Eric Pavao wrote: > On Tue, Jul 1, 2008 at 9:34 PM, goat! <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Yes, and people are still being prosecuted / ruined trying to stop >> trespass on the borders. > > Huh? If you own land on the border (or have permission from the > person(s) that own the land) then you can rightfully stop a > trespasser. If however you are talking about "public" land then I can > confidently tell you (being part of the public myself) that you do not > have unanimous consent to stop tresspassers. Of course, since it is > impossible to get unanimous consent to do ANYTHING with public land > (including buy it in the first place), public land should not exist to > begin with. But as long as you want to believe in the fiction of > public land, you shouldn't be able to keep out trespassers unless you > have permission to do so from ALL the owners. And I hereby refuse to > give my permission.
No, I'm talking about people being sued for stopping trespass on private land, and having everything they have taken. As far as public land, that is what the vote is for. Goat
