>> ^quantumushroom:
Nice baseless assumption, qm. Begging the question is the technical word for this particular fallacy.
dft, I stand by my words. As always. They are based on observance of the hysterical tone of the bulk of these responses as well as past observations of sifters' knee-jerk hateful reactions to lawful authority, reactions programmed by government school (and kollij) indoctrination. The moral-relativist "Establishment" has done its evil work.
The "private property" excuse is a lame one and not applicable. It appears to be the front yard area, visible from the road. Any criminal activity in plain sight in the front yard requires no warrant, nor does an officer being threatened with harm.
Had the cop shot a sleeping dog or sitting dog, I'd also like to see him strung up by his balls.
But that's not what happened here.


It does apply. Because these laws prohibit any one who is unwelcome from being on the property. They have to have written and expressed consent from the owner of the property. The officer did not have a need to be on the property, and being lost does not constitute as a need, because they have radios in their cars. It appears to be the front yard area, so that means its Ok for a cop to go on the property? If there were crime on the property then her surveillance would have caught the criminals comming on to the property, which they did in this case it was the police.

Just because the law is lame does not mean that it is not applicable in this case. It is applicable and that would be how I would advocate for the owner.

Finally if you read most of my comments you will find that I state that this case hinges on what she had posted on her borders, and on the property.

Nice baseless assumption, qm. Begging the question is the technical word for this particular fallacy.

dft, I stand by my words. As always. They are based on observance of the hysterical tone of the bulk of these responses as well as past observations of sifters' knee-jerk hateful reactions to lawful authority, reactions programmed by government school (and kollij) indoctrination. The moral-relativist "Establishment" has done its evil work.

The "private property" excuse is a lame one and not applicable. It appears to be the front yard area, visible from the road. Any criminal activity in plain sight in the front yard requires no warrant, nor does an officer being threatened with harm.

Had the cop shot a sleeping dog or sitting dog, I'd also like to see him strung up by his balls.

But that's not what happened here.

Hold the phone. So 15 years ago, Ossetia, with a rebel government leaves Georgia independence. Now, Georgia wants it back and moves in militarily. Russia starts to take it "back" in force claiming its residents as Russians and Georgia says:

"One hundred and fifty Russian tanks, armoured personnel carriers and other vehicles have entered South Ossetia," President Saakashvili of Georgia told reporters in Tbilisi. "This is a clear intrusion on another country’s territory. We have Russian tanks on our territory, jets on our territory in broad daylight."

WTF. I know Georgia is a much closer ally to the US and the west than Russia, but still. I'm confused. We must not be getting enough history to understand this. Who the F owns this land? So far, it looks like Georgia is at fault and should have let the sleeping dog lie.

Fast Facts:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,400046,00.html

Tags for this video have been changed from 'sleeping, dogs' to 'sleeping, dogs, lips, ears, nose, skin, hound, dog, puppy' - edited by swampgirl