Originally Posted by Scimmia (Post 623166)

Wow, all of this over a very obviously photoshopped sign.

Originally Posted by BigCat (Post 623034)

I'm a practicing attorney. Of course, I'll probably have to find a new board to call home after that revelation. In any event, I think the sign is funny as hell, but from a legal standpoint (and I'm mostly a defense attorney), I would have no problem putting together a legitimate lawsuit if the neighbor were to be harmed by someone coming into the house. It is a straight-forward negligence case. You have a duty to your neighbor not to increase his risk of being robbed, harmed, killed, etc. By posting this sign, you have breached that duty. If he is harmed by someone entering his home because of your sign, you caused it. And if he is harmed, he has been damaged. The elements of negligence are (1) duty, (2) breach, (3) causation, and (4) damage. You've got all four here. It isn't going to be a viable defense that you breached that duty by speaking - speech can be an action as well as an expression. You can't go into a bad neighborhood and post a notice that your neighbor is on vacation for a week and doens't have an alarm and then claim free speech protection when he gets robbed. Just sayin...

Originally Posted by Sr Mike (Post 622348)

This is too funny

Originally Posted by Don Fernando (Post 622359)

If something happens to the neighbors, these folks will get sued, and they should imho.

You can have a different point of view, but putting your neighbors at risk is a bad thing, and this sign is putting them at risk by clearly marking them as an easy target for burglars and robbers.

Originally Posted by oilhead110 (Post 624896)

Good, they deserve it. They should be sued? How retarded. Anti-gunners deserve what they get.

Originally Posted by oilhead110 (Post 624896)

Good, they deserve it. They should be sued? How retarded. Anti-gunners deserve what they get.