Democrat Neighbor Electrocuted THEN Charged with Trespassing

[Ringel05]

I don't have a problem with you disagreeing with me, hell I don't even have a problem with the fact you're misinterpreting my reason, in fact I find it quite telling and extremely funny.

Add liar to your list. You said I was irrational and stupid based on my disagreement with what you were claiming. Most people that do what you do turn out to be liars.

Good God, you're not really that stupid are you? That's impossible!!!!!!!! Well obviously it's not impossible.

Again, you make claims about someone being stupid because they disagree with you. You keep proving you're that stupid. You've proven you're a liar.

I'm ridiculing you not because you disagree but because you're locked in a false paradigm and refuse to see it. The same thing I've seen you do with those who disagree with you....... hypocrite........

You're not ridiculing anyone, son. You don't have the capability. That you think you do proves you're stupid. It's not because you disagree with me. It's because you're stupid.

You're another one who thinks way too highly of yourself.......

Now ya wanna know what's really fucked up, the wife is watching Cops, they responded to a report of an attempted home break in, the perp was coming through the screen door and the home owner swung a shovel at him to scare him off. The cops arrested the homeowner for 2nd degree assault and you morons think there are not laws on the books to protect criminals....... Oh, it was in Kalifornia of course, how many other cities and states have such fucked up laws?

 

[Ringel05]

Add liar to your list. You said I was irrational and stupid based on my disagreement with what you were claiming. Most people that do what you do turn out to be liars.

Good God, you're not really that stupid are you? That's impossible!!!!!!!! Well obviously it's not impossible.

Again, you make claims about someone being stupid because they disagree with you. You keep proving you're that stupid. You've proven you're a liar.

I'm ridiculing you not because you disagree but because you're locked in a false paradigm and refuse to see it. The same thing I've seen you do with those who disagree with you....... hypocrite........

You're not ridiculing anyone, son. You don't have the capability. That you think you do proves you're stupid. It's not because you disagree with me. It's because you're stupid.

You're another one who thinks way too highly of yourself.......

Now ya wanna know what's really fucked up, the wife is watching Cops, they responded to a report of an attempted home break in, the perp was coming through the screen door and the home owner swung a shovel at him to scare him off. The cops arrested the homeowner for 2nd degree assault and you morons think there are not laws on the books to protect criminals....... Oh, it was in Kalifornia of course, how many other cities and states have such fucked up laws?

Bet you think since I posted this I think the homeowner should have been arrested.......

 

[beagle9]

Add liar to your list. You said I was irrational and stupid based on my disagreement with what you were claiming. Most people that do what you do turn out to be liars.

Good God, you're not really that stupid are you? That's impossible!!!!!!!! Well obviously it's not impossible.

Again, you make claims about someone being stupid because they disagree with you. You keep proving you're that stupid. You've proven you're a liar.

I'm ridiculing you not because you disagree but because you're locked in a false paradigm and refuse to see it. The same thing I've seen you do with those who disagree with you....... hypocrite........

You're not ridiculing anyone, son. You don't have the capability. That you think you do proves you're stupid. It's not because you disagree with me. It's because you're stupid.

You're another one who thinks way too highly of yourself.......

Now ya wanna know what's really fucked up, the wife is watching Cops, they responded to a report of an attempted home break in, the perp was coming through the screen door and the home owner swung a shovel at him to scare him off. The cops arrested the homeowner for 2nd degree assault and you morons think there are not laws on the books to protect criminals....... Oh, it was in Kalifornia of course, how many other cities and states have such fucked up laws?

. Ummm there are no laws on the books to protect the perp trying to break into the home, but there are idiot cops that make up crap on the spot if they don't like someone, and then the lawyers and judges have to sort it all back out. The guy had every right to protect his property. Can you post a link to the specific law being talked about here by you ? Would be interesting to see it if it exist.

 

[Ringel05]

Good God, you're not really that stupid are you? That's impossible!!!!!!!! Well obviously it's not impossible.

Again, you make claims about someone being stupid because they disagree with you. You keep proving you're that stupid. You've proven you're a liar.

I'm ridiculing you not because you disagree but because you're locked in a false paradigm and refuse to see it. The same thing I've seen you do with those who disagree with you....... hypocrite........

