Democrat Neighbor Electrocuted THEN Charged with Trespassing

[Ringel05]

Wow, looks like you beginning to figure it out. I'm impressed, truly I am, didn't think you had it in you........

Lawsuits claiming damage predicated on the plaintiff's criminal behavior are often thrown out.

Depends on the locality. Like you finally figured out, it's the age of litigation.

It's also the age of tort reform. Idiots like to tell each other that anyone can sue for any reason but it's just not true. I know someone who sued the City of Boise, a case utterly lacking in merit. He lost the suit and ended up owing the city $10,000 in legal fees. If this idiot sued, the homeowner insurance company would slap back with a devastating counter lawsuit and end up owning his house. That's how it actually works, people with money protect that money.

Duh, so what else is new?

OMG you're dumb.

Boy do I hope you were looking in a mirror when you posted that, at least now you can get help.....

 

[Ringel05]

Wow, you finally figured out what I was referring to, you win another cupie doll!!!

Already knew it. Sad how you thought you actually did something.

Another strange statement pulled out of your ass. It's amazing how few people can use the brain God gave them..........

It's amazing how many people, including you, have shit where God put brains that they refuse to use.

Yet you appear to be one of the ones who thought I had an agenda because I posted a simple legal fact.

You have yet to post one.

Oh you mean that federal law link isn't valid........

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Already knew it. Sad how you thought you actually did something.

Another strange statement pulled out of your ass. It's amazing how few people can use the brain God gave them..........

It's amazing how many people, including you, have shit where God put brains that they refuse to use.

Yet you appear to be one of the ones who thought I had an agenda because I posted a simple legal fact.

You have yet to post one.

Oh you mean that federal law link isn't valid........

It doesn't apply to this situation, idiot.

 

[Ringel05]

Another strange statement pulled out of your ass. It's amazing how few people can use the brain God gave them..........

It's amazing how many people, including you, have shit where God put brains that they refuse to use.

Yet you appear to be one of the ones who thought I had an agenda because I posted a simple legal fact.

You have yet to post one.

Oh you mean that federal law link isn't valid........

It doesn't apply to this situation, idiot.

You do know what an FYI is...... Right? Of course you don't otherwise we wouldn't be having this "conversation"

 

[jon_berzerk]

in the penal code (the first one ) it say justification in other words under the set circumstances

it is legal

the second one civil code says you have immuity from a lawsuit if it was justifiable

Somehow I missed the justifiable part or misread it, it looked like a contradiction. Happens to the best of us. My bad.

there are examples that go over the line

like rigging a shotgun to go off

if someone tampers with a window for example

Part of it is (I think) state statutes also where things like electrifying a booby trap is illegal no matter what. If I remember correctly it was illegal in the Commonwealth of Virginia possibly in other states, localities also.

there may be some local ordinances

Well it appears my initial concept of the law (application) was at least partially wrong, at least in a broad, overarching sense. Unlike some who walk on water and change water into wine I'm willing to admit I'm not infallible.

it happens from time to time

 

[HenryBHough]

"Electrocuted" would mean the dumb shit was executed (killed). He wasn't. Too Bad - So Sad. Lesson not learned.

 

[Ringel05]

Somehow I missed the justifiable part or misread it, it looked like a contradiction. Happens to the best of us. My bad.

there are examples that go over the line

like rigging a shotgun to go off

if someone tampers with a window for example

Part of it is (I think) state statutes also where things like electrifying a booby trap is illegal no matter what. If I remember correctly it was illegal in the Commonwealth of Virginia possibly in other states, localities also.

there may be some local ordinances

Well it appears my initial concept of the law (application) was at least partially wrong, at least in a broad, overarching sense. Unlike some who walk on water and change water into wine I'm willing to admit I'm not infallible.

it happens from time to time

What? Me walking on water and changing water to wine? Well my mom did call my dad god.......... But only when she was pissed at him.......

 

[Conservative65]

Sad part is the age of lawsuits enables criminals to sue because they suffered a consequence during the commission of a crime.

Wow, you finally figured out what I was referring to, you win another cupie doll!!!

Already knew it. Sad how you thought you actually did something.

Another strange statement pulled out of your ass. It's amazing how few people can use the brain God gave them..........

It's amazing how many people, including you, have shit where God put brains that they refuse to use.

Yet you appear to be one of the ones who thought I had an agenda because I posted a simple legal fact.

