We now have a podcast! Exclusive RIPE story: bit.ly/ripeexclusive OR: Search for "Ripestories" on ANY podcast platform (Spotify, apple podcasts, google podcasts, audible, amazon etc.)
That first story, hurts. It sucks for the innocent victim, and it sucks that the woman had been so poisoned. The Imperial Japanese were worse than the Nazi regime, but OP had nothing to do with that. Heck, he didn't even know most likely.
I would not bother with boots, but have Karen's car towed every time after asking once that she not park there. When a Karen or HOA is in the neighborhood, you need cameras. She can see how well arson works for her in prison. Great stories, Ripe. 🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟
In America, depending, usually if there is an “obvious” trespassing then you have no ability to sue the homeowner for damages incurred. It comes down to a reasonable point of contention where “is it indirectly welcoming to others”
Sadly in the states if you are not completely enclosed with a fence with limited access and a sign people will still trespass. Your only legal option is to enclose and post no trespassing signs which ONLY shields you from being sued because of these people trespassing in the first place. This shield is NOT to prevent lawsuits. It's to enable you to countersue for legal fees. Law does not determine who is right. It only determines liability. The sign makes it their liability for crossing into your property.
Possible reason for hostility...1895-1945, Imperial Japan occupied Korea, and mistreated the inhabitants rather severely. If Karen was Korean, that is a possible reason for animosity. Not justified, but a possibility.
@@frozencanary4522same with the atrocities committed by what became north korea, they just did it on a smaller scale(the peninsula and surrounding waters)
@@brianarnold8666es and no. Look up Unit 731. Just... Prepare yourself. The only crimes modern Japan is guilty of is even now refusing to admit when officials are wrong and refusing to look back at WW2 and learn. That's not the same, and it means most are innocent even. Even the US is starting to look at our interment camps and what not, but...
About that liability for others on your property. There has been a few cases where robbers brake into a house, ignoring all warning signs and getting hurt. And later on suing the home owner for medical expenses & winning despite having broken into someone's house.
Hiring the best attorney/lawyer will mitigate this. A great lawyer would know how each judge may make a decision. I have had lawyers that would purposely file in a particular month knowing that the case would go to another judge because of X Y,&Z. This probability would benefit the case but still doesn't guarantee a win.
That's how I'd handle it. I understand why she's racist, but it ain't right. OP probably never even heard about Unit 731, let alone what happened in Korea.
I've started following you on Spotify. Hubby n I enjoy listening to reddit stories while in the car. I usually listen to stories too on the console. Very happy to have our 3 favorite redditors on Spotify now. 🥰🥰🥰
It depends where you live but I got a story that'll make you mad. My 9th grade English teacher told me a friend of hers that lived in Northern US had a guy break into her house & he fell down her not up to current code but was in code when installed spiral staircase, broke both his legs and he was able to sue the homeowner and won $5000. My teacher told me this over 15 years ago these are the main details that I remember.
17:00 depending on the state you're in. However, to my knowledge, at least you shouldn't be liable since they were the ones who trespassed in the first place
1st story, just sign over her house, sans mortgage, to OP. If it is more then she owes too bad for her, if it is less, that amount is deducted and she is still on the hook for the remainder, or OP could in that case say that's good enough. That way OP has a home to live in while the other is repaired, rebuilt, or removed. So in the end OP now has 2 houses, or a double wide property, with single house and huge lawn (where the burnt house used to be). I envision she was directly next door.
I have heard of stories living here in the US, where burglars have tried suing homeowners because after they broke in, the hurt themselves on something either during the break in or after they got in.
That's in the blue (democrat) states. I know of a guy that broke into a house in California. He climbed in through the garage into the attic. He fell through the ceiling and broke his leg landing on a coffee table. He sued and actually won.
There was a story that happened here in the U.S. about a man who broke into a garage while the family who lived there was away on vacation for a week and got himself trapped inside. He survived on a giant bag of dog food and a case of Pepsi during the week he was trapped in there. When the family came back and found him in their garage the man wasn't arrested for breaking into their property and to add insult to injury he sued the homeowners and won because he got trapped in the garage of their home that he was attempting to rob. Another ridiculous case I've heard of was a guy was stealing a television from a home he had just broken into and while carrying the television down a flight of stairs he slipped and broke his leg...he sued...and won. Nothing beats the Twinkie case though, a guy sued the manufacturer of Twinkies because they made him fat, he won that too. What a world we live in. I have a bachelor's in criminal justice administration and I distinctly remember discussing these specific cases in one of my classes, the twisted jury that awarded the criminal(s) damages was something I couldn't stop thinking about, I could never understand how people could collectively agree that these people deserved a penny, being a crook or eating yourself to death is your choice, no one else's and they sure as shit shouldn't compensate you for being a moron.
@@AcousticGString I'd heard about those first two stories, although that's been quite some years ago now. However sadly trespassers and others bent on doing something that they shouldn't be doing, either getting away with what they were doing or trying to if they were hurt and winning a lawsuit, and I believe there were even a few cases where the property owner went to jail due being hit with some type of endangerment.
Forget the fact these people have committed a crime, but still were able to sue and win against a case of injury. I guess that breaking and entering with intent of theft is outweighed by them inadvertently injuring themselves and winning. If that's all it takes, then just keep breaking and entering find a way to hurt yourself bad enough to sue, and get money. How many cases would it take for one person to bring up against a stranger who allowed them to damage entry into a home and intentionally hurt themselves.
In the USA, in general property owners are not liable for injuries to trespassers. Of course, lawyers attempt to circumvent this rule. One prominent exception is if the property has some feature that is attractive to children and they trespass to use it. Examples might be a swing set, trampoline or swimming pool. Or even a hole in the ground. The legal theory is called "attractive nuisance." The owner must take action to neutralize its presence or risk, like constructing a fence.
