Discussion:
Privately owned restaurants on privately owned real estate are private property
(too old to reply)
Buzz Forward
2015-11-27 21:23:45 UTC
Permalink
This is settled; it is not in dispute.

The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
Dechucka
2015-11-27 21:32:28 UTC
Permalink
"Buzz Forward"
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it public
property. The status of property as public or private depends *only* on
the ownership of it.
WOW so what. Once it is open to the public a whole heap of laws and
regulations come into play. Even for private property without public access
that applies, but differently of course
¡Jones
2015-11-27 23:19:57 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 27 Nov 2015 13:23:45 -0800, in talk.politics.guns Buzz Forward
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
Well, not entirely. The *property* is private, of course. When one
opens a retail business, it is now a public *place* and the business
owner has to conform to different local laws. For example, the owner
of a business usually has to maintain bathrooms; in your home, you do
as you please on that. The laws on whether or not these are public
bathrooms tend to vary; however, while the owner may say they're
reserved for customers only, in general they can't file trespass if
someone walks in and uses it.

In my younger days, I once owned a taxicab; the car was mine. One
evening, I was carrying a passenger who had committed a crime
(burglary) and we were pulled over and searched; the police found
evidence in the back seat. Later, the defense would argue that they
needed a search warrant to have searched the cab. It was found that
they could search the cab in the same manner as they could have
searched a city bus or commuter train... it was a public space.

After that, I always put my weed under the back seat when I wasn't
smoking it. If you want the property to be strictly private, you
cannot operate a retail business on the property.

Jones
Alex
2015-11-28 02:47:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
+1
Usenet Support Personnel
2015-11-28 08:38:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
This has to be the longest running troll in the history of Usenet.
This 'discussion' started in 2008 and is still effectively fueled by
its original proponent.
Just Wondering
2015-11-28 10:05:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Usenet Support Personnel
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
This has to be the longest running troll in the history of Usenet.
This 'discussion' started in 2008 and is still effectively fueled by
its original proponent.

Zimmerman
2015-12-06 22:08:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Just Wondering
Post by Usenet Support Personnel
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
This has to be the longest running troll in the history of Usenet.
This 'discussion' started in 2008 and is still effectively fueled by
its original proponent.
http://youtu.be/0U2zJOryHKQ
I have legal authority to shoot trespassers on my private property, so if a
faggot called Buzz Forward walked into my restaurant, it will be my decision
to shoot him or not. If they're an outlaw biker or an Oath Keeper they could
die slowly and painfully. I decide their rights on my property.
Jerry Sauk
2015-11-29 21:00:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Usenet Support Personnel
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
This has to be the longest running troll in the history of Usenet.
This 'discussion' started in 2008 and is still effectively fueled by
its original proponent.
Wrong. The original proponent was, Albert worschley. He hasn't posted in
YEARS.

It is now fueled mostly by, Klous. Everybody else gave up trying to prove
thier point's. (becouse they couldn't). Klous is the only one right stupid
enough to continue.
Klaus Schadenfreude
2015-11-30 12:02:44 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 15:00:10 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Usenet Support Personnel
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
This has to be the longest running troll in the history of Usenet.
This 'discussion' started in 2008 and is still effectively fueled by
its original proponent.
Wrong. The original proponent was, Albert worschley. He hasn't posted in
YEARS.
It is now fueled mostly by, Klous. Everybody else gave up trying to prove
thier point's. (becouse they couldn't). Klous is the only one right stupid
enough to continue.
You're lying, like you usually do, Jerry. There are several people
engaged in trying to educate you on this matter.

You are the only person in the entire world stupid enough to think
restaurants are public property. The only one.

In the entire world.

That stupid.
Jerry Sauk
2015-12-07 20:52:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 15:00:10 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Usenet Support Personnel
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
This has to be the longest running troll in the history of Usenet.
This 'discussion' started in 2008 and is still effectively fueled by
its original proponent.
Wrong. The original proponent was, Albert worschley. He hasn't posted in
YEARS.
It is now fueled mostly by, Klous. Everybody else gave up trying to prove
thier point's. (becouse they couldn't). Klous is the only one right stupid
enough to continue.
You're lying, like you usually do, Jerry. There are several people
engaged in trying to educate you on this matter.
You are the only person in the entire world stupid enough to think
restaurants are public property. The only one.
In the entire world.
The why haven't all store's one out of business due to the fact that no
customer's are able to trespass the property?
Dave Taylor
2015-12-07 21:30:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 15:00:10 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Usenet Support Personnel
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
This has to be the longest running troll in the history of Usenet.
This 'discussion' started in 2008 and is still effectively fueled by
its original proponent.
Wrong. The original proponent was, Albert worschley. He hasn't posted in
YEARS.
It is now fueled mostly by, Klous. Everybody else gave up trying to prove
thier point's. (becouse they couldn't). Klous is the only one right stupid
enough to continue.
You're lying, like you usually do, Jerry. There are several people
engaged in trying to educate you on this matter.
You are the only person in the entire world stupid enough to think
restaurants are public property. The only one.
In the entire world.
The why haven't all store's one out of business due to the fact that no
customer's are able to trespass the property?
They aren't trespassing, of course. The business firms invite them to
come onto the property - the *private* property, of course - to transact
business.

Everyone knows this.
Klaus Schadenfreude
2015-12-08 02:10:14 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 7 Dec 2015 14:52:40 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 15:00:10 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Usenet Support Personnel
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
This has to be the longest running troll in the history of Usenet.
This 'discussion' started in 2008 and is still effectively fueled by
its original proponent.
Wrong. The original proponent was, Albert worschley. He hasn't posted in
YEARS.
It is now fueled mostly by, Klous. Everybody else gave up trying to prove
thier point's. (becouse they couldn't). Klous is the only one right stupid
enough to continue.
You're lying, like you usually do, Jerry. There are several people
engaged in trying to educate you on this matter.
You are the only person in the entire world stupid enough to think
restaurants are public property. The only one.
In the entire world.
The why haven't all store's one out of business due to the fact that no
customer's are able to trespass the property?
because you're too fucking stupid to understand what the word
"trespass" means?

That's my guess.
Jerry Sauk
2015-12-19 03:29:08 UTC
Permalink
"Klaus Schadenfreude" <***@null.net> wrote in message news:***@4ax.com...
\
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
The why haven't all store's one out of business due to the fact that no
customer's are able to trespass the property?
because you're too fucking stupid to understand what the word
"trespass" means?
That's my guess.
I already posted the definition of Tresspass, Moron.
Klaus Schadenfreude
2015-12-20 01:23:33 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 21:29:08 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
\
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
The why haven't all store's one out of business due to the fact that no
customer's are able to trespass the property?
because you're too fucking stupid to understand what the word
"trespass" means?
That's my guess.
I already posted the definition of Tresspass, Moron.
No, you did not.

You posted a fabricated lie.
Mel Schacher
2015-11-30 18:08:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Usenet Support Personnel
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
This has to be the longest running troll in the history of Usenet.
This 'discussion' started in 2008 and is still effectively fueled by
its original proponent.
Wrong. The original proponent was, Albert worschley. He hasn't posted in
YEARS.

It is now fueled mostly by, Klous. Everybody else gave up trying to prove
thier point's. (becouse they couldn't). Klous is the only one right stupid
enough to continue.

####
You forgot about yourself, who is the ONLY RETARD that still thinks that the
Government owns Taco Bell.
Groupkilla
2015-11-30 18:10:59 UTC
Permalink
the Government owns Taco Bell.
Which one?
Sqwertz
2015-11-30 19:35:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Usenet Support Personnel
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
This has to be the longest running troll in the history of Usenet.
This 'discussion' started in 2008 and is still effectively fueled by
its original proponent.
Wrong. The original proponent was, Albert worschley. He hasn't posted in
YEARS.
Jerry the Vocabularist strikes again.