You're not ridiculing anyone, son. You don't have the capability. That you think you do proves you're stupid. It's not because you disagree with me. It's because you're stupid.

You're another one who thinks way too highly of yourself.......

Now ya wanna know what's really fucked up, the wife is watching Cops, they responded to a report of an attempted home break in, the perp was coming through the screen door and the home owner swung a shovel at him to scare him off. The cops arrested the homeowner for 2nd degree assault and you morons think there are not laws on the books to protect criminals....... Oh, it was in Kalifornia of course, how many other cities and states have such fucked up laws?

. Ummm there are no laws on the books to protect the perp trying to break into the home, but there are idiot cops that make up crap on the spot if they don't like someone, and then the lawyers and judges have to sort it all back out. The guy had every right to protect his property. Can you post a link to the specific law being talked about here by you ? Would be interesting to see it if it exist.

It was the tv show Cops, the wife like to watch it so I'll have to figure out what the laws are called and then do a search. In the meantime just some food for thought, why do you think there has been such a push over the last decade for Castle Doctrine laws.........? Also in many states the home owner was "required" to retreat as far as possible into the home before they could finally defend themselves (Duty to Retreat).
Did find this (quick search) concerning home defense;

States That Have Stand Your Ground Laws - FindLaw

Look at the duty to retreat states, for all intent and purposes DTR laws protect the perp.

 

[Ringel05]

Again, you make claims about someone being stupid because they disagree with you. You keep proving you're that stupid. You've proven you're a liar.

I'm ridiculing you not because you disagree but because you're locked in a false paradigm and refuse to see it. The same thing I've seen you do with those who disagree with you....... hypocrite........

You're not ridiculing anyone, son. You don't have the capability. That you think you do proves you're stupid. It's not because you disagree with me. It's because you're stupid.

You're another one who thinks way too highly of yourself.......

Now ya wanna know what's really fucked up, the wife is watching Cops, they responded to a report of an attempted home break in, the perp was coming through the screen door and the home owner swung a shovel at him to scare him off. The cops arrested the homeowner for 2nd degree assault and you morons think there are not laws on the books to protect criminals....... Oh, it was in Kalifornia of course, how many other cities and states have such fucked up laws?

. Ummm there are no laws on the books to protect the perp trying to break into the home, but there are idiot cops that make up crap on the spot if they don't like someone, and then the lawyers and judges have to sort it all back out. The guy had every right to protect his property. Can you post a link to the specific law being talked about here by you ? Would be interesting to see it if it exist.

It was the tv show Cops, the wife like to watch it so I'll have to figure out what the laws are called and then do a search. In the meantime just some food for thought, why do you think there has been such a push over the last decade for Castle Doctrine laws.........? Also in many states the home owner was "required" to retreat as far as possible into the home before they could finally defend themselves (Duty to Retreat).
Did find this (quick search) concerning home defense;

States That Have Stand Your Ground Laws - FindLaw

Look at the duty to retreat states, for all intent and purposes DTR laws protect the perp.

Just looked it up for California which surprisingly has a Castle Doctrine law on the books but one cannot use force unless the perp uses force first even inside the house and you have to retreat into your home first.

5 Things To Know About ‘Stand Your Ground’ In California

On the show the perp was on the front porch and not attacking the homeowner but simply trying to enter the house which is why the cops arrested the homeowner for assault. I still think that's crazy but that's the law.

 

[beagle9]

Again, you make claims about someone being stupid because they disagree with you. You keep proving you're that stupid. You've proven you're a liar.

I'm ridiculing you not because you disagree but because you're locked in a false paradigm and refuse to see it. The same thing I've seen you do with those who disagree with you....... hypocrite........

You're not ridiculing anyone, son. You don't have the capability. That you think you do proves you're stupid. It's not because you disagree with me. It's because you're stupid.

You're another one who thinks way too highly of yourself.......

Now ya wanna know what's really fucked up, the wife is watching Cops, they responded to a report of an attempted home break in, the perp was coming through the screen door and the home owner swung a shovel at him to scare him off. The cops arrested the homeowner for 2nd degree assault and you morons think there are not laws on the books to protect criminals....... Oh, it was in Kalifornia of course, how many other cities and states have such fucked up laws?

