Privately owned restaurants on privately owned real estate are private property

[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.

[Dechucka]

"Buzz Forward"
<kick.jerry.sauks.fat.p...@everywhere.now> wrote in
message news:n3ahgi$qib$1...@dont-email.me...

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

[︰ones]

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]

+1

[Usenet Support Personnel]

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]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0U2zJOryHKQ

[Jerry Sauk]

"Buzz Forward"
<kick.jerry.sauks.fat.p...@everywhere.now> wrote in
message news:n3ahgi$qib$1...@dont-email.me...

> This is settled; it is not in dispute.

WRONG. It has been in dispute for, YEARS.

> 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.

>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]

On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 01:51:17 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Buzz Forward"
><kick.jerry.sauks.fat.p...@everywhere.now> wrote in
>message news:n3ahgi$qib$1...@dont-email.me...
>
>> 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?

>> 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!

> Just becouse a property is "open to the public"
>doesn't mean that, THE PUBLIC ACTUALLY ENTERS THE PROPERTY.


>>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?

>I'd REALLY like to hear your explanation for that.............
>

No, you really wouldn't.

[Jerry Sauk]

"Usenet Support Personnel" <u...@gov.org> wrote in message
news:LKd6y.199664$eE.1...@fx07.iad...

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]

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.

[Mel Schacher]

"Jerry Sauk" wrote in message
news:FvudnV5yrYPl-sbL...@supernews.com...

####
You forgot about yourself, who is the ONLY RETARD that still thinks that the
Government owns Taco Bell.

[Groupkilla]

Mel Schacher wrote:
> the Government owns Taco Bell.
>

Which one?

[WangoTango]

In article <n3ahgi$qib$1...@dont-email.me>,
kick.jerry.sauks.fat.p...@everywhere.now says...

Yeah, and?

[Mel Schacher]

"WangoTango" wrote in message
news:MPG.30c6a3247...@news.east.earthlink.net...

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

[astron]

On 11/27/2015 4:19 PM, �Jones wrote:
> After that, I always put my weed under the back seat when I wasn't
> smoking it.

You trashball druggie.

[Jerry Sauk]

"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message
news:cspl5b5qvck4e6lna...@4ax.com...

>>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]

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.

[Zimmerman]

Just Wondering wrote :

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]

"Dave Taylor" <triple....@lakings.con> wrote in message
news:n42a1t$d7n$2...@dont-email.me...

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]

"Jerry Sauk" <jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:646dnQeQTNL0nvjL...@supernews.com:

> 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]

"Jerry Sauk" wrote in message

news:646dnQeQTNL0nvjL...@supernews.com...

#####
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?

[Mel Schacher]

"Jerry Sauk" wrote in message

news:DbCdnaW4FMkDCvnL...@supernews.com...

#####
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]

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.

>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 ***
=====================================

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

On Sun, 6 Dec 2015 21:53:03 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote:


>> 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

[Mel Schacher]

"Dave Taylor" wrote in message news:n42a1t$d7n$2...@dont-email.me...

####
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

[Dave Taylor]

On 12/6/2015 7:53 PM, Jerry Sauk wrote:
> "Dave Taylor" <triple....@lakings.con> wrote in message
> news:n42a1t$d7n$2...@dont-email.me...
>> On 12/6/2015 12:12 PM, Jerry Sauk wrote:
>>> "Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message
>>> news:cspl5b5qvck4e6lna...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>>> 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.

> 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.

[Unknown]

"Jerry Sauk" <jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:646dnQeQTNL0nvjL...@supernews.com:

>

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

[Cujo DeSockpuppet]

"Mel Schacher" <Myste...@bass.gov> wrote in
news:GW79y.91$GV...@fx37.iad:

>
>
> "Jerry Sauk" wrote in message
> news:646dnQeQTNL0nvjL...@supernews.com...

<Snip>

> 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/

[Dave Taylor]

On 12/7/2015 9:31 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
> "Jerry Suck" wrote in

> news:646dnQeQTNL0nvjL...@supernews.com:
>
>>
>> "Dave Taylor" <triple....@lakings.con> wrote in message
>> news:n42a1t$d7n$2...@dont-email.me...

