Welcome Guest
Sign In | Register

it's on public property, it wasn't on clay's property nor

Posted on: January 6, 2017 at 11:28:55 CT
90Tiger STL
Posts:
163818
Member For:
23.39 yrs
Level:
User
M.O.B. Votes:
2
the artist's property.

Nobody went to private property and removed something.

Nobody has a right to take over property rights by posting their art on property that isn't theirs. they can put it up and take it down for years, both within their rights.
Report Message

Please explain why this message is being reported.

REPLY

Handle:
Password:
Subject:

MESSAGE THREAD

Well done Rep Duncan Hunter.... well done! - Spanky KU - 1/6 10:56:37
     Lacy Clay, what a worthless piece of crap....just slightly - tigertix MU - 1/6 11:46:38
     RE: Well done Rep Duncan Hunter.... well done! - Role Call MU - 1/6 11:14:41
          that's a marine and the military for you (nm) - pickle MU - 1/6 11:16:09
               The guys that would save your ass? (nm) - MUGuy2004 STL - 1/6 11:16:45
                    Hasn't been a just war since this country was founded.(nm) - TigerMatt STL - 1/6 11:31:27
     pussies - pickle MU - 1/6 11:12:50
          Atleast he acts on his beliefs instead of whining - GODZILLA MU - 1/6 11:37:27
          Takes one to know one (nm) - MUGuy2004 STL - 1/6 11:13:33
     Maybe he should take the first amendment down as well - El-ahrairah KC - 1/6 11:00:37
          Taking it down did nothing to his rights. They did not try - DHighlander KC - 1/6 11:11:57
               no one was infringed upon by the painting - pickle MU - 1/6 11:15:15
                    no one was infringed upon by taking it down.(nm) - SuperTone MU - 1/6 11:21:31
                         it wasn't his property (nm) - pickle MU - 1/6 11:24:59
                              That is not the point.. - Spanky KU - 1/6 11:26:27
                              the public building isn't the artwork creators property - 90Tiger MU - 1/6 11:26:05
                              It wasn't the person's property who put it up either. - SuperTone MU - 1/6 11:25:52
                                   the property was given to Lacy - pickle MU - 1/6 11:32:43
                                        who owned the wall that it was placed upon?(nm) - dangertim MU - 1/6 11:47:28
                    and no one was infringed upon by its removal. - DHighlander KC - 1/6 11:20:38
                    So you're saying someone could hang a pic of Obama - Civil-E-Tiger MU - 1/6 11:16:36
                         of course (nm) - pickle MU - 1/6 11:16:55
                    no-one was infringed upon by removing it - Spanky KU - 1/6 11:16:33
                         it wasn't his property - pickle MU - 1/6 11:17:47
                              That doesn't make it an infringement. - Spanky KU - 1/6 11:27:53
                                   none of that makes a difference (nm) - pickle MU - 1/6 11:36:09
                                        Nor does your 'it wasn't his property' line... - Spanky KU - 1/6 11:38:01
                                             well, yes, that does - pickle MU - 1/6 11:40:53
                                                  No-one's speech right was infringed upon.... - Spanky KU - 1/6 12:04:55
                                                       RE: No-one's speech right was infringed upon.... - pickle MU - 1/6 12:33:41
                                                            That is irrelevant. No one was infringed by taking it down - Spanky KU - 1/6 12:38:00
                                                                 it is relevant. it is El's point (nm) - pickle MU - 1/6 12:39:28
                                                                      NO.. He doesn't have a point.. nor do you. - Spanky KU - 1/6 12:48:41
                                                                           if i steal your car - pickle MU - 1/6 12:51:56
                                                                                The painting was not stolen; nor taken on a joy ride..next? - Spanky KU - 1/6 12:53:31
                                                                                     don't deflect and try to change courses - pickle MU - 1/6 13:10:44
                              nobody missed your point, you're being presumptuous - 90Tiger MU - 1/6 11:27:12
                                   no, the point was El's regarding free speech and expression - pickle MU - 1/6 11:35:32
          Why? Doesn't he have 1st Amendment rights also? - Spanky KU - 1/6 11:03:56
               Not to mess with someone else's property - El-ahrairah KC - 1/6 11:05:21
                    I think you're missing the point here. nm - Civil-E-Tiger MU - 1/6 11:15:38
                         was it his property? (nm) - pickle MU - 1/6 11:16:40
                              it's on public property, it wasn't on clay's property nor - 90Tiger MU - 1/6 11:28:55
                              Is the building it was hung in Clay's property? nm - Civil-E-Tiger MU - 1/6 11:17:33
                                   answer the question (nm) - pickle MU - 1/6 11:18:03
                                        Yes, his property and it was returned undamaged. Now answer - Civil-E-Tiger MU - 1/6 11:18:47
                                             the painting was Duncan Hunter's property? no, it wasn't (nm) - pickle MU - 1/6 11:25:30
                                                  whose property was it? the answer is: - 90Tiger MU - 1/6 11:29:49
                                                  How does 'ownership' factor into your determination of - Spanky KU - 1/6 11:29:04
                    Why not? Did he destroy it or simply return it to - Spanky KU - 1/6 11:09:44
                         you don't mess with people's stuff - El-ahrairah KC - 1/6 11:16:10
                              Hunter was elected.. he didn't inherit it. - Spanky KU - 1/6 12:06:31




©2025 Fanboards L.L.C. — Our Privacy Policy   About Tigerboard