Sometimes that creepy vibe is what your body telling your in trouble I was working a a University walker for a large college a walker is a person who walks students from late night classes to ware they are parked we walked them in a group in parking lots,bus stops my job was to get on the radio ( before cell phones ) was to get the students back to a safe place and use the mace ( now it's pepper spray) to stop the bad guy I also carried a large flashlight think 5 C cell batteries if one of those students got the vibe we went around if we couldn't I would radio for a second walker with a car to take over and if a single woman was waiting at a bus stop you water with with them until they got on the bus in 6 years none of my students ever got hurt I also walk a few Professors as well
Ripe, in the US, even if someone Trespasses on your property, you still may be liable for injury or damages they sustain. What people don't realize is that with "No Trespass" signs, in many states in the US, you must legally register this with the local authorities before those signs actually become legally binding. Even when they aren't required to be registered, it's still good practice to take a copy of the plat (shows your property lines) up to the courthouse and note that the property is now a No Trespassing area, and pass that off to the city, or county authorities. There's also a host of rules with the signs, such as what they can say, how big they must be, where they must be placed, and how many you have to put in place. So, for example, say you have 1 sign at the corner of your lot, and then half a km down, you have another sign at the other corner of your lot. A person hopping the fence between them couldn't be reasonably expected to have seen either sign, and thus they're not able to be enforced. Most states say you need one at least every 50 m (about 150 feet) along a property line, and that they must be visible from the property boundry.
I only occasionally watch reddit-type stories, but Ripe, I watch your videos 99% of the time. I enjoy your storytelling and accent. Also the stories you pick are the most interesting. Kudos to you on doing a great job! 🌠🌠🌠
its like this if a crook breaks into your house and you use force to stop them then said crooks can sue you because you did some thing to them even though its your private land aka house and they brook into it ame if you own land and its not fenced off they fall next thing you know your in court because there sueing you because it wasnt fenced off and you now dont own said land any more thats how stupid it is now in the states
In the first story the OP should have called the police as soon as he saw Karen's car parked in his driveway blocking his car in the driveway. You've got to love Karen logic. *SHE* not only trespassed on the OP's property but intentionally hits his car. But claims to be the victim. I hope that Karen gets a psych eval.
Arson should put her away for a long time. Sigh...always with the money. The 23 year sentence is an after thought....Ripe, money is NOT all important. These stories always seem to bring up the monetary damages first, and mention prison time, as an after thought. In this case, I am glad that Karen has been put away for a LONG time, which will protect the public from an ARSONIST. Impoverishing her...should be an afterthought, not the primary 'revenge'!
The whole situation just makes me sad. OP not only had nothing to do with what happened, but likely never even heard of it. She was literally acting like the people who victimized her family.
nice that the state payed the fines and then was forcing karen to pay back to them. they have far more resources to go afther her than op had. if it had been something that happend like 70 years ago i could see that karen hated japaneese people when she was korean considering ww2 and the atroseties the japaneese did in that region of the world durin that time. but still wouldent have justified what she did.
Had a lady one on an airplane sit next to me, put her two year old in my lap, say here. and put in headphones and ignored me. I called the steward who moved her to her own seat which was some distance away. For some reason she tried to sneak her kid back up to my lap several times before takeoff and was removed before takeoff. Thing is, I dont even know why me.
There is a case against of a home owner who had leak in their kitchen and someone broke in slipped and broke their back and they sued the homeowner successfully.
Yard Story: OP is NOT the Ass Hole! In fact, OP was incredibly smart to fence off their yard if only to protect themself from the Liability of a kid getting hurt in their yard and the Parent's Suing OP's Ass Off for it... The Parent's on the other hand ARE the Ass Holes here for getting mad at OP for closing off their yard and depriving their kids of a place to play...a Place to play that they Legally never had in the first place since at no time was OP ever asked for Permission of the kids to play in the yard in the first place...
Sadly a lot of times in America your liability for injuries on your property can basically come down to the judge and how good the person’s lawyer is. Several years ago a man broke into a house in the city next to mine attempted to rob a house by climbing through a downstairs window. In the process he badly twisted his knee and hip falling over a small table beneath the window, sued the homeowners for his medical expenses as well as the time he had to miss from his job due to the injury…..and won. I can’t remember exactly what he was awarded, but from what I remember it was a decently substantial amount.
It depends on where you are, but the reason why you wouldn’t get in trouble if you had trespassing signs is because they are committing a crime by entering the property, and when someone commits a crime, and someone gets hurt, the criminals, the one held reliable
Unfortunately, you are incorrect. There have been many cases where criminals have sued homeowners and won judgments against them despite the fact that they broke in and were committing a felony at the time of the injury because in the words of Ron White, you can't fix stupid. It doesn't mean that the criminal won't be convicted of the break-in, but they can still receive a civil judgment from the homeowner if there's a jury handy who is that stupid.
@@nadinenone4761 I mean again depending on where you are the one I remember was someone setting a booby trap which is illegal but yes it has gone both ways
@@ViThePrincess Yeah, I think if someone set a booby trap they would definitely be held liable as that shows deliberate intent to cause harm. And like I said, the criminal can still be found guilty of the break-in or whatever the crime is and the homeowner can still be forced to pay a civil judgment to the criminal. The person could still serve felony time, they'd just have a nice nest-egg when they got out. Seems sort of wrong-way-round, doesn't it.
@@nadinenone4761 okay well lets look at it in the sense of the story. its about kids, if a kid tresspasses on your property onto the pool, lets say he's 16 and he threw a party while you were on vacation, and he slips and falls and busts his head open. are you held liable
@@ViThePrincess Yes. A homeowner in this situation could indeed be held liable. Even if they had an 8' fence around the pool, a sturdy lock on the gate, and multiple no trespassing signs up, the kid could climb over the fence or break or pick the lock, and ignore the signs and still sue the homeowner and win despite the fact that they were knowingly trespassing and possibly committing breaking and entering at the time that the injury occurred.
It's none of what you said. The laws that allow for that are tied to the laws that make it illegal to set booby traps , lethal or simply wounding, in a property. The reason the burglars won, in most every case I've seen (I did research this) is they were able to reasonably argue that the homeowner's actions within the property equated to setting a boobytrap. One that comes to mind, off hand, was a man who is reported as having "slipped and fell" and then sued; but upon closer inspection the homeowner had laid a trap for him by placing a number of wires across various open doorways that were designed to trip up the intruder. The burglar tripped over one of these wires, struck his head on a cabinet, and suffered serious injuries. As a result, he sued the homeowner for his medical bills, and won. The homeowner was also arrested and charged with possession of and maintaining a boobytrap, and was sentenced to three years in prison, and fined 25,000 dollars.