. Ummm there are no laws on the books to protect the perp trying to break into the home, but there are idiot cops that make up crap on the spot if they don't like someone, and then the lawyers and judges have to sort it all back out. The guy had every right to protect his property. Can you post a link to the specific law being talked about here by you ? Would be interesting to see it if it exist.

It was the tv show Cops, the wife like to watch it so I'll have to figure out what the laws are called and then do a search. In the meantime just some food for thought, why do you think there has been such a push over the last decade for Castle Doctrine laws.........? Also in many states the home owner was "required" to retreat as far as possible into the home before they could finally defend themselves (Duty to Retreat).
Did find this (quick search) concerning home defense;

States That Have Stand Your Ground Laws - FindLaw

Look at the duty to retreat states, for all intent and purposes DTR laws protect the perp.

. It's crazy there are laws that protect a perp who is attempting to break into your home. I guess the reason there are laws that give the idea that a perp could be protected by law just as well, is because the law is trying to keep people from using the law to hide an evil in which they (a person who knows the laws so well), might do evil to someone (frame someone or set someone up), and then use a law to suggest that it wasn't them that was the bad guy, but instead it was the one who was set up by them that was the bad guy.
It appears that due to alot of gray area being involved in alot of these events, then it is that the breaking it down quicker by narrowing the fields quickly, and this by putting a deterrent law in place could also stop crime... This is what the law desires due to the fact that everything isn't always what it might seem when arrive on a crime scene.

 

[Ringel05]

I'm ridiculing you not because you disagree but because you're locked in a false paradigm and refuse to see it. The same thing I've seen you do with those who disagree with you....... hypocrite........

You're not ridiculing anyone, son. You don't have the capability. That you think you do proves you're stupid. It's not because you disagree with me. It's because you're stupid.

You're another one who thinks way too highly of yourself.......

Now ya wanna know what's really fucked up, the wife is watching Cops, they responded to a report of an attempted home break in, the perp was coming through the screen door and the home owner swung a shovel at him to scare him off. The cops arrested the homeowner for 2nd degree assault and you morons think there are not laws on the books to protect criminals....... Oh, it was in Kalifornia of course, how many other cities and states have such fucked up laws?

. Ummm there are no laws on the books to protect the perp trying to break into the home, but there are idiot cops that make up crap on the spot if they don't like someone, and then the lawyers and judges have to sort it all back out. The guy had every right to protect his property. Can you post a link to the specific law being talked about here by you ? Would be interesting to see it if it exist.

It was the tv show Cops, the wife like to watch it so I'll have to figure out what the laws are called and then do a search. In the meantime just some food for thought, why do you think there has been such a push over the last decade for Castle Doctrine laws.........? Also in many states the home owner was "required" to retreat as far as possible into the home before they could finally defend themselves (Duty to Retreat).
Did find this (quick search) concerning home defense;

States That Have Stand Your Ground Laws - FindLaw

Look at the duty to retreat states, for all intent and purposes DTR laws protect the perp.

. It's crazy there are laws that protect a perp who is attempting to break into your home. I guess the reason there are laws that give the idea that a perp could be protected by law just as well, is because the law is trying to keep people from using the law to hide an evil in which they (a person who knows the laws so well), might do evil to someone (frame someone or set someone up), and then use a law to suggest that it wasn't them that was the bad guy, but instead it was the one who was set up by them that was the bad guy.
It appears that due to alot of gray area being involved in alot of these events, then it is that the breaking it down quicker by narrowing the fields quickly, and this by putting a deterrent law in place could also stop crime... This is what the law desires due to the fact that everything isn't always what it might seem when arrive on a crime scene.

It can get pretty complex, and there are some Retreat Doctrine locals that specifically state if you can retreat out of your house safely then you are required to do so.
What some here didn't get, didn't have the brains to figure out was why I posted about a perp possibly being able to sue, it was a FYI warning just in case someone thought setting booby traps was a good idea. It was not that the perp should sue but in some circumstances some states/localities the perp could sue and the homeowner might be subject to criminal charges. Everyone should be aware of their individual state and local laws concerning the protection of personal property including when, where, where not, why and why not any force can be used.

 

[beagle9]

You're not ridiculing anyone, son. You don't have the capability. That you think you do proves you're stupid. It's not because you disagree with me. It's because you're stupid.

You're another one who thinks way too highly of yourself.......

