I’m not one of someone’s many names on here. MAybe you should read one of my many posts. I don’t swear in my posts and I don’t refer to states as “bumble #5$@!” (insert state here).

I do think this whole thing is being blown out of porportion.

At age 9 yrs, a kid knows not to go on someone else’s property without permission.

Please do not try to associate me with someone else’s trouble making ventures on here.

I think I’ve actually agreed with you on some issues in the past, although I’ve only been on here for about two or three weeks.

I’m not a lawyer, I’m a 25 yr old stay at home mom with two kids. So my views are not of that of someone who works in a law firm or wants to appear that they do.

It is important to get the “Rest of the Story” Thanks for finding the original story.

The man was careful when electrifying his signs:

“Turschak, who has a degree in electrical engineering, said he tested the shock on himself while wiring the signs, and did so again while a reporter watched Wednesday, touching both signs repeatedly without flinching. Under each was a yellow sign warning that they were electrified.”

And then after Turschak de-electrified the signs, that angry lady stole the signs!

“Under each was a yellow sign warning that they were electrified.”

Therefore your “The use of electrical shock without any warning is a potential form of battery under tort and assault under criminal law” is irrelevant.

Some stupid Democrat taught their kid to be a criminal and to trespass and steal someone’s property and the idiot kid didn’t even bother to read the damn sign saying the thing was electrified. Typical Democrat behavior, jumping in before making sure there’s water in the pool.

You know what, if that kid was just trying to figure out how it worked, why didn’t he trot up to an OBAMA sign and inspect it? I’m sure his parents have a ton of the things to play with.

And it was pretty funny that an “angry-looking woman” was caught stealing the McCain signs just after this boy tried to. Of course she’s angry — it’s someone who doesn’t agree with her actually exercising freedom of speech. They must be stopped — even if it means committing crimes!

If that’s how you Democrats think you deserve to be zapped. Keep your hands to yourselves next time!

Don’t be so sure next time, Cro!

Patty C 1, October 31, 2008 at 2:21 pm

” … I don’t understand how you shock someone with one of these units without rigging it in a way that is way outside of it’s intended use.

I think it’s cruel and criminal to do that and not mark the area with a warning.

That’s HOW I trained my dogs to use the fence. For several days, I had to show them the perimeter of our property via red flags on metal stakes I had planted after burying the wire. I walked around with them on leashes showing them where they could go without potentially getting shocked… “

We shall not be surprised when you no longer show up to post under your handle seamus a/k/a/ Gaelic for ‘James’ ie code for ‘assume’ meaning
makin’ an ‘ASS out of yoU and ME’…

—-

Plenty…

Apparently, you’re new here.

First of all, they don’t make reference to NC as a ‘bumble-fuck’ state nor make obscure references to established criminal laws and statutes
- especially when it is within their supposed field of expertise…

Go ahead and prove me wrong.

You will find that this blog has been critical equally of people destroying signs of both campaigns. However, you are correct that I am putting the interests of trespassers above the interests of a landowners in electrifying fences or objects. Some trespassers will be child and small animals. In most neighborhoods like mine people feel comfortable walking across each others lawns. We do not have invisible electric fences and hazards that can harm children or others. It is part of living in a community of responsible citizens. I am astonished that you would find the use of such an electrified object to be worthy of anything beyond condemnation in an urban setting like this one. To often in this uncivil political climate, people resort to attacking the motive of such objections rather than address the obvious abuse. I could not care less what is on the sign. This strikes me as a vile and disturbing act — particularly for a man with kids at his own home and likely friends who would visit. If we are going to return to old values (and even small town values), I would hope that it would include an understanding that such traps are neither moral nor neighborly.

Finally, the father insists that the kids was curious and not destructive in touching the sign. I do not know what the truth is. However, I am certain that there are a variety of people who would touch the sign with purely innocent intentions from brushing against it, leaning against it, or reaching around it. Certainly, I can see children and animals coming into innocent contact with it. This is why a warning for their parents or guardians is warranted.