>>> On 12/6/2015 12:12 PM, Jerry Suck wrote:
>>>> "Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:cspl5b5qvck4e6lna...@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>>> 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.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

On Mon, 7 Dec 2015 11:37:08 -0600, Swertz <sqw...@cluemail.compost>
wrote:

>On Mon, 07 Dec 2015 04:38:54 -0800, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>
>> =====================================
>> *** 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? :)

[Jerry Sauk]

"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message

news:sjeo5b1r9kl4lp42b...@4ax.com...

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]

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.

[Sqwertz]

Swertz wrote:
> 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
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
swe...@cluemail.compost
<i6x4dy0h0232$.d...@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]

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

On Mon, 7 Dec 2015 14:52:40 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"

because you're too fucking stupid to understand what the word
"trespass" means?

That's my guess.

[Jerry Sauk]

"Dave Taylor" <triple....@lakings.con> wrote in message

news:n44cu0$ckh$1...@dont-email.me...

> On 12/6/2015 7:53 PM, Jerry Sauk wrote:
>> "Dave Taylor" <triple....@lakings.con> wrote in message
>> news:n42a1t$d7n$2...@dont-email.me...
>>> On 12/6/2015 12:12 PM, Jerry Sauk wrote:
>>>> "Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:cspl5b5qvck4e6lna...@4ax.com...
>>>>
>>>>>> 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".

[Jerry Sauk]

"Dave Taylor" <triple....@lakings.con> wrote in message

news:n44jk6$9lq$2...@dont-email.me...

I'll take that expression of your frustration of being unable to prove me
wrong as your admission that you were wrong.

[Jerry Sauk]

"Swertz" <sqw...@cluemail.compost> wrote in message
news:6yxotdna...@sqwertz.com...

> On Mon, 07 Dec 2015 04:38:54 -0800, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>

>> =====================================
>> *** 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!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



> 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]

"Jerry Sauk" <jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:WvSdnQWXl8TAUfHL...@supernews.com...

to sell stuff to them?

[Dechucka]

"Jerry Sauk" <jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:WvSdnQGXl8TDUfHL...@supernews.com...

oh no it's not

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

Because that's how business is conducted. It's no surprise you were
fired from your fast food job.

>JUST ANSWER THE DAMN QUESTION INSTEAD OF JUST SAY " NO IT'S PRIVATE
>PROPERTY".

Businesses are private property. That's not even in dispute.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

It's an expression of his frustration at finding a human being so
incredibly ignorant. That would be you, Jerry.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

On Sat, 12 Dec 2015 19:34:05 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Swertz" <sqw...@cluemail.compost> wrote in message
>news:6yxotdna...@sqwertz.com...
>> On Mon, 07 Dec 2015 04:38:54 -0800, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>
>>> =====================================
>>> *** 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.

>> 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.

>such as, teh office, Kitchen, storage area's, etc anywear the
>customer's aren't allowed to enter is PRIVATE property.

Wrong.

> 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.

[Unknown]

"Jerry Sauk" <jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote in

news:WvSdnQWXl8TAUfHL...@supernews.com:

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

[Unknown]

"Jerry Sauk" <jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote in

news:WvSdnQCXl8TDUfHL...@supernews.com:

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

[Jerry Sauk]

"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[remove]comcast.net> wrote in message
news:XnsA56F73D51...@216.166.97.131...

> 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]

On Sun, 13 Dec 2015 13:29:24 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"RD Sandman" <rdsandman[remove]comcast.net> wrote in message
>news:XnsA56F73D51...@216.166.97.131...
>
>
>> 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.

>Also, every legitimate possible argument posted, I have proven to be wrong.

You have proven exactly ZERO arguments counter to your position wrong.

>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.

>Time now to move on to another topic.

The topic now is your idiocy.