Now ya wanna know what's really fucked up, the wife is watching Cops, they responded to a report of an attempted home break in, the perp was coming through the screen door and the home owner swung a shovel at him to scare him off. The cops arrested the homeowner for 2nd degree assault and you morons think there are not laws on the books to protect criminals....... Oh, it was in Kalifornia of course, how many other cities and states have such fucked up laws?

. Ummm there are no laws on the books to protect the perp trying to break into the home, but there are idiot cops that make up crap on the spot if they don't like someone, and then the lawyers and judges have to sort it all back out. The guy had every right to protect his property. Can you post a link to the specific law being talked about here by you ? Would be interesting to see it if it exist.

It was the tv show Cops, the wife like to watch it so I'll have to figure out what the laws are called and then do a search. In the meantime just some food for thought, why do you think there has been such a push over the last decade for Castle Doctrine laws.........? Also in many states the home owner was "required" to retreat as far as possible into the home before they could finally defend themselves (Duty to Retreat).
Did find this (quick search) concerning home defense;

States That Have Stand Your Ground Laws - FindLaw

Look at the duty to retreat states, for all intent and purposes DTR laws protect the perp.

. It's crazy there are laws that protect a perp who is attempting to break into your home. I guess the reason there are laws that give the idea that a perp could be protected by law just as well, is because the law is trying to keep people from using the law to hide an evil in which they (a person who knows the laws so well), might do evil to someone (frame someone or set someone up), and then use a law to suggest that it wasn't them that was the bad guy, but instead it was the one who was set up by them that was the bad guy.
It appears that due to alot of gray area being involved in alot of these events, then it is that the breaking it down quicker by narrowing the fields quickly, and this by putting a deterrent law in place could also stop crime... This is what the law desires due to the fact that everything isn't always what it might seem when arrive on a crime scene.

It can get pretty complex, and there are some Retreat Doctrine locals that specifically state if you can retreat out of your house safely then you are required to do so.
What some here didn't get, didn't have the brains to figure out was why I posted about a perp possibly being able to sue, it was a FYI warning just in case someone thought setting booby traps was a good idea. It was not that the perp should sue but in some circumstances some states/localities the perp could sue and the homeowner might be subject to criminal charges. Everyone should be aware of their individual state and local laws concerning the protection of personal property including when, where, where not, why and why not any force can be used.

. I guess there has to be a deterrent against people who set people up, and might try to say that the person is bad, when in reality the person who set the other person up is actually the bad guy. Not using the video as an example, but just saying that sometimes things ain't always what they seem.

 

[Ringel05]

You're another one who thinks way too highly of yourself.......

Now ya wanna know what's really fucked up, the wife is watching Cops, they responded to a report of an attempted home break in, the perp was coming through the screen door and the home owner swung a shovel at him to scare him off. The cops arrested the homeowner for 2nd degree assault and you morons think there are not laws on the books to protect criminals....... Oh, it was in Kalifornia of course, how many other cities and states have such fucked up laws?

. Ummm there are no laws on the books to protect the perp trying to break into the home, but there are idiot cops that make up crap on the spot if they don't like someone, and then the lawyers and judges have to sort it all back out. The guy had every right to protect his property. Can you post a link to the specific law being talked about here by you ? Would be interesting to see it if it exist.

It was the tv show Cops, the wife like to watch it so I'll have to figure out what the laws are called and then do a search. In the meantime just some food for thought, why do you think there has been such a push over the last decade for Castle Doctrine laws.........? Also in many states the home owner was "required" to retreat as far as possible into the home before they could finally defend themselves (Duty to Retreat).
Did find this (quick search) concerning home defense;

States That Have Stand Your Ground Laws - FindLaw

Look at the duty to retreat states, for all intent and purposes DTR laws protect the perp.

. It's crazy there are laws that protect a perp who is attempting to break into your home. I guess the reason there are laws that give the idea that a perp could be protected by law just as well, is because the law is trying to keep people from using the law to hide an evil in which they (a person who knows the laws so well), might do evil to someone (frame someone or set someone up), and then use a law to suggest that it wasn't them that was the bad guy, but instead it was the one who was set up by them that was the bad guy.
It appears that due to alot of gray area being involved in alot of these events, then it is that the breaking it down quicker by narrowing the fields quickly, and this by putting a deterrent law in place could also stop crime... This is what the law desires due to the fact that everything isn't always what it might seem when arrive on a crime scene.

It can get pretty complex, and there are some Retreat Doctrine locals that specifically state if you can retreat out of your house safely then you are required to do so.
What some here didn't get, didn't have the brains to figure out was why I posted about a perp possibly being able to sue, it was a FYI warning just in case someone thought setting booby traps was a good idea. It was not that the perp should sue but in some circumstances some states/localities the perp could sue and the homeowner might be subject to criminal charges. Everyone should be aware of their individual state and local laws concerning the protection of personal property including when, where, where not, why and why not any force can be used.

. I guess there has to be a deterrent against people who set people up, and might try to say that the person is bad, when in reality the person who set the other person up is actually the bad guy. Not using the video as an example, but just saying that sometimes things ain't always what they seem.

The premise of the law (especially concerning property) is the moral premise that lives are more important than property, in reality it's typically the other way around, life tends to be cheap. That's not a moral judgement on my part simply an observation, figured I should point that out before I get attacked again by those who can't see past their own sense of self righteousness.

The one point I was trying to make also with the perp suing the homeowner statement wasn't so much that the perp might win but that frivolous law suits happen every day, in the vast majority of cases they're tossed out of court but the homeowner typically has to spend money on an attorney just in case. Why put oneself in that position if one doesn't have to?

 

[beagle9]

. Ummm there are no laws on the books to protect the perp trying to break into the home, but there are idiot cops that make up crap on the spot if they don't like someone, and then the lawyers and judges have to sort it all back out. The guy had every right to protect his property. Can you post a link to the specific law being talked about here by you ? Would be interesting to see it if it exist.

It was the tv show Cops, the wife like to watch it so I'll have to figure out what the laws are called and then do a search. In the meantime just some food for thought, why do you think there has been such a push over the last decade for Castle Doctrine laws.........? Also in many states the home owner was "required" to retreat as far as possible into the home before they could finally defend themselves (Duty to Retreat).
Did find this (quick search) concerning home defense;

States That Have Stand Your Ground Laws - FindLaw

Look at the duty to retreat states, for all intent and purposes DTR laws protect the perp.

. It's crazy there are laws that protect a perp who is attempting to break into your home. I guess the reason there are laws that give the idea that a perp could be protected by law just as well, is because the law is trying to keep people from using the law to hide an evil in which they (a person who knows the laws so well), might do evil to someone (frame someone or set someone up), and then use a law to suggest that it wasn't them that was the bad guy, but instead it was the one who was set up by them that was the bad guy.
It appears that due to alot of gray area being involved in alot of these events, then it is that the breaking it down quicker by narrowing the fields quickly, and this by putting a deterrent law in place could also stop crime... This is what the law desires due to the fact that everything isn't always what it might seem when arrive on a crime scene.

It can get pretty complex, and there are some Retreat Doctrine locals that specifically state if you can retreat out of your house safely then you are required to do so.
What some here didn't get, didn't have the brains to figure out was why I posted about a perp possibly being able to sue, it was a FYI warning just in case someone thought setting booby traps was a good idea. It was not that the perp should sue but in some circumstances some states/localities the perp could sue and the homeowner might be subject to criminal charges. Everyone should be aware of their individual state and local laws concerning the protection of personal property including when, where, where not, why and why not any force can be used.

. I guess there has to be a deterrent against people who set people up, and might try to say that the person is bad, when in reality the person who set the other person up is actually the bad guy. Not using the video as an example, but just saying that sometimes things ain't always what they seem.

The premise of the law (especially concerning property) is the moral premise that lives are more important than property, in reality it's typically the other way around, life tends to be cheap. That's not a moral judgement on my part simply an observation, figured I should point that out before I get attacked again by those who can't see past their own sense of self righteousness.

The one point I was trying to make also with the perp suing the homeowner statement wasn't so much that the perp might win but that frivolous law suits happen every day, in the vast majority of cases they're tossed out of court but the homeowner typically has to spend money on an attorney just in case. Why put oneself in that position if one doesn't have to?

. I don't know, but in the case of the video I think the owner in his frustration may have come to a conclusion that it was worth it no matter what the out come. Hopefully he isn't so dependent on government or job, that he can't make a stand for something he believes in.

