Posted on 01/27/2007 1:36:11 PM PST by tpaine
If someone told you they would kill you for setting foot on their property and you chose to ignore that, I would rate your actions as foolish, without espousing the idea of someone killing you. I suppose you would also ignore "Beware of Dog" signs, "Danger High Voltage", "Achtung: Minen!", and "Do not use this product while taking a shower" as well.
He warned them and they proceeded without good judgement, imo.
One thing I've noticed throughout this (fairly long) thread is how many people mention the tragic murder of the "maintenance men", the "working men" - - it is instructive that not one single poster has noted with any concern that a politician was also killed in the confrontation.
Sometimes a lot depends on how they ask.
What is your breaking point? When is enough, enough? I fear we're getting awfully close to that breaking point where hell will be unleashed upon those that would tread upon our freedoms.
As usual, you're dead on the money about property rights. A man's home is his castle, and he has a right and responsibility to defend his castle against those who invade...regardless if the invader is a scumabg breaking down his door in the middle of the night, or a bureaucrat carrying a briefcase.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
Please tell me how else to interpret your post other than to think that you condone civil violence? Your 'wrong to shoot the messenger' leads one to believe that you would support going down to city hall and shooting the head guy would be justified.
"However, if what I understand to be the case really is the case, damn if someone wouldn't pay for encroaching on my property. Maybe it was wrong to shoot the messenger for the message, but to paraphrase John Wayne in "The Green Berets", sometimes due process is a bullet."
I have voiced neither approval nor condemnation of Watson's actions, but was called a nut for condoning the shooting of those that come to repair the problems. As I recall, Watson didn't shoot the ones who came to repair the overflowing sewer. He paid them for their work. He shot the ones who came to steal his property.
You are mixing apples and oranges. Warning someone that you are going to kill them does not allow you to murder them.
--He shot the ones who came to steal his property.--
They were there NOT to steal his property but to fix the problem.
Put me on any list you like. I said what I said. If you must read more into it than that, it's your problem.
They were not there to clean up the mess of raw sewage they'd already created on his property. They were there to run more raw sewage across his problem, without an easement this time.
"...the rights of the people against the encroachments of the government."
Now t...are you going to make the argument that the people who constructed the Bill of Rights were wrong about its intent?
You simply don't understand their world luis. -- None of them ever imagined that some day we would have individual businessmen, - like you, - intent on denying a fellow- citizens right to carry arms in his vehicle.
The founders would have rode you out of town on a rail for posting a 'no guns allowed' sign on your business.
Must have been a freudian slip.
--without an easement this time. --
Huh? They HAD an easement.
I'm not embarrassed by my comment but by the trend in this thread.
--As usual, you're dead on the money about property rights. A man's home is his castle, and he has a right and responsibility to defend his castle against those who invade...regardless if the invader is a scumabg breaking down his door in the middle of the night, or a bureaucrat carrying a briefcase.--
Better look up the laws on easements before you go shooting the utility guy.
--I'm not embarrassed by my comment but by the trend in this thread.--
I am too. Too many blowhards going around supporting murder.
If someone told you they would kill you for setting foot on their property, would you ignore that?
The warning does not make his actions justified, but by ignoring the warning, imo, some culpability falls on the 'victims'. At no time did I say warning them made what he did right. I DID say they were stupid to ignore the warning.
Maybe the difference is lost on you.
If you open the panel marked "high voltage" and get fried as a result, is the electricity wrong or right for cooking you?
It does not matter. You ignored the warning.
But what I DID say is that there was likley more to this story than met my 'page'. No reasonable person would normally shoot people over such a matter as a hole in their property, especially if there is a legal easement, unless there is something else involved. So rather than carp at me for acknowledging the guy gave them a warning and they ignored it (and trying to twist that into my approving of his actions), if you have some greater knowledge of the situation, maybe you would like to share it with us.
They had an easement for the property they had already destroyed. They weren't happy with it after they destroyed it, so they decided to take more property. They notified his wife of this, hours before they began digging up a new location on his property, which was separate from their easement.
-They were not there to clean up the mess of raw sewage they'd already created on his property. They were there to run more raw sewage across his property--
Wrong.
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.