@@martinwalker9386 In that investigation, it was found that the skylight was dangerous to begin with, and the school knew it. They had painted over the skylight with the same colors as used on the roof itself, and had taken no measures to make it safe. So when he stepped onto it, he believed it was the same roof. However the glass broke and dropped him 27 feet to the ground, permanently disabling him. The school was found liable for this, as the court reasoned that unless someone expressly knew there was a skylight present there, then other people might suffer the same fate. Thus the school settled out of court for around 250k, and agreed to pay him 1500 per week for the rest of his life. Nine months earlier, a 19-year-old man on his way to a swimming pool at another high school in the same school district fell through a painted-over skylight and died.
There was a case reported in our lical.papwr manybyears back abt a burglarcsuing and winning. House in suburb had a skylight, and he was on roof. Skylight broken while he was ON it, and he sued for--get this--UNSAFE WORK CONDITIONS, complaining that the skylight thst broke under him caused him ON THE JOB injury. And he won. Never saw if that homeowner appealed or not, but it were me I'd Have sppealed.
OP was Stupid! The first time Karen had parked her car in his driveway blocking him in he should have called the Police and had the car Ticketed and Towed. and called them each time she parked on his Driveway... He should also have called a Lawyer to Sue Karen for Harassment and Trespassing and when she burned the house down, have her Charged with Felony Trespassing, Felony Arson, Felony Destruction of Property and Attempted Murder (there's no real way to ensure that no one was in the house when she set the fire!)...
That would just make her go further. She's not in the right, but what Japan did to other Asian countries in WW2 is simply horrific. And they refuse to teach their populace about it because it's dishonorable.
Creepy Killer Neighbour Story: OP was foolish...the second time Mr. Creepy showed up trying to get in to "Charge his Laptop", OP should have said no and moved away from the door so he could call 911 without Mr. Creepy hearing him talk to the Operator...
Last story, why did they not call the cops when that neighbor came over acting really weird again? Especially after finding out the reason he was there teh first time was to hide from the cops after shooting someone. That second time with the laptop I would have immediately called the cops.
I’m not a lawyer, but work in the legal field. As far as someone getting hurt who has trespass on your property, no, you are not liable as they were not invited and did not have your permission to be there.
There's exceptions for boobytraps or unsafe premises, basically anything where if there was an emergency and paramedics or fire fighters were needing to navigate your house have you made it unreasonably unsafe for such situations. If you set a tripwire at the top of the stairs and a burgular falls as a result you're liable for the injuries the same as if it was a firefighter or paramedic coming to administer aid in an emergency. Also a lot of these sorts of rules have exclusions for if it's human activated for that same reason. If you tripped a burgular by pulling the trip wire then that's completely different to if it's always there because it's assumed you wouldn't be pulling it for anyone trying to assist in an emergency.
Sorry but the airplane story op is annoying. I have to hold on to seat back. I don't pull it just hold on. And when the guy in front reclining the seat that means i can't get out at all. Had to wake up a guy once to pull his seat up so i could get out. Even an isle seat is bad.
It’s crazy, but I have seen cases where burglars have been injured and even sued the homeowner…. Thankfully homeowners insurance fights and/or pays these types of claims.
The owner will be liable for the victim's injury if: The owner knew, or should have known, about the hazard that caused injury. This means the landowner cannot turn a blind eye to dangers on the property that reasonable inspection or observation would uncover.
3rd story, that was a little of a fail on OP's part, you always have ALL with you so jerks don't do that, but perfect revenge, those old ladies were quite idiotic
idk if it changed but i got a story from my grandma! that can shed some light note im in washington state not dc she worked as a janitor at the junior high i went to. while she was working there i remember three (maybe more later) stories i got told. this one is relevant to the question. a kid had snuck onto the roof after school hours fell through a skylight and got hurt. they sued and won the case (it upsetted my grandma and still annoys me. to me if u break the law u cant use the law to protect ur self while breaking said law.) quick over view of the other two stories girls would kiss the mirror and elave lipstick stains on the mirrors in the girls restroom. my grandma got tired of trying 2 wash those away so she putted signs on those mirrors reading "sponges that was used to clean the toilets are the same sponges to clean the mirrors" weirdly there was no more lipstick stains the last one i remember my grandma boss was shitty during her time working there everyone got a 3% raise. she and a few others complained her boss reply was "well i only got 3% raise also" (his 3% idr the amount difference but it was huge if detail desire i can ask my mom!)
Unless you are the police or police parking enforcement (not private) you do not have the legal right to "clamp" anyone's car, even if it's on your property.
Story 1: Why can't people call the police...or just a tow truck to remove the offending vehicle...instead of having to deal with a khunt like this? Story 3: OP is NTA. There are liability issues in addition to the neighbor parents not parenting their kids so OP had every right to put up the fence.
17:10 in certain states like California which are completely backwards it doesn’t matter what they’re doing you’re still liable. A person can have a open and shut case if they injure themselves busting out a window to break into a house and the victim of the robbery is held liable
Story 3) regarding trespassers rights, it really comes down to what country you're in and sometimes just who has a better lawyer. i read a story a while back, a thief broke into an old lady's house at night, he tried to sneak in through the kitchen window, he tripped in the dark and tried to catch himself on a nearby counter unfortunately he cut himself bad on a kitchen knife she had left out, she woke up from the sound of pain and panic and called the police and ambulance for the thief, he needed surgery for his hand ended up suing her because he ended up with permanent damage to his fingers and tendon and the fact he could no longer do his day job, he won the case, he still got charged with breaking and entering and he went to jail but with his ill gotten gains from the old woman. Which pisses me off so much.
The 2nd to last story: I am not a lawyer, but I know my way around the courts and laws. What I know is that a person can sue if they are injured on the property owned by you no matter what in my country. Everyone has the right to sue a person. It is up to the courts to decide if they will proceed with the plaintiff's argument. That person could, in fact, win the court case against the defendant by a landslide. If I, as a defendant, had a fence around my property, it would weaken the plaintiff's case and the probability of me winning the case would be stronger. If I just had signs all around my property stating no entry, danger, private property makes it a stronger case. If I had a fence with those signs, the probability is all in my favor. I may still lose, but by a small fraction.
in story 3 refuse if the parents are mad tell them to convert their own properties into fields for the kids there is no reason YOU need to be the one to give their kids a play area
Doesn't matter whether one "should not be liberal" (I guess you mean liable) for what happens to a trespasser, the fact remains that it can indeed happen.
