Posted on 06/22/2005 6:11:10 AM PDT by pickemuphere
Yeah, it wasn't the landlord's problem - or his fault. He also became a victim. The law spends more time protecting the rights of rapists and killers than protecting innocent citizens. It's an outrage. And it's caused by having too many liberal judges on the bench.
When citizen act on their own to protect their children, the law is breaking down. For the law to work, people must have faith that justice will be done. Without that, the law is only a sledge hammer for the elites. As it is in so many totalitarian countries.
I live near Bradenton where the creeps buried the raped child alive -- a nine year old. The people who covered for the rapist walked. In a two bedroom trailer they "didn't know". Yeah, and the judge bought it...
It's time for citizens to put their dimes together and build halfway houses for sexual predators so they can live next door to the judges who let them out.
If you fail to keep batteries in a smoke detector, you may find yourself in court if anyone's hurt from a fire. (And no one will care that your renters took the nine volts to run their kid's toy). I read of one lawsuit where someone was the victim of a crime on a front porch, and they blamed the landlord because the bulb had burnt out.
I understand that there OUGHT to be property rights, just like the governent OUGHT to be controlling illegal immigration.
The Minutemen are watching little bits of the border. There are other ways that citizens can take action.
For instance, Americans are being done out of jobs because employers are discriminating against the LEGAL. This is a civil rights cause of action. Landlords oughtn't to be doing business with Godfathers. If they house criminals, and the criminals hurt someone...how is that any different from a failed smoke dectector?
keep em coming Bush - most of the violent crimes committed in border states are by illegal aliens. Shame that the media and liberals and RINOs (Bush and McCain) care more about illegals than our own citizens. Bush's rhetoric re. the war on terror is a joke - he is an elitist - unfortunately he has proven that he could care less about Americans. Sad, after so many of us worked so hard to get him elected.
I'll admit that you can go whistle your silly tune anywhere you please. People who come to discussion forums demanding affadavits are losers and bores.
YADA YADA YADA
But people, who make unsubstantiated claims, want to string up innocent third parties, and provide dubious (to say the least) legal opinions, are indeed the epitome of intelligent discourse.
That part is racist. I'll agree with you there.
Good luck getting either the police or the media to be forthcoming with the perp(s) immigration status.
You'll have to pry that information out of them with a crowbar.
Anarchists have been infiltrating our institutions for 80 years.
Some of the socialist protesters admit to being "anarchist-socialists" (and yes that is a genuine political philosphy). The only way they can acheive their "utopian" dream is to tear down this society we already have. They want chaos and lawlessness. They push for a lack of faith in institutions of law, education, and religion.
Ted Rall has confessed to having wet dreams of CEOs being hung from lampposts as people run wild in the streets. It is the sole reason he supports the right to bear arms, so that he can have a gun when all of the s*** goes down. He has confessed that the "kill whitey" mentality will make him a target but he said that he agrees with this racist minority view and would hope to be considered a friendly soul. This interview was even posted to his own website at one time (don't know if it is still there).
These anarchists cannot have a "peace" protest without lobbing some bricks into the windows of a Wells Fargo or INS office it seems. And don't forget to spraypaint the Starbucks windows after getting that double latte.
If the legal system weren't a joke in California or DC, these violent offenders would be locked up for 3-5 years. While arrests are made at these riots, far too often the charges are later dropped (charging them in the first place permits the event to continue while getting the offenders off the streets).
I don't consider these rioters to be harmless. They have confessed a goal of tearing down this nation by force.
Agreed. I have a hard time determining what is worse though, the press hiding facts to meet their agenda, or activist making up facts to fit theirs.
I, of course, believe the residents of the house were illegal and believe uncontrolled illegal immigration is perhaps this nations greatest threat, but I am not yet willing to string up innocent third parties based on a hunch or frame an entire debate on an assumed "fact".
Hmmmmm. The landlord now gets insurance money to rebuild his rental house. That's a good deal for him.
sure!
"In certain situations, the law is inadequate. Sometimes we need to shame the law into action. People need to be killed as part of natural justice."
-from The Punisher
(Yeah, I know I'm a dork)
"We have RESPECT for other people's property, even if they rent to illegals."
To be respected requires being respectable.
The landlord was complicit.
Expect to see more "vigilance committee" articles in the future.
That doesn't mean I like it but you will see more.
