CDZ There's a builderer scaling Trump Tower in NYC

[320 Years of History]

Not many people engage in buildering. No surprise there. I don't and wouldn't. On the other hand, it's something to do. People climb cliffs and rappel down/into a variety of structures too. Buildering is illegal and punishable as a criminal trespass.

• Do you think buildering should be declared an act of criminal trespass? If so, why? If not, why not?
• Should buildering be prohibited? Why or why not?
• Should buildering be a crime? Why or why not?

 

[Dekster]

Yes, Yes and your third question is redundant as it is the same as your second question.

 

[deltex1]

Not many people engage in buildering. No surprise there. I don't and wouldn't. On the other hand, it's something to do. People climb cliffs and rappel down/into a variety of structures too. Buildering is illegal and punishable as a criminal trespass.

• Do you think buildering should be declared an act of criminal trespass? If so, why? If not, why not?
• Should buildering be prohibited? Why or why not?
• Should buildering be a crime? Why or why not?

It and you....should be ignored....no offense intended....yo.

 

[320 Years of History]

Yes, Yes and your third question is redundant as it is the same as your second question.

Red:
For most folks and deeds, yes, they are the same, and for you, clearly they are. That's fine. Some folks are aware of the subtle distinction between malum in se and malum prohibitum, and elect to address the matter from that contextual foundation. Others may recognize the distinction between civilly and criminally prohibited acts. There is at least one other legal concept that gives rise to the distinction between what's recognized as prohibited and but that may not be treated as criminal. I tried to set up the discussion to allow for those admittedly "more sophisticated than the average person will care about" lines of consideration of the thread question.

 

[Dekster]

Yes, Yes and your third question is redundant as it is the same as your second question.

Red:
For most folks and deeds, yes, they are the same, and for you, clearly they are. That's fine. Some folks are aware of the subtle distinction between malum in se and malum prohibitum, and elect to address the matter from that contextual foundation. Others may recognize the distinction between civilly and criminally prohibited acts. There is at least one other legal concept that gives rise to the distinction between what's recognized as prohibited and but that may not be treated as criminal. I tried to set up the discussion to allow for those admittedly "more sophisticated than the average person will care about" lines of consideration of the thread question.

Did you have to rewatch the clips from Legally Blonde to come up with that pedantic response?

 

[Fair&Balanced]

320, you simply try too hard.

 

[320 Years of History]

Yes, Yes and your third question is redundant as it is the same as your second question.

Red:
For most folks and deeds, yes, they are the same, and for you, clearly they are. That's fine. Some folks are aware of the subtle distinction between malum in se and malum prohibitum, and elect to address the matter from that contextual foundation. Others may recognize the distinction between civilly and criminally prohibited acts. There is at least one other legal concept that gives rise to the distinction between what's recognized as prohibited and but that may not be treated as criminal. I tried to set up the discussion to allow for those admittedly "more sophisticated than the average person will care about" lines of consideration of the thread question.

Did you have to rewatch the clips from Legally Blonde to come up with that pedantic response?

 

[OldLady]

What's more interesting about that climb is that once again, a young American is off his meds doing dangerous things. Why can't they come up with a slow release long term medication for schizophrenics and paranoids that gets shot into them whether they like it or not?
I realize that's two issues, but that's what the climber and his subsequent transport to Bellevue brought to mind.