You lost me with 23 years in prison bit, only if you were actually in the house sleeping at the time which would be attempted murder, would she get 23 years maybe. I found the story hard to believe about her parking like that and the guy just getting a tax or clapping the car, but 23 years prison for arson(LOL), only if the guy or his family were sleeping inside then it's attempted murder.
RE: Story 3 The most likely way OP could be found liable is under the attractive nuicence theory, basically OP has something in their property that makes kids more likely to go there and they don't take reasonable measures to block it off. The class example is a pool,if the pool is visible from the street or neighbours where the kids are it's your responsibility to block it off because toddlers don't understand property boundaries or the dangers of a pool so they're liable to hurt themselves. Normally a reasonable measure is considered sufficient, so a fence that's hard to climb or similar. You could also obstruct line of vision(if the kid doesn't see the pool they won't be attracted to it. In OPs case they have a garden which by it's nature attracts kids since it's a free grassy area and perfect for playing on. It's not unexpectedly dangerous though(unless OP has some plants that are harmful like poison ivy, throny roses, brambles, etc) and the kids sound old enough to read no trespassing signs, so legally as long as he makes it clear they aren't allowed on the land he's covered. If there were hidden dangers(say he planted some roses) then he'd need to be responsible for ensuring the kids either aren't easily able to gain access, don't see the garden, or if they're old enough are aware of the risk should they trespass(this is also why people have beware of dog signs, even adults must be made aware of dangers from trespassing if there's an unexpected danger from trespassing somewhere with a reasonably foreseable temptation to do so).
@ripe -- tIn general , this explains liability on private property in the USA -- Injuries to trespassers can become a challenging area of premises liability law. In most situations, we will find that the property owner will not be held liable, but that is not always the case. There are various aspects of premises liability law that some people may find questionable, including paying trespassers for injuries. What we will find that, in most situations, property owners will not be responsible for trespasser injuries. After all, they are trespassing. So, if a person decides to come onto your property and climb a tree in the middle of the night, you should not be held responsible if they fall and break their leg. Property owners cannot be expected to anticipate most types of trespassers, and they should not be held responsible for injuries in typical situations. The situation does get murky when property owners have trespassers on their land with regularity. If a property owner comes to expect continued trespassing, this expectation does come with heightened liability issues. Because property owners can anticipate that a dangerous condition on their property would pose hazards to these routine trespassers, it may now be possible for a property owner to be held responsible for injuries if they occur. In general, we will find that property owners will be responsible for posting signs that warn expected trespassers of hazardous conditions. This may seem like a burden, but it is the reality of owning property.
Not the AH. Y are libel if someone gets hurt. Say there is a hole in the ground and they trip and break a leg. You’re going to pay for the medical bills. Especially if there isn’t any signs saying clearly no trespassing enter at own risk.
I... normally I like the stories, but I actually didn't enjoy that first story. It's just sad. OP had no way of knowing why that woman was so hateful. History buffs do, as do a lot of science majors, but... It's in no way a justification for the crimes, nor the fact she became who she hated, but the Imperial Japanese military committed some of the most horrific abuse ever committed on fellow human beings in the history of mankind. Do not take this as a slight against the Romani, Jewish, or other "abnormals" that the Nazis abused and murdered, but even with how every time I think I have a grasp on how bad Nazis were, and finding theme even worse, the Imperial Japanese were worse, and Unit 731 makes Nazi science look like day care. 731 literally bred prisoners for babies to commit lethal experiments on.
For the second to last story, in regards to trespassing if someone trespasses on your land because you have something like a swing set or a pool and you don't necessarily have no trespassing signs and they get injured because of that swingset or pool or something else you are liable potentially because it's called an "attractive nuisance". Meaning that if a child sees something that draws them onto your property and is dangerous, it's your responsibility because you should make it safe which is so stupid! Parents should be watching their children and it shouldn't be your responsibility, but America is a litigious society. Though if you have no trespassing signs, I'm not sure if that really negates it either though a fence certainly would
@RipeStories to make the story worse to the question you asked about if someone gets hurt on your property for the US people. there have been a few court cases where a thief breaks in and the home owner defense themself. the Thief gets caught, and the thief sued and won against the owner of the property they were trying to steal from. To be fair, it matters on the state, but because of this it's like a twisted joke to just go for the kill then having to defend yourself in court from the impending law suits.
We now have a podcast! Exclusive RIPE story: bit.ly/ripeexclusive
OR: Search for "Ripestories" on ANY podcast platform (Spotify, apple podcasts, google podcasts, audible, amazon etc.)
That first story, hurts. It sucks for the innocent victim, and it sucks that the woman had been so poisoned. The Imperial Japanese were worse than the Nazi regime, but OP had nothing to do with that. Heck, he didn't even know most likely.
Ripe you have such a calm and fitting voice
@@dopedanielinspace1563 thank you ⭐️⭐️
I would not bother with boots, but have Karen's car towed every time after asking once that she not park there. When a Karen or HOA is in the neighborhood, you need cameras. She can see how well arson works for her in prison. Great stories, Ripe.
🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟
I'm wondering how old Karen actually was... I suspect her mother or grandmother was R'd by Japanese troops. Doesn't make it right, but...
In America, depending, usually if there is an “obvious” trespassing then you have no ability to sue the homeowner for damages incurred. It comes down to a reasonable point of contention where “is it indirectly welcoming to others”
You also can't profit from the commission of a crime.
A welcome mat or a door knocker is a legal invitation. Or if u dont have a privacy fence it can be argued that u dont want privacy.
Sadly in the states if you are not completely enclosed with a fence with limited access and a sign people will still trespass. Your only legal option is to enclose and post no trespassing signs which ONLY shields you from being sued because of these people trespassing in the first place. This shield is NOT to prevent lawsuits. It's to enable you to countersue for legal fees. Law does not determine who is right. It only determines liability. The sign makes it their liability for crossing into your property.
@@artyd42 yep, but figured I’d give a more watered down since that detail can change state to state
Possible reason for hostility...1895-1945, Imperial Japan occupied Korea, and mistreated the inhabitants rather severely. If Karen was Korean, that is a possible reason for animosity. Not justified, but a possibility.
Completely agree, that's what I thought. Not excusable, but there might be a reason other than stupidity.
The atrocities committed by the Imperial Japanese Army were horrific.
That's exactly where my mind went. OP didn't understand because OP was never taught.
Not justified, but can be understood.
@@frozencanary4522same with the atrocities committed by what became north korea, they just did it on a smaller scale(the peninsula and surrounding waters)
@@brianarnold8666es and no. Look up Unit 731. Just... Prepare yourself.
The only crimes modern Japan is guilty of is even now refusing to admit when officials are wrong and refusing to look back at WW2 and learn. That's not the same, and it means most are innocent even.
Even the US is starting to look at our interment camps and what not, but...
⭐️❤️⭐️❤️⭐️❤️⭐️
Story 2 I am disabled and it hurts like hell when people use my plane seat as leverage.
I’m disabled and had to hold onto seats to keep from falling, but I always apologized and explained why I had to do that, people understood.
There have been people who got sued and lost by the burgler that injured themselves
About that liability for others on your property.
There has been a few cases where robbers brake into a house, ignoring all warning signs and getting hurt. And later on suing the home owner for medical expenses & winning despite having broken into someone's house.
That is messed up 😡
Hiring the best attorney/lawyer will mitigate this. A great lawyer would know how each judge may make a decision. I have had lawyers that would purposely file in a particular month knowing that the case would go to another judge because of X Y,&Z. This probability would benefit the case but still doesn't guarantee a win.
Karen's car would have been towed every time she parked there. 🐺💖🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟
That's how I'd handle it. I understand why she's racist, but it ain't right. OP probably never even heard about Unit 731, let alone what happened in Korea.
After I politely asked someone to not park there, it would have been towed the very next time and every time after. ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
I heard of a burglar sued a home owner when he fell out of the house window and broke his ankle and wanted the owner to pay his medical bills
Yay Herr Ripe, JB and Disney floof 😀⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
A bit late to the party, trying to sort out a TV aerial.
I've started following you on Spotify. Hubby n I enjoy listening to reddit stories while in the car. I usually listen to stories too on the console. Very happy to have our 3 favorite redditors on Spotify now. 🥰🥰🥰
Thank you for listening there!
It depends where you live but I got a story that'll make you mad. My 9th grade English teacher told me a friend of hers that lived in Northern US had a guy break into her house & he fell down her not up to current code but was in code when installed spiral staircase, broke both his legs and he was able to sue the homeowner and won $5000. My teacher told me this over 15 years ago these are the main details that I remember.
Howdy Ripe!
👍⭐️✨️🌟✨️⭐️✌️🐱😻🐱🤟
Excellent stories!
Nta. Tow her each and every time. She also committed a hate crime. Also have her arrested for arson.
17:00 depending on the state you're in. However, to my knowledge, at least you shouldn't be liable since they were the ones who trespassed in the first place
If your yawn is marked with no trespassing signs you are not liable
Sorry, that's incorrect.
In my state of Michigan if someone breaks into your house and gets hurt you can still be liable even if they are robbing you.
Third story: NTA. Be a dougebag, be treated like a dougrbag. I say blame the ones who brushed off OP's concerns about HIS OWN property.
1st story, just sign over her house, sans mortgage, to OP. If it is more then she owes too bad for her, if it is less, that amount is deducted and she is still on the hook for the remainder, or OP could in that case say that's good enough.
That way OP has a home to live in while the other is repaired, rebuilt, or removed. So in the end OP now has 2 houses, or a double wide property, with single house and huge lawn (where the burnt house used to be). I envision she was directly next door.
I have heard of stories living here in the US, where burglars have tried suing homeowners because after they broke in, the hurt themselves on something either during the break in or after they got in.
That's in the blue (democrat) states. I know of a guy that broke into a house in California. He climbed in through the garage into the attic. He fell through the ceiling and broke his leg landing on a coffee table. He sued and actually won.
There was a story that happened here in the U.S. about a man who broke into a garage while the family who lived there was away on vacation for a week and got himself trapped inside. He survived on a giant bag of dog food and a case of Pepsi during the week he was trapped in there. When the family came back and found him in their garage the man wasn't arrested for breaking into their property and to add insult to injury he sued the homeowners and won because he got trapped in the garage of their home that he was attempting to rob. Another ridiculous case I've heard of was a guy was stealing a television from a home he had just broken into and while carrying the television down a flight of stairs he slipped and broke his leg...he sued...and won. Nothing beats the Twinkie case though, a guy sued the manufacturer of Twinkies because they made him fat, he won that too. What a world we live in. I have a bachelor's in criminal justice administration and I distinctly remember discussing these specific cases in one of my classes, the twisted jury that awarded the criminal(s) damages was something I couldn't stop thinking about, I could never understand how people could collectively agree that these people deserved a penny, being a crook or eating yourself to death is your choice, no one else's and they sure as shit shouldn't compensate you for being a moron.
@@AcousticGString Proof that not everyone should be able to vote or have something as important as jury duty.
@@AcousticGString I'd heard about those first two stories, although that's been quite some years ago now. However sadly trespassers and others bent on doing something that they shouldn't be doing, either getting away with what they were doing or trying to if they were hurt and winning a lawsuit, and I believe there were even a few cases where the property owner went to jail due being hit with some type of endangerment.
Forget the fact these people have committed a crime, but still were able to sue and win against a case of injury. I guess that breaking and entering with intent of theft is outweighed by them inadvertently injuring themselves and winning. If that's all it takes, then just keep breaking and entering find a way to hurt yourself bad enough to sue, and get money. How many cases would it take for one person to bring up against a stranger who allowed them to damage entry into a home and intentionally hurt themselves.
In the USA, in general property owners are not liable for injuries to trespassers. Of course, lawyers attempt to circumvent this rule. One prominent exception is if the property has some feature that is attractive to children and they trespass to use it. Examples might be a swing set, trampoline or swimming pool. Or even a hole in the ground. The legal theory is called "attractive nuisance." The owner must take action to neutralize its presence or risk, like constructing a fence.
Good, believable stories today.
There have been cases where people were literally breaking and entering and got injured then sued the homeowners they stole from.
