Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Video of the Spandex Spark in action will be powerful evidence. And it's an elemental understanding that fire is inherently dangerous. I predict some amount of monetary damages for the plaintiff.
The only thing this man lost is the value of the sign. And that is all he will get. Damages are not awarded for your feelings being hurt or causing you to be scared.
The only thing this man lost is the value of the sign. And that is all he will get. Damages are not awarded for your feelings being hurt or causing you to be scared.
If this is a fact, then I'm in no position to dispute it. Are you certain of this?
The man should obviously be charged appropriately for this crime. I suspect that the homeowner is making a bigger deal of this with his civil lawsuit, because he ran for NC GOP Chair earlier this year and lost. He also applied to be a poll assistant in Wake County during the elections last year and claimed bias when he was told they had enough election workers.
Setting fire to property in North Carolina is a Class H felony. The felonies get much more severe if a building/dwelling is set on fire.
This is what the victim is likely making a fuss about. Is the crime about destruction of property, or about using fire to destroy property.
The perp was stupid to use fire as the means of destruction of something that could have been destroyed in other methods. If the victim doesn't want to volunteer leniency, that's not bad on them, as this was a repeat offender specifically targeting him.
I would warn North Carolina....stop prosecuting nuisance laws and you'll end up with community wrecks like California....or worse complete meltdowns like Detroit is recovering from and New York had to make significant stands to restore.
Kicking and/or tearing up a small sign.....yes....that is minor. However I don't see intentionally starting a fire as minor. It was done in the middle of the night and the guy left. There is no telling what could have happened.
I think all of us have to take the sign out of this situation. If someone came onto your property and lit a fire while you and your family were sleeping how would you feel? I doubt you would feel it was a minor thing.
And for the record I detest Trump and feel that all of these signs (especially at this point) are ridiculous. People just need to ignore them.
I think his charge would have been more aggressive if more damage had been done. I do not approve of people setting fires in other people’s yards, no matter how greatly they ultimately improve the view afterward, is not acceptable behavior in polite society.
I don’t expect a person who is driving and hits a sign to be charged with vehicular manslaughter unless the sign kills someone. The same logic applies here.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
Setting fire to property in North Carolina is a Class H felony. The felonies get much more severe if a building/dwelling is set on fire.
This is what the victim is likely making a fuss about. Is the crime about destruction of property, or about using fire to destroy property.
The perp was stupid to use fire as the means of destruction of something that could have been destroyed in other methods. If the victim doesn't want to volunteer leniency, that's not bad on them, as this was a repeat offender specifically targeting him.
I would warn North Carolina....stop prosecuting nuisance laws and you'll end up with community wrecks like California....or worse complete meltdowns like Detroit is recovering from and New York had to make significant stands to restore.
The word “property” here is implied to be real property, not cheap signs. We’re not headed down the garden path to anarchy because some doofus took a Bic lighter to a stupid Trump sign that was temporarily affixed via tiny stakes into the front perimeter of someone’s yard. And, he is being charged. With a misdemeanor. Because the damage here was minimal and the sign was cheap. Nobody got hurt. Yes, he should have refrained.
I hate political signs. They create nothing but contention.
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
The man should obviously be charged appropriately for this crime. I suspect that the homeowner is making a bigger deal of this with his civil lawsuit, because he ran for NC GOP Chair earlier this year and lost. He also applied to be a poll assistant in Wake County during the elections last year and claimed bias when he was told they had enough election workers.
Free publicity!
__________________
When in doubt, check it out: FAQ
Video of the Spandex Spark in action will be powerful evidence. And it's an elemental understanding that fire is inherently dangerous. I predict some amount of monetary damages for the plaintiff.
Remind us again what his Spandex has to do with anything, or why you keep on trying to put it in the forefront?
Why it matters to me? I ride a bike, I wear spandex sometimes. I don't support what this guy does, and I don't like that people are already talking about targeting cyclist (yes, those posts did happen, they were appropriately deleted). It has nothing to do with cyclists, and I wish people like you would stop with the false association, for no other reason than my own personal safety.
My bet: $500-$1000 fine, and some significant community service hours. I would agree with both, and think the latter is really important, to make an impression on the perp.
The word “property” here is implied to be real property, not cheap signs. We’re not headed down the garden path to anarchy because some doofus took a Bic lighter to a stupid Trump sign that was temporarily affixed via tiny stakes into the front perimeter of someone’s yard. And, he is being charged. With a misdemeanor. Because the damage here was minimal and the sign was cheap. Nobody got hurt. Yes, he should have refrained.
I hate political signs. They create nothing but contention.
I mean, it wasn't a long or difficult read....
I think they meant:
"burning of any goods, wares, merchandise or other chattels or personal property of any kind,"
Real property is a different law and it has higher consequences.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
