Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-32 last
To: Joe Brower; Mr. Mojo; DaveLoneRanger; Travis McGee
53 posted on
10/02/2006 4:21:33 AM PDT by
freepatriot32
(Holding you head high & voting Libertarian is better then holding your nose and voting republican)
To: baldeagle390
Back in Wisconsin in the 60s or early 70s, a farmer had a continuing problem with break-ins at a second farmhouse on his farm. He set up a spring-gun and it got a convicted felon who was also an escapee, as I recall.
The felon sued and won! There is no justice in Wisconsin.
55 posted on
10/02/2006 4:39:29 AM PDT by
Redleg Duke
(¡Salga de los Estados Unidos de América, invasor!)
To: baldeagle390
This says all of us need to review our homeowners' insurance policies carefully. Many companies' policies only apply to accidental shootings, not intentional ones. In such cases homeowners have been known to ally themselves with the burglars, claiming the discharge was accidental, so they have insurance coverage. Other companies, like USAA, my insurer, cover intentional shootings in defense of life and property. I hope this homeowner has such a policy.
To: baldeagle390
In essence, his lawyer is asking the jury to help create a world where it isn't so dangerous to break into an occupied house.
I prefer to live in a world where it is extremely dangerous to break into an occupied house.
58 posted on
10/02/2006 5:05:36 AM PDT by
ko_kyi
To: baldeagle390
Would never happen in Texas.
65 posted on
10/02/2006 5:59:26 AM PDT by
DaGman
To: baldeagle390
INSIDE his house? Double tap center mass. One follow up to the head.
Why is this lawsuit even being allowed by the judge? Toss it out. With prejudice. If not, impeach the judge.
69 posted on
10/02/2006 6:37:43 AM PDT by
Dead Corpse
(Quam terribilis est haec hora)
To: baldeagle390
This is type of BS is old news.
He is a jailhouse lawyer. Their should be explicit immunity and a prohibition of attorney fees for the convicted.
73 posted on
10/02/2006 6:59:45 AM PDT by
longtermmemmory
(VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
To: baldeagle390
The Milwaukee County suit claims Rainiero used excessive force to deal with the intruding plaintiff and alleges severe and permanent injuries, relentless pain, and loss of earning capacity. He suing because he can't burgle any more?
87 posted on
10/02/2006 9:23:51 AM PDT by
steve-b
(The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.)
To: baldeagle390
Moral #1: Finish what you start
Moral #2: Have a big enough gun
89 posted on
10/02/2006 11:59:47 AM PDT by
TexasRepublic
(Afghan protest - "Death to Dog Washers!")
To: baldeagle390
English Rule!!!! Make the plaintiff's attorney pay!!!
94 posted on
10/02/2006 7:07:56 PM PDT by
Lonesome in Massachussets
(The hallmark of a crackpot conspiracy theory is that it expands to include countervailing evidence.)
To: baldeagle390
Since the perp says he was shot in the back I was tempted to make a wisecrack about the MD being a proctologi-something but I looked it up and he is a general surgeon, so I guess that sews that up.
95 posted on
10/02/2006 7:14:38 PM PDT by
Old Professer
(The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, and writes again.)
To: baldeagle390
"Accused Burglar Sues Homeowner Who Shot Him"
Showing that the homeowner needs more range time. If he'd have been a better shot, he wouldn't be getting sued right now.
100 posted on
10/02/2006 8:39:13 PM PDT by
BLS
(It's time to redefine your deiphobic mind.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-32 last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson