and do not need an encyclopaedia to know that even in the US, to threaten a man with physical harm is in itself a crime.

Actually, yes I do know a great deal. Unreasonable duress, extortion, threat to do bodily harm, assault and battery are felonies.

Want to show me where they arent?

BTW jackass, one of the first classes we hold in nursing school is on LAW, torts, felonies, assault, harassment, and the many and varied ways we could be hauled into court. One of the first texts we used was a book on medical law, published in the UNITED STATES.

Lippincott, Brunner and Siddharth, O'Sullivan and a host of others. Nurses must know the law.

Seems like I know more than you realise.

Sonnabend
10-02-2009, 04:45 AM
Nursing and Malpractice Risks: Understanding the Law (Nursing CEU Course) ... Paperback: 256 pages; Publisher: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; ...
www.amazon.com/Nursing-Malpractice.../158255207X

http://virginiacriminallawyers.vatrafficlaw.com/pages/assault-and-battery.html


Virginia Code 18.2-57 codifies the offense of simple assault and battery as a class 1 misdemeanor; however, this code section relies upon what is called the common law to define the elements of the offense. Common law is judge made law which has been around for centuries which we inherited in this country from our original ties with England. The common law definition of an assault and battery is an intentional harmful or offensive contact. To get even more specific, an assault under common law is separate from a battery. An assault is the apprehension of a harmful or offensive contact.

Thus, even if you did not actually make contact with the individual, if you intended to make contact, you could be found guilty of assault. A battery is the actual harmful or offensive contact.

Virginia Code 18.2-57 adds additional criteria to the definition of simple assault and battery which enhances the penalty by creating mandatory jail time for certain behavior. For instance if the accused . . . intentionally selects the person against whom a simple assault is committed because of his race, religious conviction, color or national origin, the penalty upon conviction shall include a term of confinement of at least six months, 30 days of which shall be a mandatory minimum term of confinement.

Don't ever make the mistake of thinking that just because I happen to live elsewhere, I am ignorant or uninformed. Law is what I do, law is what I live with every damned day.

My family are cops, lawyers, judges.

and here


18.2-47 (http://law.justia.com/virginia/codes/toc1802000/18.2-47.html). Abduction and kidnapping defined; punishment.

A. Any person, who, by force, intimidation or deception, and without legal justification or excuse, seizes, takes, transports, detains or secretes the person of another, with the intent to deprive such other person of his personal liberty or to withhold or conceal him from any person, authority or institution lawfully entitled to his charge, shall be deemed guilty of "abduction"; but the provisions of this section shall not apply to any law-enforcement officer in the performance of his duty. The terms "abduction" and "kidnapping" shall be synonymous in this Code. Abduction for which no punishment is otherwise prescribed shall be punished as a Class 5 felony.



B. If such offense is committed by the parent of the person abducted and punishable as contempt of court in any proceeding then pending, the offense shall be a Class 1 misdemeanor in addition to being punishable as contempt of court. However, such offense, if committed by the parent of the person abducted and punishable as contempt of court in any proceeding then pending and the person abducted is removed from the Commonwealth by the abducting parent, shall be a Class 6 felony in addition to being punishable as contempt of court.


The moment that man was cornered and threatened by these men, they deprived him of his liberty UNLAWFULLY.

Game over.

Here endeth the lesson.

lacarnut
10-02-2009, 11:00 AM
That, dear lacarnut, was one of the options he was "offered". Can we spell DURESS?

They sdawe him do it, did not detain him and he left, the property.,..they went after him a lot later...which throws that excuse out the window. He was NO LONGER on their property, and unless they are police officers, they have NO legal right to "hunt anyone down"

I left nursing in 1990. am now a commercial agent / investigator, come from a family of cops and do not need an encyclopaedia to know that even in the US, to threaten a man with physical harm is in itself a crime.

Actually, yes I do know a great deal. Unreasonable duress, extortion, threat to do bodily harm, assault and battery are felonies.

Want to show me where they arent?

BTW jackass, one of the first classes we hold in nursing school is on LAW, torts, felonies, assault, harassment, and the many and varied ways we could be hauled into court. One of the first texts we used was a book on medical law, published in the UNITED STATES.

Lippincott, Brunner and Siddharth, O'Sullivan and a host of others. Nurses must know the law.

Seems like I know more than you realise.

It's realize not realise and it's aren't not arent, dummy.

Where did I say that the 4 men did not commit a crime? I stated what I might do if I caught them on my property. Your comprehension sucks.

Laws vary from state to state and from county to county. What is prosecuted in one community such as a fist-fight might not be prosecuted in another. The DA has that discretion. Case closed, jerk.

FlaGator
10-02-2009, 12:04 PM
It's realize not realise and it's aren't not arent, dummy.

Where did I say that the 4 men did not commit a crime? I stated what I might do if I caught them on my property. Your comprehension sucks.

Laws vary from state to state and from county to county. What is prosecuted in one community such as a fist-fight might not be prosecuted in another. The DA has that discretion. Case closed, jerk.

In Texas you could probably shoot them and get away with it. They have laws that really side with the owner when it comes to protecting personal property. In Florida I could do just about anything but kill them if the are on my property and weren't threatening my life. Now if they threatened to harm me then I could shoot them.

stsinner
10-02-2009, 01:33 PM
In Texas you could probably shoot them and get away with it. They have laws that really side with the owner when it comes to protecting personal property. In Florida I could do just about anything but kill them if the are on my property and weren't threatening my life. Now if they threatened to harm me then I could shoot them.

Lucky you! In Massachusetts, if someone breaks into my house and have access to a door, I'm obligated by law to take advantage of that exit route and leave my house with the intruder inside...

lacarnut
10-02-2009, 01:38 PM
In Texas you could probably shoot them and get away with it. They have laws that really side with the owner when it comes to protecting personal property. In Florida I could do just about anything but kill them if the are on my property and weren't threatening my life. Now if they threatened to harm me then I could shoot them.

Right. In Louisiana, the same holds true. Aussie boy does not understand that.

Sonnabend
10-02-2009, 11:45 PM
It's realize not realise and it's aren't not arent, dummy.

Not my fault you can't spell.


Where did I say that the 4 men did not commit a crime? I stated what I might do if I caught them on my property. Your comprehension sucks.

You stated I knew jack shit about your laws. Your mistake.


Laws vary from state to state and from county to county. What is prosecuted in one community such as a fist-fight might not be prosecuted in another. The DA has that discretion. Case closed, jerk.

Let's see what happens when he presses charges, shall we?


Right. In Louisiana, the same holds true. Aussie boy does not understand that.

When he is on your property? Yes. Doies Louisiana or Texas law (incl the Castle Doctrine which I have read) allow you to later hunt down and shoot the person?

NO.