These stories are the reason why I never leave the house
Sometimes that creepy vibe is what your body telling your in trouble
I was working a a University walker for a large college a walker is a person who walks students from late night classes to ware they are parked we walked them in a group in parking lots,bus stops my job was to get on the radio ( before cell phones ) was to get the students back to a safe place and use the mace ( now it's pepper spray) to stop the bad guy I also carried a large flashlight think 5 C cell batteries if one of those students got the vibe we went around if we couldn't I would radio for a second walker with a car to take over and if a single woman was waiting at a bus stop you water with with them until they got on the bus in 6 years none of my students ever got hurt I also walk a few Professors as well
Ripe, in the US, even if someone Trespasses on your property, you still may be liable for injury or damages they sustain. What people don't realize is that with "No Trespass" signs, in many states in the US, you must legally register this with the local authorities before those signs actually become legally binding. Even when they aren't required to be registered, it's still good practice to take a copy of the plat (shows your property lines) up to the courthouse and note that the property is now a No Trespassing area, and pass that off to the city, or county authorities. There's also a host of rules with the signs, such as what they can say, how big they must be, where they must be placed, and how many you have to put in place.
So, for example, say you have 1 sign at the corner of your lot, and then half a km down, you have another sign at the other corner of your lot. A person hopping the fence between them couldn't be reasonably expected to have seen either sign, and thus they're not able to be enforced. Most states say you need one at least every 50 m (about 150 feet) along a property line, and that they must be visible from the property boundry.
I only occasionally watch reddit-type stories, but Ripe, I watch your videos 99% of the time. I enjoy your storytelling and accent. Also the stories you pick are the most interesting. Kudos to you on doing a great job! 🌠🌠🌠
I guess OP knows to setup the chairs and coolers before the canopy.
Fence story: the term is "Attractive Nuisance".
its like this if a crook breaks into your house and you use force to stop them then said crooks can sue you because you did some thing to them even though its your private land aka house and they brook into it ame if you own land and its not fenced off they fall next thing you know your in court because there sueing you because it wasnt fenced off and you now dont own said land any more thats how stupid it is now
in the states
In the first story the OP should have called the police as soon as he saw Karen's car parked in his driveway blocking his car in the driveway.
You've got to love Karen logic. *SHE* not only trespassed on the OP's property but intentionally hits his car. But claims to be the victim.
I hope that Karen gets a psych eval.
Psi. Caught. Ick. Translated from phonetics and you get the summation of the Karen; PSYCHOTIC.
Arson should put her away for a long time. Sigh...always with the money. The 23 year sentence is an after thought....Ripe, money is NOT all important. These stories always seem to bring up the monetary damages first, and mention prison time, as an after thought. In this case, I am glad that Karen has been put away for a LONG time, which will protect the public from an ARSONIST. Impoverishing her...should be an afterthought, not the primary 'revenge'!
The whole situation just makes me sad. OP not only had nothing to do with what happened, but likely never even heard of it.
She was literally acting like the people who victimized her family.
nice that the state payed the fines and then was forcing karen to pay back to them. they have far more resources to go afther her than op had. if it had been something that happend like 70 years ago i could see that karen hated japaneese people when she was korean considering ww2 and the atroseties the japaneese did in that region of the world durin that time.
but still wouldent have justified what she did.
I suspect that's exactly why she's so racist
Had a lady one on an airplane sit next to me, put her two year old in my lap, say here. and put in headphones and ignored me. I called the steward who moved her to her own seat which was some distance away. For some reason she tried to sneak her kid back up to my lap several times before takeoff and was removed before takeoff. Thing is, I dont even know why me.
Former insurance adjuster. You are not automatically liable for someone injured on your property, especially a trespasser.
There is a case against of a home owner who had leak in their kitchen and someone broke in slipped and broke their back and they sued the homeowner successfully.
Yard Story: OP is NOT the Ass Hole! In fact, OP was incredibly smart to fence off their yard if only to protect themself from the Liability of a kid getting hurt in their yard and the Parent's Suing OP's Ass Off for it...
The Parent's on the other hand ARE the Ass Holes here for getting mad at OP for closing off their yard and depriving their kids of a place to play...a Place to play that they Legally never had in the first place since at no time was OP ever asked for Permission of the kids to play in the yard in the first place...
Sadly a lot of times in America your liability for injuries on your property can basically come down to the judge and how good the person’s lawyer is. Several years ago a man broke into a house in the city next to mine attempted to rob a house by climbing through a downstairs window. In the process he badly twisted his knee and hip falling over a small table beneath the window, sued the homeowners for his medical expenses as well as the time he had to miss from his job due to the injury…..and won. I can’t remember exactly what he was awarded, but from what I remember it was a decently substantial amount.
So when the Karen get out she will be homeless unless she has relatives to live with and still be paying of the dept
Depends on how good of a lawyer the trespassers can afford.
Pretty Disney likes to watch the world go by.
😊
It depends on where you are, but the reason why you wouldn’t get in trouble if you had trespassing signs is because they are committing a crime by entering the property, and when someone commits a crime, and someone gets hurt, the criminals, the one held reliable
Unfortunately, you are incorrect. There have been many cases where criminals have sued homeowners and won judgments against them despite the fact that they broke in and were committing a felony at the time of the injury because in the words of Ron White, you can't fix stupid. It doesn't mean that the criminal won't be convicted of the break-in, but they can still receive a civil judgment from the homeowner if there's a jury handy who is that stupid.
@@nadinenone4761 I mean again depending on where you are the one I remember was someone setting a booby trap which is illegal but yes it has gone both ways
@@ViThePrincess Yeah, I think if someone set a booby trap they would definitely be held liable as that shows deliberate intent to cause harm. And like I said, the criminal can still be found guilty of the break-in or whatever the crime is and the homeowner can still be forced to pay a civil judgment to the criminal. The person could still serve felony time, they'd just have a nice nest-egg when they got out. Seems sort of wrong-way-round, doesn't it.
@@nadinenone4761 okay well lets look at it in the sense of the story. its about kids, if a kid tresspasses on your property onto the pool, lets say he's 16 and he threw a party while you were on vacation, and he slips and falls and busts his head open. are you held liable
@@ViThePrincess Yes. A homeowner in this situation could indeed be held liable. Even if they had an 8' fence around the pool, a sturdy lock on the gate, and multiple no trespassing signs up, the kid could climb over the fence or break or pick the lock, and ignore the signs and still sue the homeowner and win despite the fact that they were knowingly trespassing and possibly committing breaking and entering at the time that the injury occurred.
Kinda dumb to leave anything unattended with a violent racist narcissist living next door
Yard OP is not the A Hole.
