NOTICE: This message may not have been sent by the Sender Name above. Always use cryptographic digital signatures to verify the identity of the sender of any usenet post or e-mail.
Anonymous via the Cypherpunks Tonga Remailer wrote on March 7, 2003 at 07:07:02 +0100: > On Thu, 6 Mar 2003 19:21:52 -0800, you wrote: > > > > On Thursday, March 6, 2003, at 02:11 PM, Major Variola (ret) wrote: > > > > > Besides, the publicity has been great. I was told that after it made > > > news, 150 women wearing the same T-shirts showed up at the mall. The > > > security guards locked themselves in their offices. Probably messed > > > their pants, too. > > > > If people didn't leave my property when told to, and the actual police > > would not expel them, then I would consider it morally justified to > > start shooing those 150 bitches. Sometimes people don't understand > > anything except bullets. > > > > My defense would be that it was my property, they were trespassing, and > > the police refused to do their job. > > Stupid defense, and if you found a judge stupid enough to allow > it, I'd be surprised. If you proved the elements above, you are > still guilty of murder. You'd be the bitch in prison over that > one. No state in the US allows lethal force for trespassing. Do > it the way you said and you go down for murder one. Two words: Jury nullification. I've been hearing liberals bleat about the actions of the cops and mall security. "Their civil rights were violated!" "They have free speech!" "The mall is a public accomodation!" "Property rights don't trump personal rights!" These fuckards really need to learn what private property is. -- Tom Veil "Give us the negatives, Tom...."