JT

It doesn’t affect anyone but the dog. They were trained where the ‘fence’ lines are, when the transmitter was on and had their collars on. Most of the time they don’t even bother to test it anymore.

I even have wire running along and across streams and under pavement.

I don’t understand how you shock someone with one of these units without rigging it in a way that is way outside of it’s intended use.

I think it’s cruel and criminal to do that and not mark the area with a warning.

That’s HOW I trained my dogs to use the fence. For several days, I had to show them the perimeter of our property via red flags on metal stakes I had planted after burying the wire. I walked around with them on leashes showing them where they could go without potentially getting shocked.

Unfortunately, they will break through IF there is really something good to get at, like a bear, OR if the transmitter goes off for some reason and nobody notices for a long time – like a break in the wire which happens often enough, surprisingly.

Fortunately, I have crimps and splices in almost my coat pockets…:)

Too funny! I love my pups!

But because the owner sometimes has cows in that field, it is also surrounded by an electrified fence. There aren’t any signs declaring this, but there doesn’t need to be. It’s someone else’s property, so I know better than to try and go in that field.

The argument that you have to take the safety of trespassers into account on your own property is a rejection of the rights of property inherent to a free society.

Your argument that there was no warning is without merit. In the first place, the kid knew or should have known that what he was doing was wrong, the warning of his conscience should have been enough. But in addition to that, the owner of the property had placed bright yellow signs warning of the electrical shock–a detail of the story that you ignored.

I wonder if you would feel so indignant if it had been an Obama sign. I doubt it.

Are you stoned!!!?? What the Hell would you know about how lawyers talk?? And who in the right mind is spell checking there posts on this site?????

Sally is obviously a right-wing crank who thinks electrocuting kids is a positive way to enforce lessons about private property.

I, on the other hand, am a rigtheous proud American who is appauled by the creeping fascism of the last several years. But…who also thought it was funny to see that kid get shocked. I am a lawyer. My secrattary checks my spelling. And there are all sorts of lawyers who talk all sorts of ways. So pull the bug out of your ass and lighten up. Happy Halloweeeeenn

Gig’s up!

You may be able to fool your old pal, Jill and a few others here
- not me. Not from day one.

Lawyers don’t talk like that AND they DO know how to spell…

And ‘Sally’ is just a female version of your fake multiple selves
- without the grimaces.

Next time READ the article so you can follow the conversation.
It’s a dead giveaway, otherwise.

http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=209213

Maybe his dad can have someone come over to show him howthe sign is all put together and how it works. Because this is what every 9 yr old cares about these days

Why, my niece’s 5th grade class actually had someone come in and show them a nice little sign. Then afterwards, they all went outside and in sheer amazement, watched the lady put it in the ground!
You could hear “Wow, so that’s how it works” and “What will they ever come up with next?”

The kids were amazed.

With Palin and her proxies fanning the anger of crazies at every rally, it’s not surprizing that they’re beginning to drool over the idea of physically harming Obama supporters. Let’s face it. McCain’s sold what ever soul he had left and is campaigning on a platform of “They’re coming for our daughters!!!”

Having said that, I’ve watched the video of the kid getting shocked and its pretty funny. It didn’t look like it hurt the kid.

It’s all petty!!!

As long as the man had placed a warning sign stating that “an electrical shock will occur while touching this sign” or some such, then he should have the right to do so, regardless of how boneheaded others see his actions.

However, in my experience as an LEO, his warning and actions would most likely fall into the legal category of an “attractive nuisance”, further complicating the issue.

The safest action for property owners’ political sign posting is to post another sign stating “NO TRESPASSING UNDER PENALITY OF LAW” and then let a LEOs citation or the small claims courts system handle the tort if a simple trespass and/or theft occurs.

I’m more concerend with someone breaking into my home or car than I am about someone stealing my political signs

**************

No, no some of these McCain supporters aren’t crazy-they’re just patriots defending sacred signs from desecration! What’s next a spring gun?