Story 3: I have heard of burglars suing the owners for injuries after they fell and winning. Crazy, idiotic, stupid, imbecilic, but there we are.
It's none of what you said. The laws that allow for that are tied to the laws that make it illegal to set booby traps , lethal or simply wounding, in a property. The reason the burglars won, in most every case I've seen (I did research this) is they were able to reasonably argue that the homeowner's actions within the property equated to setting a boobytrap. One that comes to mind, off hand, was a man who is reported as having "slipped and fell" and then sued; but upon closer inspection the homeowner had laid a trap for him by placing a number of wires across various open doorways that were designed to trip up the intruder. The burglar tripped over one of these wires, struck his head on a cabinet, and suffered serious injuries. As a result, he sued the homeowner for his medical bills, and won. The homeowner was also arrested and charged with possession of and maintaining a boobytrap, and was sentenced to three years in prison, and fined 25,000 dollars.
@@KibuFox the one I heard was the burglar fell through a skylight.
@@martinwalker9386 In that investigation, it was found that the skylight was dangerous to begin with, and the school knew it. They had painted over the skylight with the same colors as used on the roof itself, and had taken no measures to make it safe. So when he stepped onto it, he believed it was the same roof. However the glass broke and dropped him 27 feet to the ground, permanently disabling him. The school was found liable for this, as the court reasoned that unless someone expressly knew there was a skylight present there, then other people might suffer the same fate. Thus the school settled out of court for around 250k, and agreed to pay him 1500 per week for the rest of his life. Nine months earlier, a 19-year-old man on his way to a swimming pool at another high school in the same school district fell through a painted-over skylight and died.
@@KibuFox . So , did that Homeowner have some reason to EXPECT intrusion by that particular Intruder ?
Certainly SOUNDS LIKE IT .
There was a case reported in our lical.papwr manybyears back abt a burglarcsuing and winning. House in suburb had a skylight, and he was on roof. Skylight broken while he was ON it, and he sued for--get this--UNSAFE WORK CONDITIONS, complaining that the skylight thst broke under him caused him ON THE JOB injury. And he won.
Never saw if that homeowner appealed or not, but it were me I'd Have sppealed.
Re: Liability. In California you are in trouble as a land owner.
OP was Stupid! The first time Karen had parked her car in his driveway blocking him in he should have called the Police and had the car Ticketed and Towed. and called them each time she parked on his Driveway...
He should also have called a Lawyer to Sue Karen for Harassment and Trespassing and when she burned the house down, have her Charged with Felony Trespassing, Felony Arson, Felony Destruction of Property and Attempted Murder (there's no real way to ensure that no one was in the house when she set the fire!)...
Hi mr ripe 😊😊😊
OP should send her weekly letters from the Nanking Mens Club.
That would just make her go further. She's not in the right, but what Japan did to other Asian countries in WW2 is simply horrific.
And they refuse to teach their populace about it because it's dishonorable.
Creepy Killer Neighbour Story: OP was foolish...the second time Mr. Creepy showed up trying to get in to "Charge his Laptop", OP should have said no and moved away from the door so he could call 911 without Mr. Creepy hearing him talk to the Operator...
Story 3 Not the a hole. It's your yard and you can do what you want and not let anyone use it. It's your yard not theirs.
She got what she deserved
the only issue to consider with fencing is county codes and hoa demands
Last story, why did they not call the cops when that neighbor came over acting really weird again? Especially after finding out the reason he was there teh first time was to hide from the cops after shooting someone. That second time with the laptop I would have immediately called the cops.
I’m not a lawyer, but work in the legal field. As far as someone getting hurt who has trespass on your property, no, you are not liable as they were not invited and did not have your permission to be there.
Not always true. Burgelers have successfully sued for injuring themselves in my state. It is messed up but true.
There's exceptions for boobytraps or unsafe premises, basically anything where if there was an emergency and paramedics or fire fighters were needing to navigate your house have you made it unreasonably unsafe for such situations.
If you set a tripwire at the top of the stairs and a burgular falls as a result you're liable for the injuries the same as if it was a firefighter or paramedic coming to administer aid in an emergency.
Also a lot of these sorts of rules have exclusions for if it's human activated for that same reason. If you tripped a burgular by pulling the trip wire then that's completely different to if it's always there because it's assumed you wouldn't be pulling it for anyone trying to assist in an emergency.
OP should have said No Hablo.
No hablo Karen 🙏🏻
The story with the "EZ-Up" chair, I think it's said as "E-Z Up," especially since it's spelled as "E-Z Up" and not "EZ-Up."
Sorry but the airplane story op is annoying. I have to hold on to seat back. I don't pull it just hold on. And when the guy in front reclining the seat that means i can't get out at all. Had to wake up a guy once to pull his seat up so i could get out. Even an isle seat is bad.
This is crazy...
But this korean lady must have past grudges against japanese people due to history
It’s crazy, but I have seen cases where burglars have been injured and even sued the homeowner…. Thankfully homeowners insurance fights and/or pays these types of claims.
The owner will be liable for the victim's injury if: The owner knew, or should have known, about the hazard that caused injury. This means the landowner cannot turn a blind eye to dangers on the property that reasonable inspection or observation would uncover.
2nd story is from a bitter little shell of a person
3rd story, that was a little of a fail on OP's part, you always have ALL with you so jerks don't do that, but perfect revenge, those old ladies were quite idiotic
idk if it changed but i got a story from my grandma! that can shed some light note im in washington state not dc
she worked as a janitor at the junior high i went to. while she was working there i remember three (maybe more later) stories i got told. this one is relevant to the question. a kid had snuck onto the roof after school hours fell through a skylight and got hurt. they sued and won the case (it upsetted my grandma and still annoys me. to me if u break the law u cant use the law to protect ur self while breaking said law.)
quick over view of the other two stories
girls would kiss the mirror and elave lipstick stains on the mirrors in the girls restroom. my grandma got tired of trying 2 wash those away so she putted signs on those mirrors reading "sponges that was used to clean the toilets are the same sponges to clean the mirrors" weirdly there was no more lipstick stains
the last one i remember
my grandma boss was shitty during her time working there everyone got a 3% raise. she and a few others complained her boss reply was "well i only got 3% raise also" (his 3% idr the amount difference but it was huge if detail desire i can ask my mom!)