[Charlie Simmer]

On 12/12/2015 5:26 PM, Jerry Sauk wrote:
> "Dave Taylor" <triple....@lakings.con> wrote in message
> news:n44cu0$ckh$1...@dont-email.me...
>> On 12/6/2015 7:53 PM, Jerry Sauk wrote:
>>> "Dave Taylor" <triple....@lakings.con> wrote in message
>>> news:n42a1t$d7n$2...@dont-email.me...
>>>> On 12/6/2015 12:12 PM, Jerry Sauk wrote:
>>>>> "Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:cspl5b5qvck4e6lna...@4ax.com...
>>>>>
>>>>>>> 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.

> 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.

[Charlie Simmer]

On 12/12/2015 5:34 PM, Jerry Sauk wrote:
> "Swertz" <sqw...@cluemail.compost> wrote in message
> news:6yxotdna...@sqwertz.com...
>> On Mon, 07 Dec 2015 04:38:54 -0800, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>>
>>> =====================================
>>> *** 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?

[Charlie Simmer]

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.

[Charlie Simmer]

On 12/13/2015 11:29 AM, Jerry Sauk wrote:
> "RD Sandman" <rdsandman[remove]comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:XnsA56F73D51...@216.166.97.131...
>
>
>> 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.

[Jerry Sauk]

"Dechucka" <Dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:aa-dnd8LXp55U_HL...@westnet.com.au...

>
> "Jerry Sauk" <jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

>> 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.

[Jerry Sauk]

"Dechucka" <Dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message

news:eNidncWhXptXU_HL...@westnet.com.au...

Wrong. If the property was PRIVATE, then they wouldn't be allowing public
on teh property to sell them stuff.

[Jerry Sauk]

"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message

news:7vec6bp0vs8fmfb5d...@4ax.com...
\

>>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]

No, you did not.

You posted a fabricated lie.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

Of course they would.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

Wrong.

[Mel Schacher]

"Jerry Sauk" wrote in message
news:2Mydne-32dMUbujL...@supernews.com...

#####
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?

[Jerry Sauk]

"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message

news:p2qq6btvca83psumm...@4ax.com...

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!!!

[Jerry Sauk]

"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message

news:ctnr6b1hf0ku297l3...@4ax.com...

>>
>>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.

>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>

[Jerry Sauk]

"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message

news:j6qq6bpv17ep3jj2o...@4ax.com...

I just did. and I repeat:

PUBLIC area's of the restourant!!!

[Rudy Canoza]

On 12/12/2015 5:34 PM, Jerry Sauk wrote:

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.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

On Tue, 22 Dec 2015 17:05:32 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"

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?

>AND THERFORE THEY WOULDN'T BE CONUCTING ANY BUSINESS AT
>ALL!!!

Which is why they allow people onto private property. Simple, really.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

On Tue, 22 Dec 2015 17:09:17 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message
>news:ctnr6b1hf0ku297l3...@4ax.com...
>
>
>>>
>>>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.

>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 ***
=====================================

>>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.

>THEY'VEW BEEN DISMISSED SINCE THEIR
>SO MORONIC AND OFF THE TOPIC.

You have dismissed the, which makes you moronic.

>WHHHEEEEEEE!! I sure like going around in all these fun circles, Klous
><NOT>

I can't help it that you're seemingly uneducatable.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

On Tue, 22 Dec 2015 17:06:21 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"

That is just you babbling. That is not a citation.

Try again.

[Mel Schacher]

"Jerry Sauk" wrote in message

news:Er-dnRELQYjbReTL...@supernews.com...

####

Explains you being so dizzy.

[Mel Schacher]

"Jerry Sauk" wrote in message

news:Er-dnRYLQYjbReTL...@supernews.com...

####
The public can be allowed on Private Property, if allowed, you retard.

[Mel Schacher]

"Jerry Sauk" wrote in message

news:Er-dnRcLQYjYReTL...@supernews.com...

####
Private property owners can allow the public on their land all the time, you
retard.
Just ask anybody that owns it.. TacoBell for instance

[Sauk-rates]

On Tue, 22 Dec 2015 17:23:50 -0800, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:

If you Gun Owners are so gullible to believe that somebody doesn't
know the difference between private vs. public property then you have
no sense owning arms in the first place. You are a disgrace. You
should be scooping gruel into your mouths using your feet.

