Page 2 of 2
Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 3:19 am
by waltherone
KBCraig wrote:waltherone wrote:Unrelated, but I work right next door at the slick willies... next time stop in and say hi :) Name's Brian.
But didn't you say it's 51%?

Well... he can peak his head in the door can't he?
I wonder if that's allowed by law

Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 8:05 am
by mcub
Are you sure he realy worked there?????
Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 9:25 am
by Kalrog
KBCraig wrote:waltherone wrote:Unrelated, but I work right next door at the slick willies... next time stop in and say hi :) Name's Brian.
But didn't you say it's 51%?

I would call that written permission from one in control of the premises...
Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 10:18 am
by KD5NRH
waltherone wrote:KBCraig wrote:
But didn't you say it's 51%?

Well... he can peak his head in the door can't he?
I wonder if that's allowed by law

30.05(b)(1) "Entry" means the intrusion of the entire body.
Does that mean that if I leave my appendix at home in a jar, I'm completely immune to criminal trespass, since my entire body won't be present at any place I go?
I do have to wonder what caused the legislature to think it necessary to specify the entire body for criminal trespass, but "any part of the body" or "any physical [as opposed to a spiritual burglary tool, I suppose] object connected with the body" for burglary. Thus, it seems that, if someone can keep one toe on public property, you have no recourse against the rest of their body being on your lawn, as long as they're not commiting theft, assault, or any felony.
Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 10:26 am
by seamusTX
KD5NRH wrote:I do have to wonder what caused the legislature to think it necessary to specify the entire body for criminal trespass, but "any part of the body" or "any physical ... object connected with the body" for burglary.
The law doesn't have to be and isn't consistent. Various articles were written and amended at different times by different legislative sessions.
The burglary statute makes sense. A building has definite boundaries (doors and windows), and any attempt to cross them is evidence of intent to intrude.
Criminal tresspass applies to open land and other premises that are not always well defined. You would not want be guilty of criminal trespass because your hat blew off and you retrieved it from someone's unfenced lawn.
- Jim
Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 12:50 pm
by lawrnk
I quit going to dollar cinemas about 10 years ago. Too many thugs looking for trouble. The last time I went to the one at westhiemer/agusta and 3 BM's nearly got into a shootout.
Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 1:27 pm
by waltherone
Kalrog wrote:KBCraig wrote:waltherone wrote:Unrelated, but I work right next door at the slick willies... next time stop in and say hi :) Name's Brian.
But didn't you say it's 51%?

I would call that written permission from one in control of the premises...
IIRC, manager, owner, employee, etc, doesn't have authority to allow anyone to carry into an otherwise forbidden place.
Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 1:47 pm
by Kalrog
waltherone wrote:Kalrog wrote:KBCraig wrote:waltherone wrote:Unrelated, but I work right next door at the slick willies... next time stop in and say hi :) Name's Brian.
But didn't you say it's 51%?

I would call that written permission from one in control of the premises...
IIRC, manager, owner, employee, etc, doesn't have authority to allow anyone to carry into an otherwise forbidden place.
In some instances they do (such as with a school), but I don't know if a 51% establishment is the same way.
Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 2:50 pm
by Longtooths
How sure are you that he worked there, maybe just a guy looking to feel someone up??

Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 4:31 pm
by rm9792
mcub wrote:Are you sure he realy worked there?????
He was one of the cast members. He caught me offguard... as I was staring at something else....Those girls are dressed goth and in roles of the movie but some of the outfits were not much there.
Posted: Mon Oct 01, 2007 5:23 pm
by austin
Sounds like a very tame Rocky Horror outing.
The audience participation at good ones involves throwing various things.
He was just checking for those things.
Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 10:10 am
by longtooth
Longtooths wrote:How sure are you that he worked there, maybe just a guy looking to feel someone up??

I have had 2 PMs about this statement being out of character for me.
Folks please check the screen name carefully when something seems out of character.
We are 2 very different men.
LT.
Posted: Tue Oct 02, 2007 7:27 pm
by Venus Pax
longtooth wrote:Longtooths wrote:How sure are you that he worked there, maybe just a guy looking to feel someone up??

I have had 2 PMs about this statement being out of character for me.
Folks please check the screen name carefully when something seems out of character.
We are 2 very different men.
LT.