The only proponent of this argument is you, Jerry. Nobody has ever
supported your hypothesis that restaurants are public property - not
Albert nor anyone else.

BTW, Albert is still posting here. But you said you killfiled him so
how would you know anyway?

-sw
Groupkilla
2015-11-30 23:52:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sqwertz
But you said you killfiled him so
how would you know anyway?
-sw
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
***@cluemail.compost
<i6x4dy0h0232$***@sqwertz.com>
3/18/2011 3:49 PM
Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1162
readnews.com - News for Geeks and ISPs
fa35d278.newsreader.readnews.com


Sorry I don't fit either of your Ideal Psycho Pal Profiles.

-sw
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd prefer you use a sniper rifle on me from a few hundred yards away.
There you go - a reason for you to buy yet another gun and ammo.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jerry Sauk
2015-12-07 20:55:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sqwertz
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Usenet Support Personnel
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
This has to be the longest running troll in the history of Usenet.
This 'discussion' started in 2008 and is still effectively fueled by
its original proponent.
Wrong. The original proponent was, Albert worschley. He hasn't posted in
YEARS.
Jerry the Vocabularist strikes again.
The only proponent of this argument is you, Jerry.
WRONG!

WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!

As is PROVEN by the fact that MILLION'S of people are entering the store's
every day!!!!!

How many more time'sa around the merry-go-round are you going to take us,
Steve?
Dave Taylor
2015-12-07 21:32:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Sqwertz
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Usenet Support Personnel
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
This has to be the longest running troll in the history of Usenet.
This 'discussion' started in 2008 and is still effectively fueled by
its original proponent.
Wrong. The original proponent was, Albert worschley. He hasn't posted in
YEARS.
Jerry the Vocabularist strikes again.
The only proponent of this argument is you, Jerry.
WRONG!
WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!
Nope. It's right. You are the only idiot in the world claiming that
because the public goes onto the privately owned land to transact
business with the privately owned firm, that it somehow is "public
property." It isn't public property. This has been proved to you
beyond all rational dispute. You are wrong, and the rest of the world
is right.
Jerry Sauk
2015-12-13 01:41:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Sqwertz
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Usenet Support Personnel
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
This has to be the longest running troll in the history of Usenet.
This 'discussion' started in 2008 and is still effectively fueled by
its original proponent.
Wrong. The original proponent was, Albert worschley. He hasn't posted in
YEARS.
Jerry the Vocabularist strikes again.
The only proponent of this argument is you, Jerry.
WRONG!
WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!
Nope. It's right. You are the only idiot in the world claiming that
because the public goes onto the privately owned land to transact business
with the privately owned firm, that it somehow is "public property." It
isn't public property. This has been proved to you beyond all rational
dispute. You are wrong, and the rest of the world is right.
If that was true, the NOBODY would be entering the restourant's. They would
all be on teh side-walks, SCRWEAMING thier order's into the window

But of course that doesn't happen... they actually ENTER the property. Why?
BECOUSE THEY KNOW IT'S PUBLIC.
Dechucka
2015-12-13 01:49:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
But of course that doesn't happen... they actually ENTER the property.
Why?
BECOUSE THEY KNOW IT'S PUBLIC.
Oh no it's not
Sqwertz
2015-12-13 05:22:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
If that was true, the NOBODY would be entering the restourant's. They would
all be on teh side-walks, SCRWEAMING thier order's into the window
Kinda reminds me of all these Usenet rubes standing on the sidewalk.

-sw
Sqwertz
2015-12-14 17:08:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sqwertz
Kinda reminds me of all these Usenet rubes standing on the sidewalk.
-sw
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
***@cluemail.compost
<i6x4dy0h0232$***@sqwertz.com>
3/18/2011 3:49 PM
Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1162
readnews.com - News for Geeks and ISPs
fa35d278.newsreader.readnews.com


Sorry I don't fit either of your Ideal Psycho Pal Profiles.

-sw
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd prefer you use a sniper rifle on me from a few hundred yards away.
There you go - a reason for you to buy yet another gun and ammo.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sqwertz
2015-12-14 17:10:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sqwertz
Kinda reminds me of all these Usenet rubes standing on the sidewalk.
-sw
1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
***@cluemail.compost
<i6x4dy0h0232$***@sqwertz.com>
3/18/2011 3:49 PM
Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1162
readnews.com - News for Geeks and ISPs
fa35d278.newsreader.readnews.com


Sorry I don't fit either of your Ideal Psycho Pal Profiles.

-sw
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd prefer you use a sniper rifle on me from a few hundred yards away.
There you go - a reason for you to buy yet another gun and ammo.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mel Schacher
2015-12-13 12:26:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Sqwertz
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Usenet Support Personnel
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
This has to be the longest running troll in the history of Usenet.
This 'discussion' started in 2008 and is still effectively fueled by
its original proponent.
Wrong. The original proponent was, Albert worschley. He hasn't posted in
YEARS.
Jerry the Vocabularist strikes again.
The only proponent of this argument is you, Jerry.
WRONG!
WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!
Nope. It's right. You are the only idiot in the world claiming that
because the public goes onto the privately owned land to transact business
with the privately owned firm, that it somehow is "public property." It
isn't public property. This has been proved to you beyond all rational
dispute. You are wrong, and the rest of the world is right.
If that was true, the NOBODY would be entering the restourant's. They would
all be on teh side-walks, SCRWEAMING thier order's into the window

But of course that doesn't happen... they actually ENTER the property. Why?
BECOUSE THEY KNOW IT'S PUBLIC.


####
Who owns public property, jerry?

https://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=Av0YQQSXeDZDzdCeEOFjcPObvZx4?fr=yfp-t-901-s&toggle=1&fp=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8&p=will%20it%20go%20in%20circles
Sqwertz
2015-12-13 18:37:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mel Schacher
Who owns public property, jerry?
https://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=Av0YQQSXeDZDzdCeEOFjcPObvZx4?fr=yfp-t-901-s&toggle=1&fp=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8&p=will%20it%20go%20in%20circles
Yahoo has a search engine? Huh. Who knew. I suppose you're gonna
tell me there's something called Altavista, too?

-sw
Sqwertz
2015-12-13 19:00:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sqwertz
I suppose you're gonna
tell me there's something called Altavista, too?
-sw
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
***@cluemail.compost
<1qauy6zyozuo9$***@sqwertz.com>
Wed, 25 Nov 2015 21:18:00 -0600
MicroPlanet-Gravity/3.0.4
***@blocknews.net


She should call the cops. I've already publicly admitted it is me so
a conviction should be a piece of cake and then forging would stop.
So what's stopping her? I think she suffers from Bovism - she just
loves the attention and drama and screw the rest of the group.

-sw

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


And before that the subhuman virus stalked poor Omelet right of the net!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
***@cluemail.compost
<i6x4dy0h0232$***@sqwertz.com>
3/18/2011 3:49 PM
Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1162
readnews.com - News for Geeks and ISPs
fa35d278.newsreader.readnews.com


Sorry I don't fit either of your Ideal Psycho Pal Profiles.

-sw
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd prefer you use a sniper rifle on me from a few hundred yards away.
There you go - a reason for you to buy yet another gun and ammo.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post by Sqwertz
The facebook group is much more pleasant.
Only because you cower there in mortal fear of being booted by the admins.