I bet 85% you senseless motherfuckers here don't even own guns.
You're just here to wiggle the pus drip off your little yeast-infected
dicks along with he the rest of the gun nuts.

Stop being taken for fools and littering the USseNET groups.
You're the reason sensible people wonder wether we need guns.

[Todd Michel McComb]

In article <4Trey.35610$IX3....@fx36.iad>,

Sauk-rates <ante...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Stop being taken for fools and littering the USseNET groups.

We have so many people whose only enjoyment seems to be annoying
other people.

If that's not sad, I don't know what is. And I don't mean this in
some sort of
you-must-be-talking-some-sort-of-us-vs-them-thing-because-that's-all-there-is
way. At all.

Seriously people? Is it never enough? This is your life?

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

On Wed, 23 Dec 2015 01:16:28 -0600, Sauk-rates <ante...@hotmail.com>
wrote:

>On Tue, 22 Dec 2015 17:23:50 -0800, Klaus Schadenfreude wrote:
>
>If you

Shut up. Nobody was talking to you.

[One Party System]

Sauk-rates <ante...@hotmail.com> wrote in news:4Trey.35610$IX3.3073
@fx36.iad:

Wow, on your period?

--
There is a certain class of race-problem solvers who don’t want the patient
to get well, because as long as the disease holds out they have not only an
easy means of making a living, but also an easy medium through which to
make themselves prominent before the public.

Booker T. Washington

[Jerry Sauk]

"Rudy Canoza" <c...@philhendrie.con> wrote in message
news:n5cs9m$m2s$2...@speranza.aioe.org...

No It's NOT that simple, your ignoring some very basic, EASY to understand
FACTS.

[Jerry Sauk]

"Todd Michel McComb" <mcc...@medieval.org> wrote in message
news:n5didj$afh$1...@usenet.stanford.edu...

Klous, would you care to answer that? Your being paged....

[Jerry Sauk]

"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message

news:pvtj7bh1l6ua38723...@4ax.com...

>>>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.
>
>>THEY'VEW BEEN DISMISSED SINCE THEIR
>>SO MORONIC AND OFF THE TOPIC.
>
> You have dismissed the, which makes you moronic.
>
>>WHHHEEEEEEE!! I sure like going around in all these fun circles, Klous
>><NOT>
>
> I can't help it that you're seemingly uneducatable.

I'm not the one driving us around in circle's and circle's, Klous. That
would be YOU. And it's been going on for month's now.

How much longer are you going to drag this out? I'm geting tired of it.

[Jerry Sauk]

"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message

news:cttj7bhtvhmula0ce...@4ax.com...

BUT... if the property was PRIVATE... then th ecustomer's wouldn't be abl
eto enter teh DAMN STORE!!! WHAT THE FUCK IS SO HARD FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND
THAT FOR?!?!

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

On Fri, 1 Jan 2016 09:28:26 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"

It is.

>. then th ecustomer's wouldn't be ableto enter teh DAMN STORE!!!

Of course they can. BILLIONS of people enter private property EVERY
DAY.

>WHAT THE FUCK IS SO HARD FOR YOU TO UNDERSTAND
>THAT FOR?!?!

What you're saying is wrong. They CAN and DO enter private property
every day.

Just admit you are wrong.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

On Fri, 1 Jan 2016 09:29:56 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
<jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message
>news:pvtj7bh1l6ua38723...@4ax.com...
>
>>>>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.
>>
>>>THEY'VEW BEEN DISMISSED SINCE THEIR
>>>SO MORONIC AND OFF THE TOPIC.
>>
>> You have dismissed the, which makes you moronic.
>>
>>>WHHHEEEEEEE!! I sure like going around in all these fun circles, Klous
>>><NOT>
>>
>> I can't help it that you're seemingly uneducatable.
>
>
>I'm not the one driving us around in circle's and circle's, Klous.

Yes. You are.

>That
>would be YOU. And it's been going on for month's now.

See above

>How much longer are you going to drag this out? I'm geting tired of it.

