Teenagers pulling pranks

Easy? Cheap? Do you have a time lapse or motion-activated camera laying around, and a long-play VCR or hard drive recorder handy? I don't. It would cost me several hundred bucks to buy even a low-end model like Sams sells, much less a commercial-grade one. Not to mention, what weather-protected locations do you have to place them in that will provide any useful coverage? There is a reason few ma'n'pa places have cameras anywhere but over register- a system that will do any good is expensive, even using IP cameras and computers as recorders.

And just how do you get them to clean it up, assuming you even recognize the kids to know what house they live in (assuming they are from immediate neighborhood, seldom true in my experience), and further assuming the parents don't slam the door in your face? The tissue will rot off the trees before that happens, I fear. When you get papered, speed is essential, before the paper bonds to the trees. When it happened to me, I said aw shit, put on some clothes, got some long poles out of the garage and duct-taped them together, and had it pretty well cleaned up in less than an hour. Figuring out how to coax the short ends off the tall branches was fun, once I decided to treat it as a challenge.

aem sends...

Reply to
aemeijers
Loading thread data ...

Common usage. Not the actual meaning of the word.

A very SPECIFIC definition.

By executing (carrying out) the death sentence.

Realize that dictionaries follow common use, not necessarily correct use. "execute" means "do".

THAT is nonsense. You've just defined one thing 'lawful" in terms of an equally vague and inconsistently defined thing.

If IS relevant to something having an actual meaning or not.

Reply to
Mark Lloyd

Note that "liberal" and "conservative" are BOTH desirable qualities in limited amounts. Unconditionally favoring one over the other makes no sense. The use of such labels are necessarily incorrect (there are no absolutes) and effectively limit people's thoughts and actions.

Proving it's lack of correspondence with reality.

And none of those are necessarily the same as actual people.

The law is in no way, in control of reality.

Note that can be used as an excuse for anything. In effect, you are saying it means nothing at all.

Reply to
George W
[snip]

That's as useful as saying a "snaxgluff" is the same thing as an "emwoozle". This could be 100% true, but is still meaningless Defining an undefined word by reference to another undefined word doesn't define anything.

It's amazing that some people spend so much time on artificial constructs such as "unlawful" and "illegal", yet appear to have no concept of the world they inhabit where things can be "wrong" or "harmful" (something which is entirely independent of laws).

If I hit you on the head with a brick, it'd hurt. This has nothing to do with any laws. I won't hit you on the head with a brick because it does harm. This has nothing to do with any laws.

Reply to
Mark Lloyd

Quotation marks are "supposed" to indicate that the thing between them has a meaning other than the apparent one. Sometimes it can be difficult or impossible to determine what that meaning is.

Reply to
Mark Lloyd

I have a little device that connects to a video camera. When it detects motion it saves an image to a SD card. A useful thing I got at Wal-Mart.

Most of the saved images are pictures of passing cars, but some are useful.

Reply to
Mark Lloyd

In the message we're talking about, I don't see any meaning other than the obvious one. Now, if he had said "You should jack the kid up on the wall and have a little 'talk" with him", I would've interpreted that to mean that talk might not have been the chosen method of getting one's message across.

Reply to
JoeSpareBedroom

LOL -- what do you mean, "not the actual meaning of the word"?? That's straight out of a dictionary.

But I guess you know more about the "actual meaning" than the people that put the dictionary together. Riiiiiiiiight.

By executing the prisoner.

It *also* means "to subject to capital punishment" (cited above).

More nonsense. Law may be many things, but "vague" and "inconsistently defined" are not among them.

Like that sentence? ROTFLMAO!

Reply to
Doug Miller

Actually, most adults are capable of understanding the difference between real words and made-up nonsense, and that the former have real meaning while the latter do not.

"Artificial constructs" or not, those words do have meaning. And that is not altered by your perceptions of whether they correspond to your perceptions of right and wrong.