You're _done_ here virus, I mean really done.
Mel Schacher
2015-12-13 22:58:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mel Schacher
Who owns public property, jerry?
https://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=Av0YQQSXeDZDzdCeEOFjcPObvZx4?fr=yfp-t-901-s&toggle=1&fp=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8&p=will%20it%20go%20in%20circles
Yahoo has a search engine? Huh. Who knew. I suppose you're gonna
tell me there's something called Altavista, too?

####

Possibly.
I did a search on that, and it DID exist at one time.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AltaVista

You, however, still can't find your real Father, even with the best DNA
research.
From what I heard, you are the son of Jerry Sauk.
Robert
2015-12-14 00:07:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sqwertz
Post by Mel Schacher
Who owns public property, jerry?
https://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=Av0YQQSXeDZDzdCeEOFjcPObvZx4?fr=yfp-t-901-s&toggle=1&fp=1&cop=mss&ei=UTF-8&p=will%>20it%20go%20in%20circles
Yahoo has a search engine? Huh. Who knew. I suppose you're gonna
tell me there's something called Altavista, too?
BING o


Robert
Sqwertz
2015-12-14 17:08:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sqwertz
I suppose you're gonna
tell me there's something called Altavista, too?
-sw
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
***@cluemail.compost
<i6x4dy0h0232$***@sqwertz.com>
3/18/2011 3:49 PM
Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1162
readnews.com - News for Geeks and ISPs
fa35d278.newsreader.readnews.com


Sorry I don't fit either of your Ideal Psycho Pal Profiles.

-sw
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd prefer you use a sniper rifle on me from a few hundred yards away.
There you go - a reason for you to buy yet another gun and ammo.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Klaus Schadenfreude
2015-12-13 12:44:44 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 12 Dec 2015 19:41:05 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Sqwertz
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Usenet Support Personnel
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
This has to be the longest running troll in the history of Usenet.
This 'discussion' started in 2008 and is still effectively fueled by
its original proponent.
Wrong. The original proponent was, Albert worschley. He hasn't posted in
YEARS.
Jerry the Vocabularist strikes again.
The only proponent of this argument is you, Jerry.
WRONG!
WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!
Nope. It's right. You are the only idiot in the world claiming that
because the public goes onto the privately owned land to transact business
with the privately owned firm, that it somehow is "public property." It
isn't public property. This has been proved to you beyond all rational
dispute. You are wrong, and the rest of the world is right.
If that was true, the NOBODY would be entering the restourant's. They would
all be on teh side-walks, SCRWEAMING thier order's into the window
That's why restaurants allow the public onto their private property.
Post by Jerry Sauk
But of course that doesn't happen... they actually ENTER the property. Why?
BECOUSE THEY KNOW IT'S PUBLIC.
It's private property, and they know they are allowed inside
Mel Schacher
2015-12-13 22:49:25 UTC
Permalink
"Klaus Schadenfreude" wrote in message news:***@4ax.com...

On Sat, 12 Dec 2015 19:41:05 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Sqwertz
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Usenet Support Personnel
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
This has to be the longest running troll in the history of Usenet.
This 'discussion' started in 2008 and is still effectively fueled by
its original proponent.
Wrong. The original proponent was, Albert worschley. He hasn't
posted
in
YEARS.
Jerry the Vocabularist strikes again.
The only proponent of this argument is you, Jerry.
WRONG!
WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!
Nope. It's right. You are the only idiot in the world claiming that
because the public goes onto the privately owned land to transact business
with the privately owned firm, that it somehow is "public property." It
isn't public property. This has been proved to you beyond all rational
dispute. You are wrong, and the rest of the world is right.
If that was true, the NOBODY would be entering the restourant's. They would
all be on teh side-walks, SCRWEAMING thier order's into the window
That's why restaurants allow the public onto their private property.
Post by Jerry Sauk
But of course that doesn't happen... they actually ENTER the property.
Why?
BECOUSE THEY KNOW IT'S PUBLIC.
It's private property, and they know they are allowed inside

####

Just imagine Lil Jerry trying to use the Bathroom at "Pat's Streak House"!
LET ALONE get inside!
http://www.patskingofsteaks.com/
Jerry Sauk
2015-12-22 23:04:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
If that was true, the NOBODY would be entering the restourant's. They would
all be on teh side-walks, SCRWEAMING thier order's into the window
That's why restaurants allow the public onto their private property.
Well then as soon as they decide to allow the public on the property, then
we're not talking about PRIVATE property any longer!!!
Klaus Schadenfreude
2015-12-23 01:23:50 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 22 Dec 2015 17:04:24 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
If that was true, the NOBODY would be entering the restourant's. They would
all be on teh side-walks, SCRWEAMING thier order's into the window
That's why restaurants allow the public onto their private property.
Well then as soon as they decide to allow the public on the property, then
we're not talking about PRIVATE property any longer!!!
Yes, we are. The public comes onto private property all the time, all
across this Great Land of Ours.

Restaurants, for example.

BEHOLD!

=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Private property is a legal designation of the ownership of property
by non-governmental legal entities. Private property is
distinguishable from public property, which is owned by a state
entity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_property
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================

Have you come up with a SINGLE verifiable citation to prove the above
to be incorrect?

Of COURSE you haven't.

Perhaps if you visited your PUBLIC library?
Charlie Simmer
2015-12-15 06:54:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Sqwertz
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Usenet Support Personnel
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
This has to be the longest running troll in the history of Usenet.
This 'discussion' started in 2008 and is still effectively fueled by
its original proponent.
Wrong. The original proponent was, Albert worschley. He hasn't posted in
YEARS.
Jerry the Vocabularist strikes again.
The only proponent of this argument is you, Jerry.
WRONG!
WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!
Nope. It's right. You are the only idiot in the world claiming that
because the public goes onto the privately owned land to transact business
with the privately owned firm, that it somehow is "public property." It
isn't public property. This has been proved to you beyond all rational
dispute. You are wrong, and the rest of the world is right.
If that was true,
It *IS* true, Jerry Suck - beyond rational dispute.
Post by Jerry Sauk
the NOBODY
*YOU* are "the nobody", Jerry Suck.
Post by Jerry Sauk
would be entering the restourant's.
*restaurants*, Jerry Suck. Learn to spell, Jerry Suck, you stupid
shit-4-braincell HIV+ fuckwit.

Members of the public - who are private persons, of course - do enter
the restaurants, Jerry Suck, because the owners - that is, the owners of
the private property - let them in in order to do business with them.

You're stupid, Jerry Suck.
Sqwertz
2015-12-07 23:54:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Sqwertz
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Usenet Support Personnel
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
This has to be the longest running troll in the history of Usenet.
This 'discussion' started in 2008 and is still effectively fueled by
its original proponent.
Wrong. The original proponent was, Albert worschley. He hasn't posted in
YEARS.
Jerry the Vocabularist strikes again.
The only proponent of this argument is you, Jerry.
WRONG!
WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!
As is PROVEN by the fact that MILLION'S of people are entering the store's
every day!!!!!
How many more time'sa around the merry-go-round are you going to take us,
Steve?
Millions of people enter your festering asshole every day, too. Does
that your sphincter public property?

-sw
Sqwertz
2015-12-08 17:56:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sqwertz
Does
that your sphincter public property?
-sw
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
***@cluemail.compost
<i6x4dy0h0232$***@sqwertz.com>
3/18/2011 3:49 PM
Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1162
readnews.com - News for Geeks and ISPs
fa35d278.newsreader.readnews.com


Sorry I don't fit either of your Ideal Psycho Pal Profiles.

-sw
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd prefer you use a sniper rifle on me from a few hundred yards away.
There you go - a reason for you to buy yet another gun and ammo.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jerry Sauk
2015-12-13 01:43:07 UTC
Permalink
Are you TRYING to get kill-filed, Steve??!?!
Sqwertz
2015-12-13 05:34:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
Are you TRYING to get kill-filed, Steve??!?!
That's my pet bitch poodle, Casa Boner, that you're responding to.

I appreciate her here in the AFF-F group.

But if you wanna killfile me I'm totally for that. You know you
can't. Because TFM and I gang-banged your mother and made Jessie and
Jacob.

-sw
Jerry Sauk
2015-12-13 19:30:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sqwertz
Post by Jerry Sauk
Are you TRYING to get kill-filed, Steve??!?!
That's my pet bitch poodle, Casa Boner, that you're responding to.
I dunno Steve, the person who posted that had the same email that you have,
***@cluemail.compost!!
Klaus Schadenfreude
2015-12-13 21:14:15 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 13 Dec 2015 13:30:39 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Sqwertz
Post by Jerry Sauk
Are you TRYING to get kill-filed, Steve??!?!
That's my pet bitch poodle, Casa Boner, that you're responding to.
I dunno Steve, the person who posted that had the same email that you have,
Thanks for proving-- again-- you are a clueless idiot.
Sqwertz
2015-12-14 17:09:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sqwertz
That's my pet bitch poodle,
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
***@cluemail.compost
<i6x4dy0h0232$***@sqwertz.com>
3/18/2011 3:49 PM
Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1162
readnews.com - News for Geeks and ISPs
fa35d278.newsreader.readnews.com


Sorry I don't fit either of your Ideal Psycho Pal Profiles.

-sw
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd prefer you use a sniper rifle on me from a few hundred yards away.
There you go - a reason for you to buy yet another gun and ammo.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sqwertz
2015-12-14 17:09:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sqwertz
TFM and I gang-banged your mother and made Jessie and
Jacob.
-sw
BURN IN HELL!!!!!!!!!!!!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
***@cluemail.compost
<i6x4dy0h0232$***@sqwertz.com>
3/18/2011 3:49 PM
Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1162
readnews.com - News for Geeks and ISPs
fa35d278.newsreader.readnews.com


Sorry I don't fit either of your Ideal Psycho Pal Profiles.

-sw
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd prefer you use a sniper rifle on me from a few hundred yards away.
There you go - a reason for you to buy yet another gun and ammo.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mel Schacher
2015-12-13 12:22:59 UTC
Permalink
"Jerry Sauk" wrote in message news:W8GdnXIuk56vUPHLnZ2dnUU7-***@supernews.com...

Are you TRYING to get kill-filed, Steve??!?!

###
Who cares who YOU want to ignore, you retard?
Charlie Simmer
2015-12-15 06:55:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
Are you TRYING to get kill-filed, Steve??!?!
No one cares if you kill-file anyone, Jerry Suck.
Klaus Schadenfreude
2015-12-08 02:10:42 UTC
Permalink
On Mon, 7 Dec 2015 14:55:56 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Sqwertz
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Usenet Support Personnel
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
This has to be the longest running troll in the history of Usenet.
This 'discussion' started in 2008 and is still effectively fueled by
its original proponent.
Wrong. The original proponent was, Albert worschley. He hasn't posted in
YEARS.
Jerry the Vocabularist strikes again.
The only proponent of this argument is you, Jerry.
WRONG!
WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!
Then show us someone else.
Post by Jerry Sauk
As is PROVEN by the fact that MILLION'S of people are entering the store's
every day!!!!!
That's not proof.
Jerry Sauk
2015-12-19 03:29:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Mon, 7 Dec 2015 14:55:56 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Sqwertz
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Usenet Support Personnel
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
This has to be the longest running troll in the history of Usenet.
This 'discussion' started in 2008 and is still effectively fueled by
its original proponent.
Wrong. The original proponent was, Albert worschley. He hasn't posted in
YEARS.
Jerry the Vocabularist strikes again.
The only proponent of this argument is you, Jerry.
WRONG!
WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!
Then show us someone else.
Post by Jerry Sauk
As is PROVEN by the fact that MILLION'S of people are entering the store's
every day!!!!!
That's not proof.
Oh yes it is, klous. Anybody who is fucking BLIND can see the people
entering the stores!!!!!!!
Klaus Schadenfreude
2015-12-20 01:23:58 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 21:29:56 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Mon, 7 Dec 2015 14:55:56 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Sqwertz
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Usenet Support Personnel
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
This has to be the longest running troll in the history of Usenet.
This 'discussion' started in 2008 and is still effectively fueled by
its original proponent.
Wrong. The original proponent was, Albert worschley. He hasn't posted in
YEARS.
Jerry the Vocabularist strikes again.
The only proponent of this argument is you, Jerry.
WRONG!
WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!
Then show us someone else.
Post by Jerry Sauk
As is PROVEN by the fact that MILLION'S of people are entering the store's
every day!!!!!
That's not proof.
Oh yes it is, klous.
No. It's not.
Post by Jerry Sauk
Anybody who is fucking BLIND can see the people
entering the stores!!!!!!!
What's odd about that?
Mel Schacher
2015-12-20 14:38:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Mon, 7 Dec 2015 14:55:56 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Sqwertz
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Usenet Support Personnel
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
This has to be the longest running troll in the history of Usenet.
This 'discussion' started in 2008 and is still effectively fueled by
its original proponent.
Wrong. The original proponent was, Albert worschley. He hasn't posted in
YEARS.
Jerry the Vocabularist strikes again.
The only proponent of this argument is you, Jerry.
WRONG!
WRONG WRONG WRONG!!!
Then show us someone else.
Post by Jerry Sauk
As is PROVEN by the fact that MILLION'S of people are entering the store's
every day!!!!!
That's not proof.
Oh yes it is, klous. Anybody who is fucking BLIND can see the people
entering the stores!!!!!!!

####

Blind people can see people doing stuff?
Only according to Jerry! :)

Hence the joke...
Jerry walks into a bar.

Boink!
Jerry Sauk
2015-11-29 07:51:17 UTC
Permalink
"Buzz Forward"
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
WRONG. It has been in dispute for, YEARS.
Post by Buzz Forward
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it public
property.
OF Course that's right. Just becouse a property is "open to the public"
doesn't mean that, THE PUBLIC ACTUALLY ENTERS THE PROPERTY.
Post by Buzz Forward
The status of property as public or private depends *only* on the ownership
of it.
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!

I'd REALLY like to hear your explanation for that.............
Klaus Schadenfreude
2015-11-29 11:57:50 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 01:51:17 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Dechucka
"Buzz Forward"
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
WRONG. It has been in dispute for, YEARS.
The only one disputing it is you. EVERYONE ELSE ON THE PLANET knows
and agrees that restaurants are private property.

EVERYONE.

You had to make up a bullshit story and tell us about make believe
people that agreed with you.

Were they leprechauns, Jerry?
Post by Dechucka
Post by Buzz Forward
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it public
property.
OF Course that's right.
So you agree that restaurants are private property. Great!
Post by Dechucka
Just becouse a property is "open to the public"
doesn't mean that, THE PUBLIC ACTUALLY ENTERS THE PROPERTY.
Post by Buzz Forward
The status of property as public or private depends *only* on the ownership
of it.
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
Post by Dechucka
I'd REALLY like to hear your explanation for that.............
No, you really wouldn't.
Jerry Sauk
2015-12-06 20:12:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?

BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
Dave Taylor
2015-12-06 21:43:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
No. Because the private property owners *LET* the public onto the
property, in order to do transact business with them. But it is private
property - not in rational dispute.
Jerry Sauk
2015-12-07 03:53:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
No. Because the private property owners *LET* the public onto the
property, in order to do transact business with them. But it is private
property - not in rational dispute.
But if it was PRIVATE property, then how exaclty are trhe owner's letting
people into the store's???!!! That's COMPLETELY insane.
Cujo DeSockpuppet
2015-12-07 04:11:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
COMPLETELY insane.
Nah, you're just willfully st00pid.
--
Cujo - The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls in dfw.*,
alt.paranormal, alt.astrology and alt.astrology.metapsych. Supreme Holy
Overlord of alt.fucknozzles. Winner of the 8/2000, 2/2003 & 4/2007 HL&S
award. July 2005 Hammer of Thor. Winning Trainer - Barbara Woodhouse
Memorial Dog Whistle - 12/2005 & 4/2008. COOSN-266-06-01895.
"Is it true you are some gay stalker freak like Pete said?" - Edmo
employs the Kook Info Nutworks to get the facts wrong again.
Mel Schacher
2015-12-07 04:29:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
No. Because the private property owners *LET* the public onto the
property, in order to do transact business with them. But it is private
property - not in rational dispute.
But if it was PRIVATE property, then how exaclty are trhe owner's letting
people into the store's???!!! That's COMPLETELY insane.

#####
That's how a private enterprise, on private property, conducts business!
They advertise TO the public, and allow them to, well, conduct business on
their private property.
The Government does NOT own it, or pay taxes on private property.
In fact, the Government does not pay ANY taxes on any property.
Only private property owner pay property taxes.
When you were born, HOW many times did the doctors and your custodians drop
you on the head?
Cujo DeSockpuppet
2015-12-07 17:43:39 UTC
Permalink
<Snip>
Post by Mel Schacher
When you were born, HOW many times did the doctors and your custodians
drop you on the head?
More than enough.
--
Cujo - The Official Overseer of Kooks and Trolls in dfw.*,
alt.paranormal, alt.astrology and alt.astrology.metapsych. Supreme Holy
Overlord of alt.fucknozzles. Winner of the 8/2000, 2/2003 & 4/2007 HL&S
award. July 2005 Hammer of Thor. Winning Trainer - Barbara Woodhouse
Memorial Dog Whistle - 12/2005 & 4/2008. COOSN-266-06-01895.
"Right and wrong are subjective value judgments. Remove them from your
thinking." -Ed Wollmann, using the ethics of convenience.
This signature was made by SigChanger.
You can find SigChanger at: http://www.phranc.nl/
Klaus Schadenfreude
2015-12-07 12:39:49 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 6 Dec 2015 21:53:03 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
No. Because the private property owners *LET* the public onto the
property, in order to do transact business with them. But it is private
property - not in rational dispute.
But if it was PRIVATE property, then how exaclty are trhe owner's letting
people into the store's???!!! That's COMPLETELY insane.
Jerry says it's insane to let people into a store.

ROFLMAO

No WONDER you keep getting fired, Jerry!

LOL
Dave Taylor
2015-12-07 16:45:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
No. Because the private property owners *LET* the public onto the
property, in order to do transact business with them. But it is private
property - not in rational dispute.
But if it was PRIVATE property,
Not "if". It *IS* private property. The business is privately owned,
and it operates on privately owned real estate. It is private property.
Post by Jerry Sauk
then how exaclty are trhe owner's letting
people into the store's???!!!
They unlock the doors and invite people in. Simple, really. It's
private property.
Jerry Sauk
2015-12-13 01:26:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
No. Because the private property owners *LET* the public onto the
property, in order to do transact business with them. But it is private
property - not in rational dispute.
But if it was PRIVATE property,
Not "if". It *IS* private property. The business is privately owned, and
it operates on privately owned real estate. It is private property.
Oh? Are you really so insecure in your position that you can't handle it
being reffered to as a "if"?

IF.... IF........... it was private property, then WHY is the owner's
allowing the public on teh property.

JUST ANSWER THE DAMN QUESTION INSTEAD OF JUST SAY " NO IT'S PRIVATE
PROPERTY".
Dechucka
2015-12-13 01:49:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
No. Because the private property owners *LET* the public onto the
property, in order to do transact business with them. But it is private
property - not in rational dispute.
But if it was PRIVATE property,
Not "if". It *IS* private property. The business is privately owned,
and it operates on privately owned real estate. It is private property.
Oh? Are you really so insecure in your position that you can't handle it
being reffered to as a "if"?
IF.... IF........... it was private property, then WHY is the owner's
allowing the public on teh property.
to sell stuff to them?
Jerry Sauk
2015-12-19 03:31:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dechucka
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
No. Because the private property owners *LET* the public onto the
property, in order to do transact business with them. But it is private
property - not in rational dispute.
But if it was PRIVATE property,
Not "if". It *IS* private property. The business is privately owned,
and it operates on privately owned real estate. It is private property.
Oh? Are you really so insecure in your position that you can't handle it
being reffered to as a "if"?
IF.... IF........... it was private property, then WHY is the owner's
allowing the public on teh property.
to sell stuff to them?
Wrong. If the property was PRIVATE, then they wouldn't be allowing public
on teh property to sell them stuff.
Klaus Schadenfreude
2015-12-20 01:24:20 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 21:31:03 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dechucka
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
No. Because the private property owners *LET* the public onto the
property, in order to do transact business with them. But it is private
property - not in rational dispute.
But if it was PRIVATE property,
Not "if". It *IS* private property. The business is privately owned,
and it operates on privately owned real estate. It is private property.
Oh? Are you really so insecure in your position that you can't handle it
being reffered to as a "if"?
IF.... IF........... it was private property, then WHY is the owner's
allowing the public on teh property.
to sell stuff to them?
Wrong. If the property was PRIVATE, then they wouldn't be allowing public
on teh property to sell them stuff.
Of course they would.

=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Private property is a legal designation of the ownership of property
by non-governmental legal entities. Private property is
distinguishable from public property, which is owned by a state
entity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_property
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Mel Schacher
2015-12-20 14:32:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dechucka
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
No. Because the private property owners *LET* the public onto the
property, in order to do transact business with them. But it is private
property - not in rational dispute.
But if it was PRIVATE property,
Not "if". It *IS* private property. The business is privately owned,
and it operates on privately owned real estate. It is private property.
Oh? Are you really so insecure in your position that you can't handle it
being reffered to as a "if"?
IF.... IF........... it was private property, then WHY is the owner's
allowing the public on teh property.
to sell stuff to them?
Wrong. If the property was PRIVATE, then they wouldn't be allowing public
on teh property to sell them stuff.


#####
If your mother wanted privacy, why did she constantly allow the public to
enter her vagina repeatedly for the price of a soft shell taco and a gram of
meth?

And your father's name is what?
Klaus Schadenfreude
2015-12-13 12:46:18 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 12 Dec 2015 19:26:14 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
No. Because the private property owners *LET* the public onto the
property, in order to do transact business with them. But it is private
property - not in rational dispute.
But if it was PRIVATE property,
Not "if". It *IS* private property. The business is privately owned, and
it operates on privately owned real estate. It is private property.
Oh? Are you really so insecure in your position that you can't handle it
being reffered to as a "if"?
IF.... IF........... it was private property, then WHY is the owner's
allowing the public on teh property.
Because that's how business is conducted. It's no surprise you were
fired from your fast food job.
Post by Jerry Sauk
JUST ANSWER THE DAMN QUESTION INSTEAD OF JUST SAY " NO IT'S PRIVATE
PROPERTY".
Businesses are private property. That's not even in dispute.
Jerry Sauk
2015-12-22 23:05:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Sat, 12 Dec 2015 19:26:14 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
No. Because the private property owners *LET* the public onto the
property, in order to do transact business with them. But it is private
property - not in rational dispute.
But if it was PRIVATE property,
Not "if". It *IS* private property. The business is privately owned, and
it operates on privately owned real estate. It is private property.
Oh? Are you really so insecure in your position that you can't handle it
being reffered to as a "if"?
IF.... IF........... it was private property, then WHY is the owner's
allowing the public on teh property.
Because that's how business is conducted. It's no surprise you were
fired from your fast food job.
WRONG, if it was PRIVATE property, then the owenr's wouldn't be allowing
people to enter. AND THERFORE THEY WOULDN'T BE CONUCTING ANY BUSINESS AT
ALL!!!
Klaus Schadenfreude
2015-12-23 01:25:07 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 22 Dec 2015 17:05:32 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Sat, 12 Dec 2015 19:26:14 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
No. Because the private property owners *LET* the public onto the
property, in order to do transact business with them. But it is private
property - not in rational dispute.
But if it was PRIVATE property,
Not "if". It *IS* private property. The business is privately owned, and
it operates on privately owned real estate. It is private property.
Oh? Are you really so insecure in your position that you can't handle it
being reffered to as a "if"?
IF.... IF........... it was private property, then WHY is the owner's
allowing the public on teh property.
Because that's how business is conducted. It's no surprise you were
fired from your fast food job.
WRONG, if it was PRIVATE property, then the owenr's wouldn't be allowing
people to enter.
I thought you spent so much time in retail? Were you lying?

Because if owners didn't allow people to come into their private
property, they would go out of business.

Is this part of why you got fired?
Post by Jerry Sauk
AND THERFORE THEY WOULDN'T BE CONUCTING ANY BUSINESS AT
ALL!!!
Which is why they allow people onto private property. Simple, really.
RD Sandman
2015-12-13 18:22:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
No. Because the private property owners *LET* the public onto the
property, in order to do transact business with them. But it is
private property - not in rational dispute.
But if it was PRIVATE property,
Not "if". It *IS* private property. The business is privately
owned, and it operates on privately owned real estate. It is private
property.
Oh? Are you really so insecure in your position that you can't handle
it being reffered to as a "if"?
IF.... IF........... it was private property, then WHY is the
owner's allowing the public on teh property.
He wants to make money selling his product......whether it is a hamburger
or a pair of shoes.
--
Sleep well tonight.......

RD (The Sandman}

"Inside every old person is a young person
wondering what the hell happened!"

Terry Pratchett in The Times/UK

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Charlie Simmer
2015-12-15 06:44:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
No. Because the private property owners *LET* the public onto the
property, in order to do transact business with them. But it is private
property - not in rational dispute.
But if it was PRIVATE property,
Not "if". It *IS* private property. The business is privately owned, and
it operates on privately owned real estate. It is private property.
Oh? Are you really so insecure in your position that you can't handle it
being reffered to as a "if"?
IF.... IF........... it was private property,
No, Jerry Suck. Not "if" - it *IS* private property, proved beyond
rational dispute.
Post by Jerry Sauk
then WHY is the owner's allowing the public on teh property.
To do business with them, of course.

You really suck at this, Jerry Suck.
RD Sandman
2015-12-07 17:31:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
No. Because the private property owners *LET* the public onto the
property, in order to do transact business with them. But it is
private property - not in rational dispute.
But if it was PRIVATE property, then how exaclty are trhe owner's
letting people into the store's???!!! That's COMPLETELY insane.
They unlock the doors, open them and place a sign showing their hours on
the way in.
--
Sleep well tonight.......

RD (The Sandman}

"It used to be you couldn't be gay. Now you can be
gay but you can't smoke! It's always something."

David Hockney in The Gaurdian (UK)

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Dave Taylor
2015-12-07 18:39:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by RD Sandman
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
No. Because the private property owners *LET* the public onto the
property, in order to transact business with them. But it is
private property - not in rational dispute.
But if it was PRIVATE property, then how exaclty are trhe owner's
letting people into the store's???!!! That's COMPLETELY insane.
They unlock the doors, open them and place a sign showing their hours on
the way in.
Exactly.

This clown Jerry Suck is an obvious troll.
Jerry Sauk
2015-12-13 01:35:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by RD Sandman
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
No. Because the private property owners *LET* the public onto the
property, in order to transact business with them. But it is
private property - not in rational dispute.
But if it was PRIVATE property, then how exaclty are trhe owner's
letting people into the store's???!!! That's COMPLETELY insane.
They unlock the doors, open them and place a sign showing their hours on
the way in.
Exactly.
This clown Jerry Suck is an obvious troll.
I'll take that expression of your frustration of being unable to prove me
wrong as your admission that you were wrong.
Klaus Schadenfreude
2015-12-13 12:47:08 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 12 Dec 2015 19:35:02 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by RD Sandman
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
No. Because the private property owners *LET* the public onto the
property, in order to transact business with them. But it is
private property - not in rational dispute.
But if it was PRIVATE property, then how exaclty are trhe owner's
letting people into the store's???!!! That's COMPLETELY insane.
They unlock the doors, open them and place a sign showing their hours on
the way in.
Exactly.
This clown Jerry Suck is an obvious troll.
I'll take that expression of your frustration of being unable to prove me
wrong as your admission that you were wrong.
It's an expression of his frustration at finding a human being so
incredibly ignorant. That would be you, Jerry.
RD Sandman
2015-12-13 18:23:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by RD Sandman
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
No. Because the private property owners *LET* the public onto the
property, in order to transact business with them. But it is
private property - not in rational dispute.
But if it was PRIVATE property, then how exaclty are trhe owner's
letting people into the store's???!!! That's COMPLETELY insane.
They unlock the doors, open them and place a sign showing their
hours on the way in.
Exactly.
This clown Jerry Suck is an obvious troll.
I'll take that expression of your frustration of being unable to prove
me wrong as your admission that you were wrong.
I think it is that you won't admit being wrong. Several in here have
proven that you are.
--
Sleep well tonight.......

RD (The Sandman}

"Inside every old person is a young person
wondering what the hell happened!"

Terry Pratchett in The Times/UK

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Jerry Sauk
2015-12-13 19:29:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by RD Sandman
I think it is that you won't admit being wrong. Several in here have
proven that you are.
Wrong. Multiple people THINK they have proven me wrong, but all they did
was post irrelevent law's, bogus "fact's" and name calling.

Also, every legitimate possible argument posted, I have proven to be wrong.
There is no question about it... even after 7 year's, nobody has come CLOSE
to proving it's private property.

Time now to move on to another topic.
Klaus Schadenfreude
2015-12-13 21:15:52 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 13 Dec 2015 13:29:24 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by RD Sandman
I think it is that you won't admit being wrong. Several in here have
proven that you are.
Wrong. Multiple people THINK they have proven me wrong, but all they did
was post irrelevent law's, bogus "fact's" and name calling.
The laws quoted were totally relevant. The facts posted have been
unchallenged by you.

And yes. You are an idiot.
Post by Jerry Sauk
Also, every legitimate possible argument posted, I have proven to be wrong.
You have proven exactly ZERO arguments counter to your position wrong.
Post by Jerry Sauk
There is no question about it... even after 7 year's, nobody has come CLOSE
to proving it's private property.
Everyone has proven it. You're the only one who hasn't proven
otherwise.
Post by Jerry Sauk
Time now to move on to another topic.
The topic now is your idiocy.
Jerry Sauk
2015-12-22 23:09:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Wrong. Multiple people THINK they have proven me wrong, but all they did
was post irrelevent law's, bogus "fact's" and name calling.
The laws quoted were totally relevant.
NO they weren't. They refferd to PRIVATE property, which has nothing to
do witht eh topic of FAST-FOOD store's, which is public property.
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
The facts posted have been unchallenged by you.
Of Course tehy haven't been challenged, THEY'VEW BEEN DISMISSED SINCE THEIR
SO MORONIC AND OFF THE TOPIC.

WHHHEEEEEEE!! I sure like going around in all these fun circles, Klous
<NOT>
Klaus Schadenfreude
2015-12-23 01:27:02 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 22 Dec 2015 17:09:17 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Wrong. Multiple people THINK they have proven me wrong, but all they did
was post irrelevent law's, bogus "fact's" and name calling.
The laws quoted were totally relevant.
NO they weren't.
Yes. They were.
Post by Jerry Sauk
They refferd to PRIVATE property, which has nothing to
do witht eh topic of FAST-FOOD store's, which is public property.
So you keep lying. But we both know you are wrong. Observe...

=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Private property is a legal designation of the ownership of property
by non-governmental legal entities. Private property is
distinguishable from public property, which is owned by a state
entity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_property
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
The facts posted have been unchallenged by you.
Of Course tehy haven't been challenged,
That's because you cannot challenge them. You are in the wrong.
Post by Jerry Sauk
THEY'VEW BEEN DISMISSED SINCE THEIR
SO MORONIC AND OFF THE TOPIC.
You have dismissed the, which makes you moronic.
Post by Jerry Sauk
WHHHEEEEEEE!! I sure like going around in all these fun circles, Klous
<NOT>
I can't help it that you're seemingly uneducatable.
Charlie Simmer
2015-12-15 06:56:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by RD Sandman
I think it is that you won't admit being wrong. Several in here have
proven that you are.
Wrong.
No, *RIGHT*, Jerry Suck. You're wrong, and it has been proved beyond
rational dispute.
Charlie Simmer
2015-12-15 06:50:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by RD Sandman
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dave Taylor
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
No. Because the private property owners *LET* the public onto the
property, in order to transact business with them. But it is
private property - not in rational dispute.
But if it was PRIVATE property, then how exaclty are trhe owner's
letting people into the store's???!!! That's COMPLETELY insane.
They unlock the doors, open them and place a sign showing their hours on
the way in.
Exactly.
This clown Jerry Suck is an obvious troll.
I'll take that expression of your frustration
No frustration, Jerry Suck. You're wrong and we're right. You're the
one who's frustrated, Jerry Suck. You've admitted it, dozens of times.
Mel Schacher
2015-12-07 15:28:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
No. Because the private property owners *LET* the public onto the
property, in order to do transact business with them. But it is private
property - not in rational dispute.

####
Jerry thinks that the bedroom in his mom's trailer,that sits on private
property, (Where she 'entertains' the public as a cum dumpster,) is an on
and off switch!
Only private property when she is asleep and/or not willing.
Government owned, "PUBLIC PROPERTY " when Jerry opens the door (and his
Mom's legs) to the public!
"That's gonna cost you a full 20 piece Bucket, Mr!" <--- Jerry
Patty O'Furniture
2015-12-06 23:18:28 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 6 Dec 2015 14:12:55 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
Tell you what, oh great legal expert. I'll slip and fall in your
local McD's, get carted off to the hospital, and sue you for damages.
Why? Because you say it is Public Property; if it is, you are a member
of teh Public, so you share the ownership (and the liability).
Mel Schacher
2015-12-07 04:44:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?

BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.

#####
They invented the word "Obtuse"; just for you, as they saw you coming a mile
away!
http://www.webster-dictionary.org/definition/Obtuse
Klaus Schadenfreude
2015-12-07 12:38:54 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 6 Dec 2015 14:12:55 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Jerry Sauk
Then perhaps you'd care to explain why teh public ALWAYS goes on property
that isn't owned by the public???!
Because they have permission. See how easy that is?
And WHY do they have permission Klous?
Because the private property owner give them permission. Just like
when you have a garage sale, you give permission for the public to
come into your driveway to see all those books you obviously have
never read.
Post by Jerry Sauk
BECOUSE ITS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
Wrong. See below.

=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Private property is a legal designation of the ownership of property
by non-governmental legal entities. Private property is
distinguishable from public property, which is owned by a state
entity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_property
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Swertz
2015-12-07 17:37:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Private property is a legal designation of the ownership of property
by non-governmental legal entities. Private property is
distinguishable from public property, which is owned by a state
entity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_property
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Jerry has seen all the legal definitions of private vs. public
property and has refused to acknowledge them. She even got a letter
from Taco Bell's legal department stating that practically every Taco
Bell is indeed privately owned property.

Jerry knows that restaurants are private property. She learned a
long time ago that her stupidity was her only asset. You all are
being had by the most dimwitted troll to ever exist.

-sw
Klaus Schadenfreude
2015-12-07 19:51:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Swertz
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Private property is a legal designation of the ownership of property
by non-governmental legal entities. Private property is
distinguishable from public property, which is owned by a state
entity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_property
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Jerry has seen all the legal definitions of private vs. public
property and has refused to acknowledge them.
But are you sure Jerry can read? Or at least read better than he can
write? :)
Sqwertz
2015-12-07 22:47:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Swertz
She learned a
long time ago that her stupidity was her only asset. You all are
being had by the most dimwitted troll to ever exist.
-sw
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
***@cluemail.compost
<i6x4dy0h0232$***@sqwertz.com>
3/18/2011 3:49 PM
Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1162
readnews.com - News for Geeks and ISPs
fa35d278.newsreader.readnews.com


Sorry I don't fit either of your Ideal Psycho Pal Profiles.

-sw
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd prefer you use a sniper rifle on me from a few hundred yards away.
There you go - a reason for you to buy yet another gun and ammo.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sqwertz
2015-12-07 22:48:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Swertz
You all are
being had by the most dimwitted troll to ever exist.
-sw
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
***@cluemail.compost
<i6x4dy0h0232$***@sqwertz.com>
3/18/2011 3:49 PM
Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1162
readnews.com - News for Geeks and ISPs
fa35d278.newsreader.readnews.com


Sorry I don't fit either of your Ideal Psycho Pal Profiles.

