Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: stands2reason
It's a spillover fight from other threads about the same court decision.

From a purely legal analysis, I can't even suggest why the judge made this decision. There's no legal theory to support it.

Nonetheless, we have several Freepers who totally agree with the judge, and some who think it would be okay if the girls were shot and killed.

I had no idea this story would be so divisive.

122 posted on 02/05/2005 3:00:07 PM PST by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies ]


To: Dog Gone

Some people aren't used to being disagreed with.


123 posted on 02/05/2005 3:02:53 PM PST by stands2reason
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies ]

To: Dog Gone

could it be that this judge was respecting property ownership? i don't know. but that is good in my book if so. i DON'T think it should have been brought to court in the first place from what i have read of it. but i always like it when judges side with property owners... ya know?


129 posted on 02/05/2005 3:08:04 PM PST by sdpatriot ("If I know the answer I'll tell you the answer, and if I don't, I'll just respond, cleverly." Rummy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies ]

To: Dog Gone
we have several Freepers who totally agree with the judge

I haven't seen any posts that kind of agree with the judge let alone "totally".

And you'll please note the "spillover" argument was caused by a poster pinging me over here in some strange attempt to force me to recant my heresy.

LOL

134 posted on 02/05/2005 3:12:15 PM PST by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 122 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson