Anti-Gun Neighbors

[Sr Mike]

This is too funny

That is funny.
Posted via Mobile Device

[Don Fernando]

If something happens to the neighbors, these folks will get sued, and they should imho.

You can have a different point of view, but putting your neighbors at risk is a bad thing, and this sign is putting them at risk by clearly marking them as an easy target for burglars and robbers.

[elderboy02]

My house is protected by the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America

[Alarmguy1]

Originally Posted by elderboy02

My house is protected by the 2nd Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America

I am with you on this one

Alarmguy1

[Scothew]

im 99% sure that sign is photoshoped.

[madwilliamflint]

Cute but over the line.

[Ahbroody]

Originally Posted by Don Fernando

If something happens to the neighbors, these folks will get sued, and they should imho.

You can have a different point of view, but putting your neighbors at risk is a bad thing, and this sign is putting them at risk by clearly marking them as an easy target for burglars and robbers.

First of all its very likely the sign is photoshop.
Second I would love to know wha you are basing the law suit under American Law. Remember in order to be a valid suit the plaitiff here would first need to show that this was not protected speech under the 1st amendment.


OOO by the way funny stuff man.

[JE3146]

Originally Posted by Ahbroody

First of all its very likely the sign is photoshop.
Second I would love to know wha you are basing the law suit under American Law. Remember in order to be a valid suit the plaitiff here would first need to show that this was not protected speech under the 1st amendment.


OOO by the way funny stuff man.

[Emjaysmash]

Originally Posted by Ahbroody

First of all its very likely the sign is photoshop.
Second I would love to know wha you are basing the law suit under American Law. Remember in order to be a valid suit the plaitiff here would first need to show that this was not protected speech under the 1st amendment.

Whether I disagree with the sign or not, what Ahbroody says is true.
I only decided to chime in becuase I have a debate in Ethics Class regarding hate speech protection coming up this friday.

[ade06]

Originally Posted by Ahbroody

First of all its very likely the sign is photoshop.
Second I would love to know wha you are basing the law suit under American Law. Remember in order to be a valid suit the plaitiff here would first need to show that this was not protected speech under the 1st amendment.


OOO by the way funny stuff man.

They could bring a claim of nuisance or maybe a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress (probably a stretch). The 1st Amendment defense also, wouldn't stop someone from bringing the suit and making the neighbor defend the lawsuit... which would likely be expensive.

[BORIStheBLADE]

Thats pretty funny.

[RightAJ]

Haha that is great!

Originally Posted by ade06

They could bring a claim of nuisance or maybe a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress (probably a stretch). The 1st Amendment defense also, wouldn't stop someone from bringing the suit and making the neighbor defend the lawsuit... which would likely be expensive.

Yes, however should the defendant win he would most likely file a counter suit to recoup his cost and would most likely win.

[Ahbroody]

Originally Posted by ade06

They could bring a claim of nuisance or maybe a claim of intentional infliction of emotional distress (probably a stretch). The 1st Amendment defense also, wouldn't stop someone from bringing the suit and making the neighbor defend the lawsuit... which would likely be expensive.

You need to go read the law on nuisance as well as IIED. This is so far from IIED that I cant even understand how you wrote it. In order for there to even be a possiblility of IIED .... you know what I am not going to turn this into legal 101.

You mean a private nuisance. This is not a private nusiance as you have the defense of freedom of speech and it is clearly only asthetic and does not affect the neighbors property in any way. A nuisance is something that interfers with someone use and enjoyement of ones property. A sign on my property would not interfere with your private use and enjoyement of your property.

Also why they may file the suit their attorney could file a motion which would claim the suit was without merit. Any suit on any of the legal grounds put forth to me is without merit. I would seek attorney fees in the case. Saying this is a nusiance is funny

I am likely done with this thread as arguing about the law with others is taxing. I am only a cop with a law degree. Perhaps a practicing attorney would like to step in here.

[Blindjimme]

All of that being said, I think it's funny

[Don Fernando]

Originally Posted by Ahbroody

Second I would love to know wha you are basing the law suit under American Law.

I base the lawsuit on the sign, which advertises that the neighbor is an easy target, increasing the chance that burglars or robbers take action, and therefore being partially guilty. It will be hard to prove though.

[croatan]

Originally Posted by Ahbroody

Perhaps a practicing attorney would like to step in here.

No way in hell

By the way, moved this into the Jokes forum.

[markem]

Originally Posted by croatan

No way in hell

By the way, moved this into the Jokes forum.

Knew that some sanity would eventually rear its ugly head ... James!

[Ahbroody]

Originally Posted by croatan

No way in hell

One of these days I will learn to just walk away and not get involved. Come on you know you want to.