Until you learn.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

It is that simple. Here is the only fact you need to know.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

Jerry is about as intelligent as a cocker spaniel. But I am confident
that, one day, he will "get it."

[Mel Schacher]

"Jerry Sauk" wrote in message

news:pJidnWfH3pNUARvL...@supernews.com...

#####
Well, you could shoot your parents (if you knew who they were) for raising a
retard like you up.
In the mean time, taunting you is fun!
What fast-food diner did you get fired from today?
Why?

[Mel Schacher]

"Jerry Sauk" wrote in message

news:pJidnWTH3pNVARvL...@supernews.com...

####
The government owns public property.
They don't even allow YOU near certain parts.

I own PRIVATE PROPERTY!
I allow the public on it when I wish.
Except you!

[Alex]

It IS that simple.

[Alex]

Cocker spaniels are rather intelligent dogs. You might be giving that
imbecile far too much credit.

[Dave Taylor]

Of course they would, Jerry Suck. The store owners invite the public to
come inside and buy. It doesn't change the classification: it's still
private property, because:

privately owned = private property

state (or publicly) owned = public property


That's the classification logic.

[Dave Taylor]

On 1/1/2016 7:29 AM, Jerry Sauk wrote:
> "Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message
> news:pvtj7bh1l6ua38723...@4ax.com...
>
>>>> 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.
>>
>>> THEY'VEW BEEN DISMISSED SINCE THEIR
>>> SO MORONIC AND OFF THE TOPIC.
>>
>> You have dismissed the, which makes you moronic.
>>
>>> WHHHEEEEEEE!! I sure like going around in all these fun circles, Klous
>>> <NOT>
>>
>> I can't help it that you're seemingly uneducatable.
>
>
> I'm not the one driving us around in circle's and circle's, Klous.

Yes, you are - trolling in circles and circles.

This is how we know you're a damned fucking troll, Jerry Suck. He write
his name "Klaus" - with an 'a', not a fucking 'o'. The 'a' and 'o' keys
are not anywhere close on the keyboard, Jerry Suck. You're doing it
deliberately, along with half of your other completely fucked up wrong
"typos".

You're a shitty fucking troll, Jerry Suck, and we all know it. We know
this bullshit troll of yours about private business / public property is
just a shitty troll, and we know that *you* know it.

[Jerry Sauk]

"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message

news:mu7d8b14uo39ev9nk...@4ax.com...

OF COURSE TEHY DO! BUT THERY ONLY ENTER THIER OWN PRIVATE PROPERTY, NOT
OTHER PEOPLE'S!!!!!!!!!

[Jerry Sauk]

"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message

news:n18d8b5jijkigkvcr...@4ax.com...

> On Fri, 1 Jan 2016 09:29:56 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
> <jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message
>>news:pvtj7bh1l6ua38723...@4ax.com...
>>
>>>>>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.
>>>
>>>>THEY'VEW BEEN DISMISSED SINCE THEIR
>>>>SO MORONIC AND OFF THE TOPIC.
>>>
>>> You have dismissed the, which makes you moronic.
>>>
>>>>WHHHEEEEEEE!! I sure like going around in all these fun circles, Klous
>>>><NOT>
>>>
>>> I can't help it that you're seemingly uneducatable.
>>
>>
>>I'm not the one driving us around in circle's and circle's, Klous.
>
> Yes. You are.

Oh? Well I'll prove to you RIGHT NOW that I'm not the one cousing the
circles.

THIS DISCUSSION IS CLOSED.... IF yuo are NOT teh one cousing the circle's,
Klous, then you will IMMEDIATELY turn off your computer and NEVER say
another word about thi sdiscussion, EVER AGAIN.

I'm signing off now, I'll be waiting to see what you do.

Will you A.) Becouse of your silence, the discussion will end.

or b.) Restart the whole argument all over again, for the hundreth trip
around the SAME DAMN CIRCLE again!!!

[Buzz Forward]

On 1/3/2016 4:44 PM, Jerry Sauk wrote:
> "Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message
> news:mu7d8b14uo39ev9nk...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 1 Jan 2016 09:28:26 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
>> <jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> BUT... if the property was PRIVATE.
>>
>> It is.
>>
>>> . then th ecustomer's wouldn't be ableto enter teh DAMN STORE!!!
>>
>> Of course they can. BILLIONS of people enter private property EVERY
>> DAY.
>
>
> OF COURSE TEHY DO!

And it's still private property.

McDonald's: private property. End of story.

[Mel Schacher]

"Jerry Sauk" wrote in message

news:zvednXHAwoSAXBTL...@supernews.com...

"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message
news:n18d8b5jijkigkvcr...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 1 Jan 2016 09:29:56 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
> <jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message
>>news:pvtj7bh1l6ua38723...@4ax.com...
>>
>>>>>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.
>>>
>>>>THEY'VEW BEEN DISMISSED SINCE THEIR
>>>>SO MORONIC AND OFF THE TOPIC.
>>>
>>> You have dismissed the, which makes you moronic.
>>>
>>>>WHHHEEEEEEE!! I sure like going around in all these fun circles, Klous
>>>><NOT>
>>>
>>> I can't help it that you're seemingly uneducatable.
>>
>>
>>I'm not the one driving us around in circle's and circle's, Klous.
>
> Yes. You are.

Oh? Well I'll prove to you RIGHT NOW that I'm not the one cousing the
circles.

THIS DISCUSSION IS CLOSED....

####

It's still into the great wide open, Jerry!
"THIS DISCUSSION IS CLOSED" when others say it is, or we drag you into the
depths of your mother's hell., or admit that you are/were wrong!

[Mel Schacher]

"Jerry Sauk" wrote in message

news:zvednXbAwoSAXBTL...@supernews.com...

###
Even jerry can't explain what he just said!

Jerry just said that a private property owner, can NOT enter another private
property owners property!

Jerry just wants to use the Bathrooom.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

On Sun, 3 Jan 2016 18:44:05 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"

<jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message
>news:mu7d8b14uo39ev9nk...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 1 Jan 2016 09:28:26 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
>> <jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>BUT... if the property was PRIVATE.
>>
>> It is.
>>
>>>. then th ecustomer's wouldn't be ableto enter teh DAMN STORE!!!
>>
>> Of course they can. BILLIONS of people enter private property EVERY
>> DAY.
>
>
>OF COURSE TEHY DO!

All RIGHT Jerry! So you admit that ! That's a good start!

>BUT THERY ONLY ENTER THIER OWN PRIVATE PROPERTY, NOT
>OTHER PEOPLE'S!!!!!!!!!

Of course they do! Each and every day! Billions of people entering
other people's PRIVATE PROPERTY.

Here is a photo:

http://www.busywifebusylife.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/img34.jpg

And another

http://www.thehindu.com/multimedia/dynamic/00352/HYM13SHOP_352161f.jpg

And another

https://blackcitygirl.files.wordpress.com/2014/03/eaton-centre1.jpg

Shopping on private property. Every square inch of what you see is
PRIVATELY OWNED.

ALL OF IT

And people just... they just.... they just WALK IN!! They don't ask
the owner permission!

Let me know if you need more photos.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

On Sun, 3 Jan 2016 18:47:18 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"

<jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message
>news:n18d8b5jijkigkvcr...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 1 Jan 2016 09:29:56 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
>> <jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message
>>>news:pvtj7bh1l6ua38723...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>>>>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.
>>>>
>>>>>THEY'VEW BEEN DISMISSED SINCE THEIR
>>>>>SO MORONIC AND OFF THE TOPIC.
>>>>
>>>> You have dismissed the, which makes you moronic.
>>>>
>>>>>WHHHEEEEEEE!! I sure like going around in all these fun circles, Klous
>>>>><NOT>
>>>>
>>>> I can't help it that you're seemingly uneducatable.
>>>
>>>
>>>I'm not the one driving us around in circle's and circle's, Klous.
>>
>> Yes. You are.
>
>Oh? Well I'll prove to you RIGHT NOW that I'm not the one cousing the
>circles.

No, you won't.