-sw
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd prefer you use a sniper rifle on me from a few hundred yards away.
There you go - a reason for you to buy yet another gun and ammo.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jerry Sauk
2015-12-13 01:34:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Swertz
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Private property is a legal designation of the ownership of property
by non-governmental legal entities. Private property is
distinguishable from public property, which is owned by a state
entity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_property
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Jerry has seen all the legal definitions of private vs. public
property and has refused to acknowledge them.
WRONG steve, I acknowledge them COMPLETELY, the propblem is THEY DON'T APPLY
TO TACO BELL BECOUSE TACO BELL ISN'T PRIVATE FUCKING
PROPERTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Post by Swertz
Jerry knows that restaurants are private property.
Steve, what your not able to understand is, certain area's of the restourant
are PRIVATE. such as, teh office, Kitchen, storage area's, etc anywear the
customer's aren't allowed to enter is PRIVATE property. But the PUBLIC
area's of the restrourant, are BY DEFINITION, PUBLIC PROPERTY.
Dechucka
2015-12-13 01:50:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Swertz
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Private property is a legal designation of the ownership of property
by non-governmental legal entities. Private property is
distinguishable from public property, which is owned by a state
entity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_property
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Jerry has seen all the legal definitions of private vs. public
property and has refused to acknowledge them.
WRONG steve, I acknowledge them COMPLETELY, the propblem is THEY DON'T
APPLY TO TACO BELL BECOUSE TACO BELL ISN'T PRIVATE FUCKING
PROPERTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Post by Swertz
Jerry knows that restaurants are private property.
Steve, what your not able to understand is, certain area's of the
restourant are PRIVATE. such as, teh office, Kitchen, storage area's, etc
anywear the customer's aren't allowed to enter is PRIVATE property. But
the PUBLIC area's of the restrourant, are BY DEFINITION, PUBLIC PROPERTY.
oh no it's not
Jerry Sauk
2015-12-19 03:32:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dechucka
Post by Jerry Sauk
Steve, what your not able to understand is, certain area's of the
restourant are PRIVATE. such as, teh office, Kitchen, storage area's,
etc anywear the customer's aren't allowed to enter is PRIVATE property.
But the PUBLIC area's of the restrourant, are BY DEFINITION, PUBLIC
PROPERTY.
oh no it's not
Yes it does. "public area", notice the use of the word PUBLIC, Therefore,
BY DEFINITION OSF "PUBLIC AREA", IS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
Klaus Schadenfreude
2015-12-20 01:24:46 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 18 Dec 2015 21:32:27 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Dechucka
Post by Jerry Sauk
Steve, what your not able to understand is, certain area's of the
restourant are PRIVATE. such as, teh office, Kitchen, storage area's,
etc anywear the customer's aren't allowed to enter is PRIVATE property.
But the PUBLIC area's of the restrourant, are BY DEFINITION, PUBLIC
PROPERTY.
oh no it's not
Yes it does. "public area", notice the use of the word PUBLIC, Therefore,
BY DEFINITION OSF "PUBLIC AREA", IS PUBLIC PROPERTY.
Wrong.

=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Private property is a legal designation of the ownership of property
by non-governmental legal entities. Private property is
distinguishable from public property, which is owned by a state
entity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_property
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Klaus Schadenfreude
2015-12-13 12:49:00 UTC
Permalink
On Sat, 12 Dec 2015 19:34:05 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Swertz
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Private property is a legal designation of the ownership of property
by non-governmental legal entities. Private property is
distinguishable from public property, which is owned by a state
entity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_property
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Jerry has seen all the legal definitions of private vs. public
property and has refused to acknowledge them.
WRONG steve, I acknowledge them COMPLETELY, the propblem is THEY DON'T APPLY
TO TACO BELL BECOUSE TACO BELL ISN'T PRIVATE FUCKING
PROPERTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Of course it is. IT is not owned by the public.
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Swertz
Jerry knows that restaurants are private property.
Steve, what your not able to understand is, certain area's of the restourant
are PRIVATE.
That has nothing to do with who owns them. Certain areas of public
property are private as well.
Post by Jerry Sauk
such as, teh office, Kitchen, storage area's, etc anywear the
customer's aren't allowed to enter is PRIVATE property.
Wrong.
Post by Jerry Sauk
But the PUBLIC
area's of the restrourant, are BY DEFINITION, PUBLIC PROPERTY.
Then go ahead and cite the definition. You won't. Because you can't.
Jerry Sauk
2015-12-22 23:06:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Sat, 12 Dec 2015 19:34:05 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Swertz
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Private property is a legal designation of the ownership of property
by non-governmental legal entities. Private property is
distinguishable from public property, which is owned by a state
entity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_property
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Jerry has seen all the legal definitions of private vs. public
property and has refused to acknowledge them.
WRONG steve, I acknowledge them COMPLETELY, the propblem is THEY DON'T APPLY
TO TACO BELL BECOUSE TACO BELL ISN'T PRIVATE FUCKING
PROPERTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Of course it is. IT is not owned by the public.
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Swertz
Jerry knows that restaurants are private property.
Steve, what your not able to understand is, certain area's of the restourant
are PRIVATE.
That has nothing to do with who owns them. Certain areas of public
property are private as well.
Post by Jerry Sauk
such as, teh office, Kitchen, storage area's, etc anywear the
customer's aren't allowed to enter is PRIVATE property.
Wrong.
Post by Jerry Sauk
But the PUBLIC
area's of the restrourant, are BY DEFINITION, PUBLIC PROPERTY.
Then go ahead and cite the definition. You won't. Because you can't.
I just did. and I repeat:

PUBLIC area's of the restourant!!!
Klaus Schadenfreude
2015-12-23 01:27:28 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 22 Dec 2015 17:06:21 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Sat, 12 Dec 2015 19:34:05 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Swertz
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Private property is a legal designation of the ownership of property
by non-governmental legal entities. Private property is
distinguishable from public property, which is owned by a state
entity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_property
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Jerry has seen all the legal definitions of private vs. public
property and has refused to acknowledge them.
WRONG steve, I acknowledge them COMPLETELY, the propblem is THEY DON'T APPLY
TO TACO BELL BECOUSE TACO BELL ISN'T PRIVATE FUCKING
PROPERTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Of course it is. IT is not owned by the public.
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Swertz
Jerry knows that restaurants are private property.
Steve, what your not able to understand is, certain area's of the restourant
are PRIVATE.
That has nothing to do with who owns them. Certain areas of public
property are private as well.
Post by Jerry Sauk
such as, teh office, Kitchen, storage area's, etc anywear the
customer's aren't allowed to enter is PRIVATE property.
Wrong.
Post by Jerry Sauk
But the PUBLIC
area's of the restrourant, are BY DEFINITION, PUBLIC PROPERTY.
Then go ahead and cite the definition. You won't. Because you can't.
PUBLIC area's of the restourant!!!
That is just you babbling. That is not a citation.

Try again.

Charlie Simmer
2015-12-15 06:49:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Swertz
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Private property is a legal designation of the ownership of property
by non-governmental legal entities. Private property is
distinguishable from public property, which is owned by a state
entity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_property
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Jerry has seen all the legal definitions of private vs. public
property and has refused to acknowledge them.
WRONG steve, I acknowledge them COMPLETELY, the propblem is THEY DON'T APPLY
TO TACO BELL BECOUSE
It's spelled "because", Jerry Suck.

They *DO* apply to Taco Bell, Jerry Suck, you stupid HIV+ troll. Taco
Bell is private property, Jerry Suck, because it's privately owned.

How many people have you infected with HIV, Jerry Suck?
Rudy Canoza
2015-12-23 01:10:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jerry Sauk
Post by Swertz
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Private property is a legal designation of the ownership of property
by non-governmental legal entities. Private property is
distinguishable from public property, which is owned by a state
entity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_property
=====================================
*** IRREFUTABLE FACT ***
=====================================
Jerry has seen all the legal definitions of private vs. public
property and has refused to acknowledge them.
WRONG steve, I acknowledge them COMPLETELY, the propblem is THEY DON'T APPLY
TO TACO BELL BECOUSE TACO BELL ISN'T PRIVATE FUCKING
PROPERTY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Post by Swertz
Jerry knows that restaurants are private property.
Steve, what your not able to understand is, certain area's of the restourant
are PRIVATE. such as, teh office, Kitchen, storage area's, etc anywear the
customer's aren't allowed to enter is PRIVATE property. But the PUBLIC
area's of the restrourant, are BY DEFINITION, PUBLIC PROPERTY.
False. You can't cite a source for this <chortle> "definition", Jerry
Suck. You made it up. It's wrong.

Private ownership ==> private property. It's that simple, Jerry Suck.
WangoTango
2015-11-30 23:17:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
Yeah, and?
Mel Schacher
2015-12-01 11:50:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Buzz Forward
This is settled; it is not in dispute.
The fact that the business is "open to the public" does not make it
public property. The status of property as public or private depends
*only* on the ownership of it.
Yeah, and?

####
Well, jerry did say (in his last drunken stupor) that ownership of property
has nothing to do with it.
Loading...