5468
Comments (386)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
36
SoYuge 36 points ago +37 / -1

I was thinking that. The reasoning behind the court case is that it could hurt emergency services who wanted to enter the house. It was indiscriminate.

But what reason could cops have to fuck with a sign? It's not indiscriminate. One should have no legally permission reason to touch his sign. And I doubt police would ever need to.

I think, no lawyer, but I think this would be fine in that it is discriminate, only upon vandals. At least there's an argument to be made for it. I don't see how this could possible be a threat to emergency services.

23
deleted 23 points ago +23 / -0
14
publ1us 14 points ago +14 / -0

Yeah, it's probably a good idea to read the law like a leftist for the loosest possible interpretation that could be used to nail you.

I know, it's hard to switch off every single one of your logical pathways, but you gotta cover your ass!

19
deleted 19 points ago +19 / -0
4
PeaceThroughStrength 4 points ago +4 / -0

Yeah, that's the crappy part of the legal system.

Any half decent lawyer or any well read civilian will get you out of this come prosecution or court time but your asshole neighbor can still swat you for this and most law enforcement don't know what they're enforcing.

4
SirWilliam 4 points ago +4 / -0

Biden sign with rat traps on it right next to it -- no one is going to prosecute for you for someone stealing your Biden sign in a blue city. Plausible deniability. BiGOts STolE My BiDeN SigN!

Wait, do Biden signs even exist?

1
Oleander 1 point ago +1 / -0

They do, there's one in my suburban neighborhood and I live in Texas.

1
SirWilliam 1 point ago +1 / -0

Never seen any out here in based CA...

11
Mad_Maximo 11 points ago +11 / -0

It's always interesting that they use people who shouldn't interfere with a sign for an obstruction, but says nothing if, say, a bird feeder was in the same place.

7
Libertas_Vel_Mors 7 points ago +7 / -0

Agreed with all of that, and one other bit:

Originally, booby-trap laws were in place to get rid of idiots who did stupid shit like, say, jerry-rig something to kill any burglar dumb enough to break into your house.

It originally came about when some dude rigged his apartment door with said shotgun. Problem is, the guy was a scoutmaster, and one of his boy scouts went over to drop something off, and knew where the spare key was. The booby-trap wound up killing the kid.

This... this is way different.

11
Granite_MAGA 11 points ago +11 / -0

Home Alone should have been renamed "Kid Commits Hundreds of Felonies".

3
kono_hito_wa 3 points ago +4 / -1

That story has a lot of internet confusion. The guy was a scoutmaster for about a year in 1979, but the kid was a burglar. Was unable to find out whether the kid-burglar was actually one of his scouts.

This contains facts in the case: https://law.justia.com/cases/florida/supreme-court/1981/59538-0.html

Here's the beginning of the urban legend (as far as I can tell): https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/fl-xpm-1986-10-03-8602280720-story.html

And to top off the insanity, the guy is a pedo: https://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/fl-xpm-1994-02-12-9402120149-story.html

It's always possible the kid entered to get evidence on pedo-master. Obviously pure speculation on my part.

7
PeaceThroughStrength 7 points ago +7 / -0

I'm a lawyer.

This type of trap is fine. This makes as much sense as placing a snake or coyote trap in your property.

What you can't do is put ducking claymores or punji pits.

Notice the extent of deadliness.

4
BladderBeerPoopin 4 points ago +4 / -0

No punji sticks? Well, shit. This is no fun.

2
dumdumexpress 2 points ago +2 / -0

This lawyer gets you off!

1
PeaceThroughStrength 1 point ago +1 / -0

😁