Arizona Republicans are advancing a bill that would allow people to legally kill someone accused of attempting to trespass or actively trespassing on their property. The big picture: The legislation, which is expected to be vetoed if it reaches the state's Democratic governor, would legalize the murder of undocumented immigrants, who often have to cross ranches that sit on the state's border with Mexico.
Reason - According to a new poll from the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), a First Amendment organization, nearly a third of Americans, including similar numbers of Republicans and Democrats, say that the First Amendment goes "too far" in the rights it guarantees. More than half agreed that their local community should not allow a public speech that espouses a belief they find particularly offensive. "Those results were disappointing, but not exactly surprising," said FIRE Chief Research Adviser Sean Stevens in a Tuesday press release. "Here at FIRE, we've long observed that many people who say they're concerned about free speech waver when it comes to beliefs they personally find offensive. But the best way to protect your speech in the future is to defend the right to controversial and offensive speech today."
2 comments:
Geesch...
A. A person or his agent in lawful possession or control of premises is justified in threatening to use deadly physical force or in threatening or using physical force against another when and to the extent that a reasonable person would believe it immediately necessary to prevent or terminate the commission or attempted commission of a criminal trespass by the other person in or upon ON the premises.
B. A person may use deadly physical force under subsection A only in the defense of himself or third persons as described in sections 13-405 and 13-406.
C. In FOR THE PURPOSES OF this section, "premises" means any real property and OR any structure, movable or immovable, permanent or temporary, adapted for both EITHER human residence and OR lodging whether occupied or not.
Legalese is such a Pain. From a personal point of view:
A property owner (me), their representative or tenant, can yell death threats (at you) without using God’s name in vain (depending upon circumstances), may use physical force, but not kill, a potential or actual criminal trespasser on their property or in their buildings.
But, if the intruder even looks at you wrong. Or looks cross-eyed at a friend of yours. Then just kill the SOB.
To be clear, by “property”, this means “land”, “building structure”, even a tent or camping trailer. Whatever, even if I ain’t home but find you there sucka.
---
So, your wife (property owner et al), after receiving a particularly horrendous hair style and manicure and seeing a jaundiced and opinionated Look by an unknown and unexpected visitor that anyone might perceive as ‘just criminal’ and capable of making any responsible person ‘see red’ and make you want to ‘just kill that person’, should feel free to just go ahead and ‘do it’. And do the same for your friend there, she don’t deserve to be dis’d either.
And that does for your fetus too.
Oops, I meant "goes for" in that last line.
Post a Comment