Well. Clearly you’re a troll. Good bye.
1 Like
Nah they’re not at odds. They’re pretty unrelated. Although if he did get beaten within an inch of his life he might learn something about how fragile human life is. To be clear: I wasn’t advocating that just saying I was impressed it didn’t happen.
Excellent retort sir. Don’t address any of my points, tell me I should “go get murdered” and then call me a troll. BRILLANT ABSOOLUTELY BRILANT
Do you say that just for the controversy?
1 Like
Fox TV?
2 Likes
“Property is theft”? or the rest ? or? but just for controversy? no. I do believe property in some ways is theft. Though I also think it’s simplistic. As for the rest… where I live some of the most beautiful spots are on the other sides of fences. Some of those spots are public lands. Some are private lands where they welcome people to visit at their own risk. Sometimes they’re private lands with public easements. Some of the places may be private lands where the owners will shoot at you. It is definitely important to know which is which.
Yes, the Proudhon quote. Where I live, many of the most beautiful and pristine spots are on our side of the fence. That is because we have worked for generations to keep those places that way. The old growth forest is only there because we passed, from parent to child, the idea that those trees have value beyond their worth measured in board feet.
It looks untouched because we have put in an amazing amount of effort to keep it that way. The article is not about people being accosted for having a picnic or a walk in the woods. If some idiot went down in that valley with a dirt bike, they would scare the horses and the elk that live down there, leave ruts in the soft ground, and turn it into a muddy mess. And the river is full of trout only because we do not let everyone fish there.
5 Likes
That’s exactly what a fence means. But yes, right of way access is granted for access to things like water and any property which may be only accessible via right of way passage. Joyriding on a dirt bike isn’t one of those right of way usages and neither is destroying farmland.
Farmland is not uninhabited. It is the way farmers feed their families. Protecting your family’s main source of income is important if you don’t want them homeless and starving. Texas law allows a person to use force in the protection of property to prevent or terminate another’s trespass or other unlawful interference with the possession of real or personal property.
2 Likes
Putting up a fence makes the issue cut and dry. Even in the UK. The exception is traditional right of access. Dirt biking on fenced in farmland isn’t an exception according to the links you provided.
1 Like
Thank you. That would be the citation I was asking for in response to this:
Sec. 9.42. DEADLY FORCE TO PROTECT PROPERTY. A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under Section 9.41; and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other’s imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means; or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Force, yes. Section 9.41 allows the property owner to use force in order to get rid of trespassers.
The use of deadly force is a lot more limited. I don’t see “willful destruction of property” anywhere on that list. Unless they were setting things on fire or stealing something, I think you’re incorrect in your interpretation of Texas law.
3 Likes
The use of reasonable force to protect property is generally allowed in many states, but the use of deadly force to protect property is generally not. Most states restrict the use of deadly force to self-defense when a person is at risk for death or serious bodily injury.
Texas is one of the states that is more permissive in allowing deadly force to protect property, but even there, as @nimelennar points out, it’s still only permissible under very select circumstances. The idea that someone has “every right to…end their lives” of anyone who is trespassing is simply not true.
3 Likes
Sigh. You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it like it’s own medicine.
3 Likes
If I asked someone what they were doing on my property and they gave me grief and ran away, I’d assume they were burglars. I might assume it three times as quickly if I were Texan.
In the video I see reasonable force (assuming he’s on his own property knocking their trailer around with his own truck at dirt road speeds) being used by an unreasonable sounding person (against a couple of young fools who started the whole thing, and earned a bad reaction to their juvenile intrusion). He didn’t pull a gun, and everyone is better off for that. I bet he had one. He wasn’t trying to kill anyone any more than they were trying to steal from him.
2 Likes
So many questions!
- Why is there a duck in the narrator’s helmet?
- In the first section, when they were “trapped” by him blocking the exit, why didn’t they just ride around until they found a convenient ramp or other unfeasibly jumpable surface to make a movie-style airborne escape?
- Which one is Jon and which Poncherello?
- Who is “U-hual” (sic) and why did they have to break the news to him? Is he a rapper?
- What is “an insurance clam”?
etc.
7 Likes
Trespassers cause damage to grading and surveying markers on your property, mock and ignore you, damage your vehicle attempting to escape before police arrive, internet springs to their defense.
Meanwhile clearly not smart youth are physically endangered by angry behavior of victim.
I’m on the old man’s side in this. Yahoos should get consequences for their bullsh@t.
3 Likes
I believe we call this irony. 
1 Like
when applied lightly it is a supplement, not unlike like bullshit.
Too much in one place and you’re gonna have a problem.
true words.
Relevant article: Texas isn’t the rest of the US in some ways, and the final resolution to where old law and modern law meet to reconcile standards with those held by the majority of the nation, and possibly the US Constitution, has not happened in the courts yet.
3 Likes
You’ve said that a person you believe doesn’t respect the fragility of life ought to be beaten to death or nearly to death-as lesson on the fragility of life.
Are you from the Old Testament?
5 Likes