Yet the first thing you posted was something that provided cover for the thief.

 

[Ringel05]

Wow, you finally figured out what I was referring to, you win another cupie doll!!!

Already knew it. Sad how you thought you actually did something.

Another strange statement pulled out of your ass. It's amazing how few people can use the brain God gave them..........

It's amazing how many people, including you, have shit where God put brains that they refuse to use.

Yet you appear to be one of the ones who thought I had an agenda because I posted a simple legal fact.

Yet the first thing you posted was something that provided cover for the thief.

In your mind yes, in a rational person's mind it was nothing more than an FYI........ But hey, don't stop spinning it's fun to watch.

 

[Conservative65]

Already knew it. Sad how you thought you actually did something.

Another strange statement pulled out of your ass. It's amazing how few people can use the brain God gave them..........

It's amazing how many people, including you, have shit where God put brains that they refuse to use.

Yet you appear to be one of the ones who thought I had an agenda because I posted a simple legal fact.

Yet the first thing you posted was something that provided cover for the thief.

In your mind yes, in a rational person's mind it was nothing more than an FYI........ But hey, don't stop spinning it's fun to watch.

Oh, one of those that defines rational as agreeing with you?

 

[saintmichaeldefendthem]

Already knew it. Sad how you thought you actually did something.

Another strange statement pulled out of your ass. It's amazing how few people can use the brain God gave them..........

It's amazing how many people, including you, have shit where God put brains that they refuse to use.

Yet you appear to be one of the ones who thought I had an agenda because I posted a simple legal fact.

Yet the first thing you posted was something that provided cover for the thief.

In your mind yes, in a rational person's mind it was nothing more than an FYI........ But hey, don't stop spinning it's fun to watch.

You have yet to present any rational argument. You made a false claim and then preceeded with spectacular gyrations to cover up your error and like any 6 year old, you think you're pulling a fast one on the grown ups who see right through you.

 

[Ringel05]

Another strange statement pulled out of your ass. It's amazing how few people can use the brain God gave them..........

It's amazing how many people, including you, have shit where God put brains that they refuse to use.

Yet you appear to be one of the ones who thought I had an agenda because I posted a simple legal fact.

Yet the first thing you posted was something that provided cover for the thief.

In your mind yes, in a rational person's mind it was nothing more than an FYI........ But hey, don't stop spinning it's fun to watch.

Oh, one of those that defines rational as agreeing with you?

No, one of those who defines rational as reading exactly what was said/posted/etc and not interpreting some nefarious or political agenda from it.

 

[Ringel05]

Another strange statement pulled out of your ass. It's amazing how few people can use the brain God gave them..........

It's amazing how many people, including you, have shit where God put brains that they refuse to use.

Yet you appear to be one of the ones who thought I had an agenda because I posted a simple legal fact.

Yet the first thing you posted was something that provided cover for the thief.

In your mind yes, in a rational person's mind it was nothing more than an FYI........ But hey, don't stop spinning it's fun to watch.

You have yet to present any rational argument. You made a false claim and then preceeded with spectacular gyrations to cover up your error and like any 6 year old, you think you're pulling a fast one on the grown ups who see right through you.

Boy do you give yourself waaaaaayyyyyyyy too much credit........

 

[Conservative65]

It's amazing how many people, including you, have shit where God put brains that they refuse to use.

Yet you appear to be one of the ones who thought I had an agenda because I posted a simple legal fact.

Yet the first thing you posted was something that provided cover for the thief.

In your mind yes, in a rational person's mind it was nothing more than an FYI........ But hey, don't stop spinning it's fun to watch.

Oh, one of those that defines rational as agreeing with you?

No, one of those who defines rational as reading exactly what was said/posted/etc and not interpreting some nefarious or political agenda from it.

I read what you posted. Like I said, the first thing you mentioned was something designed to provide protection for the thief. Coincidence or purpose?

 

[Ringel05]

Yet you appear to be one of the ones who thought I had an agenda because I posted a simple legal fact.

Yet the first thing you posted was something that provided cover for the thief.

In your mind yes, in a rational person's mind it was nothing more than an FYI........ But hey, don't stop spinning it's fun to watch.

Oh, one of those that defines rational as agreeing with you?

No, one of those who defines rational as reading exactly what was said/posted/etc and not interpreting some nefarious or political agenda from it.

I read what you posted. Like I said, the first thing you mentioned was something designed to provide protection for the thief. Coincidence or purpose?

FYI, coincidence based on the OP. If you stop looking for some weird agenda you'd realize that it was only an FYI and nothing more considering I never said the crook should sue. Dayamn are you dense.

 

[Conservative65]

Yet the first thing you posted was something that provided cover for the thief.

In your mind yes, in a rational person's mind it was nothing more than an FYI........ But hey, don't stop spinning it's fun to watch.

Oh, one of those that defines rational as agreeing with you?

No, one of those who defines rational as reading exactly what was said/posted/etc and not interpreting some nefarious or political agenda from it.

I read what you posted. Like I said, the first thing you mentioned was something designed to provide protection for the thief. Coincidence or purpose?

FYI, coincidence based on the OP. If you stop looking for some weird agenda you'd realize that it was only an FYI and nothing more considering I never said the crook should sue. Dayamn are you dense.

You were quick to provide information on the basis for which he could.

Coincidence, my ass.

 

[Ringel05]

In your mind yes, in a rational person's mind it was nothing more than an FYI........ But hey, don't stop spinning it's fun to watch.

Oh, one of those that defines rational as agreeing with you?

No, one of those who defines rational as reading exactly what was said/posted/etc and not interpreting some nefarious or political agenda from it.

I read what you posted. Like I said, the first thing you mentioned was something designed to provide protection for the thief. Coincidence or purpose?

FYI, coincidence based on the OP. If you stop looking for some weird agenda you'd realize that it was only an FYI and nothing more considering I never said the crook should sue. Dayamn are you dense.

You were quick to provide information on the basis for which he could.

Coincidence, my ass.

Believe what you want, you will anyway, I can't stop you nor do I care to, it's too much fun watching you make a complete ass out of yourself. Like I do with Guano and his far left cabal I'll continue to laugh at you and your far right cabal because of your collective stupidity.

 

[Conservative65]

Oh, one of those that defines rational as agreeing with you?

No, one of those who defines rational as reading exactly what was said/posted/etc and not interpreting some nefarious or political agenda from it.

I read what you posted. Like I said, the first thing you mentioned was something designed to provide protection for the thief. Coincidence or purpose?

FYI, coincidence based on the OP. If you stop looking for some weird agenda you'd realize that it was only an FYI and nothing more considering I never said the crook should sue. Dayamn are you dense.

You were quick to provide information on the basis for which he could.

Coincidence, my ass.

Believe what you want, you will anyway, I can't stop you nor do I care to, it's too much fun watching you make a complete ass out of yourself. Like I do with Guano and his far left cabal I'll continue to laugh at you and your far right cabal because of your collective stupidity.

I'm not the one whose FIRST statement was proving something to protect the thief then tries to pass it off as coincidence.

 

[Ringel05]

No, one of those who defines rational as reading exactly what was said/posted/etc and not interpreting some nefarious or political agenda from it.

I read what you posted. Like I said, the first thing you mentioned was something designed to provide protection for the thief. Coincidence or purpose?

FYI, coincidence based on the OP. If you stop looking for some weird agenda you'd realize that it was only an FYI and nothing more considering I never said the crook should sue. Dayamn are you dense.

You were quick to provide information on the basis for which he could.

Coincidence, my ass.

Believe what you want, you will anyway, I can't stop you nor do I care to, it's too much fun watching you make a complete ass out of yourself. Like I do with Guano and his far left cabal I'll continue to laugh at you and your far right cabal because of your collective stupidity.

I'm not the one whose FIRST statement was proving something to protect the thief then tries to pass it off as coincidence.

Like I said.......

 

[Conservative65]

I read what you posted. Like I said, the first thing you mentioned was something designed to provide protection for the thief. Coincidence or purpose?

FYI, coincidence based on the OP. If you stop looking for some weird agenda you'd realize that it was only an FYI and nothing more considering I never said the crook should sue. Dayamn are you dense.

You were quick to provide information on the basis for which he could.

Coincidence, my ass.

Believe what you want, you will anyway, I can't stop you nor do I care to, it's too much fun watching you make a complete ass out of yourself. Like I do with Guano and his far left cabal I'll continue to laugh at you and your far right cabal because of your collective stupidity.

I'm not the one whose FIRST statement was proving something to protect the thief then tries to pass it off as coincidence.

Like I said.......

I know what you said. Your first statement was one of providing information on how the THIEF could bring a case against the owner of the property from which he tried to steal. I got what you said.