Reply to
Doug Miller

Certainly. As is up-rooting mail boxes, doing wheelies on someone's lawn, putting a burning sack of dog poo on the front porch, soaping screens, or discovering the hot date you scored at the tavern is of the wrong sex.

Reply to
HeyBub

So, do you think the law in TX allows you to kill a kid for doing things like that when it's dark?

Reply to
JoeSpareBedroom

"Lawful" has a specific meaning: "Specifically required or permitted by law." "Unlawful" implies the law is silent on the subject.

Something can be "unlawful" but not "illegal."

Reply to
HeyBub

-- Who knows the difference between 'unlawful' and 'illegal'?

- It's amazing that some people spend so much time on artificial constructs such as "unlawful" and "illegal"...

Did you see my answer to my own question?

unlawful: not lawful illegal: a sick bird

Please check all groans at the door.

Reply to
DerbyDad03

And you appear to have missed the point of that, which you saw and snipped.

Very little actual meaning. Essentially, they're descriptions of things going on in certain people's minds. There's nothing there to keep those people from being mentally disturbed and having thoughts with no correspondence to reality.

At one time whisky was illegal. Did that make whisky any different? If there's something wrought about whisky, it's wrong regardless of what the law says. Notice how whisky was not changed, just the law.

(considering something else that got snipped), if you had to be hit on the head with something, would you prefer it to be a brick or a law?

What if they passed a law saying that bricks can't hurt when thrown? Does the law actually change the brick?

"My perceptions" have nothing to do with it.

Reply to
Mark Lloyd

OK, and I have a few more (unrelated to the above) definitions like that here:

asset - a small donkey ascot - a small donkey's bed catalog - list of everything you've done with cats caution - avoid crows cloe - singular of "clothes" cold - past tense of "coal" debut - remove the rear end delighted - in the dark detailed - an unnaturally tailless cat deviled - has had the vile removed dilate - live a long time economics - the verbal study of mice exit - what a hen does after laying fibula - a small lie fulfilled - twice as much as halfilled impeccable - birdproof layer - hen newbie - what you get when a bee's egg hatches number - local anesthetic politics - a large number of small parasitic animals retail - help a "detailed" cat

Reply to
Mark Lloyd

And that's where you got YOUR usage? Some people have what it takes to be able to live with circular reasoning.

It's a distortion of the word.

Never heard of laws changing?

Eventually, trying to convince [deleted] of simple and obvious things ceases to be fun.

I wouldn't use that if it wasn't true. I do use LOL sometimes (when it's really happening). Actually, meaning is damaged when these things are said too much.

Where's all those loose asses? :-)

Reply to
Mark Lloyd

I find it useful to distinguish between 3 cases:

  1. required by law
  2. "the law is silent on this"
  3. prohibited by law

What you said above seems to be using "unlawful" for case 2, while I often hear it used for case 3, as in someone being arrested for "unlawful use of a shotgun" (the law specifically prohibited that particular use).

I guess "illegal" is how you're distinguishing case 3 from case 2 (above). I wish language was more clear and consistent on that matter.

An additional definition of "legal" is "involving lawyers". That applies to things like "legal pads" or "legal briefs" (no underwear jokes please).

Reply to
Mark Lloyd

I don't either.

Considering that, I get really tired of "education" becoming an excuse for violence. That was true in 1st grade when a kid was punished for talking in class. I already knew enough to find it obvious that it the (literal) pain in the ass WASN'T a consequence of talking in class, but of the teacher's violent tenancies.

Reply to
Mark Lloyd

How can you say that? According to you, the term "illegal" has no meaning. It's just an "artificial construct."

Nobody ever contended that it did.

And your point is -- ?

The law changed. So what? Get over it. Laws change. That does *not* alter the fact that they exist, or that certain behaviors comply with them and other behaviors don't.

Reply to
Doug Miller

Most people believe that words have meaning. You're apparently not one of them.

In your opinion. The makers of the dictionary disagree.

That laws change from time to time does not make them "vague" or "inconsistently defined."

Reply to
Doug Miller

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.