I always remember a case in Britain where a vigilante mob attacked the house of a guy they thought was a paedophile. Turned out that the guy was not a paedophile, he was a paediatrician and the whole misunderstanding had been bought about by a few idiots confusing the words and spreading the rumour.
That is a strong case against vigilatism.
"But people, who make unsubstantiated claims, want to string up innocent third parties,..."
I see little difference in wrongful conviction and execution of innocent parties by the state and errant vigilante justice accomplishing the same end. As the earlier article pointed out, modern DNA testing is responsible for freeing many wrongfully convicted people from death row. We are left to wonder how many others could have benefited from this technology in years past.
This question is driven by our respect for human life, which we like to consider supremely valuable. Nothing could be further from the truth, of course, but we're not likely to change our minds now. Still, consider what makes a commodity valuable. Gold and jewels are considered valuable because of their scarcity. That principle holds true with everything else too. Want to buy a car? New ones are more expensive than used ones because the supply is limited. What then, is the most common thing on this planet? What one thing are we continually overrun with, having to make new and better facilities to accommodate it?
Human life.
My life is valuable to me and to a few relatives and friends. To the rest of the world it is a mere statistic. The same can be said of each and every one of us here on this board and of all the migrant laborers, legal and otherwise, who happen to get in the way of a bit of vigilante justice.
Six months ago, when the tsunami struck Indonesia, we in the United States leaped to send all sorts of disaster relief supplies to help the refugees. Our televisions and newspapers carried daily stories of miraculous survivals and horrible deaths. To a lesser degree, European countries contributed to the relief effort but Middle Eastern countries were conspicuous in their absence. Most notable though, was the almost complete interest shown by the Indonesian government. Their primary concern was getting our military out of their country. That they had to assume the relief effort to accomplish that was simply a price they had to pay.
Here in America we still have enough open land to allow us to assign a higher value to human life than to property. In countries that are overrun with people, such as is the case in many Asian countries, the opposite is true. If we continue with our "open borders" policy, supporting NAFTA and instituting CAFTA too, how long will it be before we begin sacrificing people to the 'God' of urban renewal? We already sacrifice their homes, using local government to declare the property essential to the good of the people as a whole.
In a county courthouse not far from here, the Sheriff has a small display case with relics from earlier years. One photo shows several men hanging from a railroad bridge. The caption tells of the problems local ranchers were having from cattle rustlers and how those problems went away after a group of vigilantes decorated the bridge. Vigilante justice reared its ugly but effective head when I was a child. In 1942 most of the deputies assigned to the Sheriff's department had enlisted in the army, leaving him woefully short-handed. A few miles away, a man was found sexually mistreating his own daughter and the Sheriff simply couldn't get to him. A group of local farmers visited him though and convinced him of the error of his ways. They did such a good job of convincing him that he hanged himself. The Sheriff came by to look into the matter and declare it a suicide, marveling at the determination of the dead man who somehow managed to hang himself with his hands tied behind him.
Justice is supposed to be meted out by peers of the accused. By the time the lawyers have chosen a jury though, none of the jurors have any resemblance to the accused and can in no way be considered peers. Vigilantes, on the other hand, are usually people from the area, perhaps even neighbors of the accused, and can rightly be considered peers. Will they make mistakes? Sure, but so does the state, and sometime those vigilantes can correct the state's errors.
"After the alleged crime, police say the (9 year old) girl ran across the street to her home, nude, and told her dad what happened."
~snip~
"When the father went to the home, the suspect was still at the home, apparently lying naked on a bed. He then took off, getting away from the father."
___________________________________
Doesn't seem to be much rumor or confusion in this case.
My innocent third party comment was directed at idea of blaming the landlord for the actions (unbeknownst to the him) of one of his tenants.
A case could be made that he was complacent if you can prove he knew the people renting the property were illegal, (I have rented properties for the last 20 years. My wife and I only recently purchased a house and I have never been asked to prove my citizenship when renting properties and I rented properties in 6 different states) knew the renters were going to engage in illegal activities (aside from mind reading I am not sure how this was suppose to be done. Granted if the criminals were carrying in marijuana plants or meth lab equipment you have reasonable suspicion, but one of the bad thing about rapists is you can't tell them by looks) or aided in the crime.
Since none of these seems to be proven, an attack on the landlord is just bad form.
Although I can understand the neighbor's passion and rage, I would rather they strung the guy up and hung him by his neck until he be dead, dead, dead! Rather they destroyed the property of two people who weren't even involved in the incident. Hardly justice.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.