 

[PredFan]

Yeah, it's illegal but it shouldn't be.

yes it should be.
what about children that are too young to worry about things like trespass? You cant just go shocking 6 year olds.

What about good parenting? What about teaching children not to play around with things that don't belong to them? My kids wouldn't have bothered it.

 

[Ringel05]

It was the tv show Cops, the wife like to watch it so I'll have to figure out what the laws are called and then do a search. In the meantime just some food for thought, why do you think there has been such a push over the last decade for Castle Doctrine laws.........? Also in many states the home owner was "required" to retreat as far as possible into the home before they could finally defend themselves (Duty to Retreat).
Did find this (quick search) concerning home defense;

States That Have Stand Your Ground Laws - FindLaw

Look at the duty to retreat states, for all intent and purposes DTR laws protect the perp.

. It's crazy there are laws that protect a perp who is attempting to break into your home. I guess the reason there are laws that give the idea that a perp could be protected by law just as well, is because the law is trying to keep people from using the law to hide an evil in which they (a person who knows the laws so well), might do evil to someone (frame someone or set someone up), and then use a law to suggest that it wasn't them that was the bad guy, but instead it was the one who was set up by them that was the bad guy.
It appears that due to alot of gray area being involved in alot of these events, then it is that the breaking it down quicker by narrowing the fields quickly, and this by putting a deterrent law in place could also stop crime... This is what the law desires due to the fact that everything isn't always what it might seem when arrive on a crime scene.

It can get pretty complex, and there are some Retreat Doctrine locals that specifically state if you can retreat out of your house safely then you are required to do so.
What some here didn't get, didn't have the brains to figure out was why I posted about a perp possibly being able to sue, it was a FYI warning just in case someone thought setting booby traps was a good idea. It was not that the perp should sue but in some circumstances some states/localities the perp could sue and the homeowner might be subject to criminal charges. Everyone should be aware of their individual state and local laws concerning the protection of personal property including when, where, where not, why and why not any force can be used.

. I guess there has to be a deterrent against people who set people up, and might try to say that the person is bad, when in reality the person who set the other person up is actually the bad guy. Not using the video as an example, but just saying that sometimes things ain't always what they seem.

The premise of the law (especially concerning property) is the moral premise that lives are more important than property, in reality it's typically the other way around, life tends to be cheap. That's not a moral judgement on my part simply an observation, figured I should point that out before I get attacked again by those who can't see past their own sense of self righteousness.

The one point I was trying to make also with the perp suing the homeowner statement wasn't so much that the perp might win but that frivolous law suits happen every day, in the vast majority of cases they're tossed out of court but the homeowner typically has to spend money on an attorney just in case. Why put oneself in that position if one doesn't have to?

. I don't know, but in the case of the video I think the owner in his frustration may have come to a conclusion that it was worth it no matter what the out come. Hopefully he isn't so dependent on government or job, that he can't make a stand for something he believes in.

JON_BESERK and I had a good conversation a few days ago, he found more clarification about booby trap laws. Seems that in most states localities if the booby trap causes serious harm or death then the home/business owner would be in trouble. So even though the idiot in the video who tried to steal the sign could possibly sue I'd bet that case would be tossed out, unless it was California or one of the other more progressive controlled states (that's a mere guess on my part though). That homeowner would not be in trouble legally based on what Jon found.

 

[Ringel05]

Yeah, it's illegal but it shouldn't be.

yes it should be.
what about children that are too young to worry about things like trespass? You cant just go shocking 6 year olds.

What about good parenting? What about teaching children not to play around with things that don't belong to them? My kids wouldn't have bothered it.

Your kids are to be commended but since when do we live in a perfect world where everyone respects everyone else and everyone else's property?

 

[beagle9]

Yeah, it's illegal but it shouldn't be.

yes it should be.
what about children that are too young to worry about things like trespass? You cant just go shocking 6 year olds.

What about good parenting? What about teaching children not to play around with things that don't belong to them? My kids wouldn't have bothered it.

Your kids are to be commended but since when do we live in a perfect world where everyone respects everyone else and everyone else's property?

. But getting back to the specific case in the video, you just gotta love it.. ROTFLMBO. Steel my Trump sign again will ya... LOL.