>THIS DISCUSSION IS CLOSED.... IF yuo are NOT teh one cousing the circle's,
>Klous, then you will IMMEDIATELY turn off your computer and NEVER say
>another word about thi sdiscussion, EVER AGAIN.
>I'm signing off now, I'll be waiting to see what you do.

I will prove you wrong once again.

=====================================
*** 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 ***
=====================================

>

>Will you A.) Becouse of your silence, the discussion will end.
>
>or b.) Restart the whole argument all over again, for the hundreth trip
>around the SAME DAMN CIRCLE again!!!
>

All YOU have to do to end the circle is admit that you're the most
ignorant dumb fuck in the entire world, that vegetables have more
intellect and reasoning power, and that you're wrong about your insane
stance on private property.


Waiting to see what you will do......

[Jerry Sauk]

"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message

news:848d8bpala8mbk9kk...@4ax.com...

Klous, you didn't answer the question:

[Mel Schacher]

"Jerry Sauk" wrote in message

news:_7-dnc-bT-mP2RLL...@supernews.com...

###
To ridicule retards like you? I would think it a great hobby at best.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

On Thu, 7 Jan 2016 22:48:15 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"

<jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message
>news:848d8bpala8mbk9kk...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 1 Jan 2016 09:32:05 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"
>> <jerr...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Todd Michel McComb" <mcc...@medieval.org> wrote in message
>>>news:n5didj$afh$1...@usenet.stanford.edu...
>>>> In article <4Trey.35610$IX3....@fx36.iad>,
>>>> Sauk-rates <ante...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>Stop being taken for fools and littering the USseNET groups.
>>>>
>>>> We have so many people whose only enjoyment seems to be annoying
>>>> other people.
>>>>
>>>> If that's not sad, I don't know what is. And I don't mean this in
>>>> some sort of
>>>> you-must-be-talking-some-sort-of-us-vs-them-thing-because-that's-all-there-is
>>>> way. At all.
>>>>
>>>> Seriously people? Is it never enough? This is your life?
>>>
>>>Klous, would you care to answer that? Your being paged....
>>
>> Jerry is about as intelligent as a cocker spaniel. But I am confident
>> that, one day, he will "get it."
>
>
>Klous, you didn't answer the question:

Jerry, you didn't get smarter.

Here is the definition of private property:

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/private-property
something, especially land or buildings, that belongs to a particular
person or company, rather than to a government.

Now all you have to do is answer a simple yes or no question:
Is this definition correct?

[ ] Yes
[ ] No

If your answer is no, supply a verifiable citation from another
dictionary which refutes this definition.

If you don't, we'll assume none exists, and you now admit that
restaurants are NOT owned by the government and are, therefore,
private property.

Put your verifiable cite here ----->

[Jerry Sauk]

"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klausscha...@null.net> wrote in message

news:jhpk8blr75ts4ukaf...@4ax.com...

I never said the property wasn't privately onwed, moron, try to follow
along. I said THE PUBLIC ENTER'S THE PROPERTY, which you foolishly just
posted the proof of, therefore proveing yourself WRONG.

[Klaus Schadenfreude]

On Mon, 11 Jan 2016 20:00:28 -0600, "Jerry Sauk"

Of course you did. Now you're just a dirty, rotten, lying sack of
shit, Jerry.

You can't get any lower that a dirty, rotten, lying sack of shit.

> I said THE PUBLIC ENTER'S THE PROPERTY

Everyone knows the public enters the property, Jerry.

How could you be so stupid to think they don't?

I JUST SHOWED YOU PHOTOS OF THEM DOING JUST THAT!!!!!!!

I could just see you opening up a restaurant and throwing people's
food out into the street into the gutter for them to eat like dogs,
because they couldn't enter the property.

"Let us in, Jerry!" they would say.

"No, I can't, it's private property," you would reply.

"You're the dumbest motherfucker in the whole universe," everyone on
the planet would say.

[Mel Schacher]

"Jerry Sauk" wrote in message

news:n8adnYxCVey7wgnL...@supernews.com...

#####
Then explain why the public is allowed on those privately owned properties?
Were you dropped on your head by accident, or on purpose, after you came out
the wrong whole during your delivery/ birth?