Ask them to put down a 3000$ per kid payment for liability
Stress at work so I haven't been commenting much lately ⭐🌠🌠🌟🌠⭐⭐
No worries my friend, glad to still see you here
Unless you are the police or police parking enforcement (not private) you do not have the legal right to "clamp" anyone's car, even if it's on your property.
Story 1: Why can't people call the police...or just a tow truck to remove the offending vehicle...instead of having to deal with a khunt like this?
Story 3: OP is NTA. There are liability issues in addition to the neighbor parents not parenting their kids so OP had every right to put up the fence.
17:10 in certain states like California which are completely backwards it doesn’t matter what they’re doing you’re still liable. A person can have a open and shut case if they injure themselves busting out a window to break into a house and the victim of the robbery is held liable
Story 3) regarding trespassers rights, it really comes down to what country you're in and sometimes just who has a better lawyer.
i read a story a while back, a thief broke into an old lady's house at night, he tried to sneak in through the kitchen window, he tripped in the dark and tried to catch himself on a nearby counter unfortunately he cut himself bad on a kitchen knife she had left out, she woke up from the sound of pain and panic and called the police and ambulance for the thief, he needed surgery for his hand ended up suing her because he ended up with permanent damage to his fingers and tendon and the fact he could no longer do his day job, he won the case, he still got charged with breaking and entering and he went to jail but with his ill gotten gains from the old woman. Which pisses me off so much.
The 2nd to last story: I am not a lawyer, but I know my way around the courts and laws. What I know is that a person can sue if they are injured on the property owned by you no matter what in my country. Everyone has the right to sue a person. It is up to the courts to decide if they will proceed with the plaintiff's argument. That person could, in fact, win the court case against the defendant by a landslide. If I, as a defendant, had a fence around my property, it would weaken the plaintiff's case and the probability of me winning the case would be stronger. If I just had signs all around my property stating no entry, danger, private property makes it a stronger case. If I had a fence with those signs, the probability is all in my favor. I may still lose, but by a small fraction.
⭐️⭐️⭐️
in story 3 refuse if the parents are mad tell them to convert their own properties into fields for the kids there is no reason YOU need to be the one to give their kids a play area
Karen is going to be charged with a arson
She was and has twenty three years to think about it.
@@vernonhardenlol yeah I would have went mandaloin and do the dha werda Verda chant
As long the property is posted you should not be liberal for what happens to the trasp
Liberal or liable? 😁😁
Doesn't matter whether one "should not be liberal" (I guess you mean liable) for what happens to a trespasser, the fact remains that it can indeed happen.
⭐️🌟✨
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
You lost me with 23 years in prison bit, only if you were actually in the house sleeping at the time which would be attempted murder, would she get 23 years maybe. I found the story hard to believe about her parking like that and the guy just getting a tax or clapping the car, but 23 years prison for arson(LOL), only if the guy or his family were sleeping inside then it's attempted murder.
RE: Story 3
The most likely way OP could be found liable is under the attractive nuicence theory, basically OP has something in their property that makes kids more likely to go there and they don't take reasonable measures to block it off.
The class example is a pool,if the pool is visible from the street or neighbours where the kids are it's your responsibility to block it off because toddlers don't understand property boundaries or the dangers of a pool so they're liable to hurt themselves.
Normally a reasonable measure is considered sufficient, so a fence that's hard to climb or similar. You could also obstruct line of vision(if the kid doesn't see the pool they won't be attracted to it.
In OPs case they have a garden which by it's nature attracts kids since it's a free grassy area and perfect for playing on. It's not unexpectedly dangerous though(unless OP has some plants that are harmful like poison ivy, throny roses, brambles, etc) and the kids sound old enough to read no trespassing signs, so legally as long as he makes it clear they aren't allowed on the land he's covered.
If there were hidden dangers(say he planted some roses) then he'd need to be responsible for ensuring the kids either aren't easily able to gain access, don't see the garden, or if they're old enough are aware of the risk should they trespass(this is also why people have beware of dog signs, even adults must be made aware of dangers from trespassing if there's an unexpected danger from trespassing somewhere with a reasonably foreseable temptation to do so).
his Case, for outrageous Dr. Bills
@ripe -- tIn general , this explains liability on private property in the USA --
Injuries to trespassers can become a challenging area of premises liability law. In most situations, we will find that the property owner will not be held liable, but that is not always the case. There are various aspects of premises liability law that some people may find questionable, including paying trespassers for injuries.
What we will find that, in most situations, property owners will not be responsible for trespasser injuries. After all, they are trespassing. So, if a person decides to come onto your property and climb a tree in the middle of the night, you should not be held responsible if they fall and break their leg. Property owners cannot be expected to anticipate most types of trespassers, and they should not be held responsible for injuries in typical situations.
The situation does get murky when property owners have trespassers on their land with regularity. If a property owner comes to expect continued trespassing, this expectation does come with heightened liability issues. Because property owners can anticipate that a dangerous condition on their property would pose hazards to these routine trespassers, it may now be possible for a property owner to be held responsible for injuries if they occur.
In general, we will find that property owners will be responsible for posting signs that warn expected trespassers of hazardous conditions. This may seem like a burden, but it is the reality of owning property.
Not the AH. Y are libel if someone gets hurt. Say there is a hole in the ground and they trip and break a leg. You’re going to pay for the medical bills. Especially if there isn’t any signs saying clearly no trespassing enter at own risk.
For the last story: 😳😬
In America a man broke into someone's house got hurt and sued the homeowner and won
When saying a word over and over, it loses all meaning... Damn canopy 🙄
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️
Korea was occupied by Japan for decades. The Japanese treated the Koreans like slaves….this might be the reason for the hate in the first story
I... normally I like the stories, but I actually didn't enjoy that first story. It's just sad. OP had no way of knowing why that woman was so hateful. History buffs do, as do a lot of science majors, but...
It's in no way a justification for the crimes, nor the fact she became who she hated, but the Imperial Japanese military committed some of the most horrific abuse ever committed on fellow human beings in the history of mankind.
Do not take this as a slight against the Romani, Jewish, or other "abnormals" that the Nazis abused and murdered, but even with how every time I think I have a grasp on how bad Nazis were, and finding theme even worse, the Imperial Japanese were worse, and Unit 731 makes Nazi science look like day care.
731 literally bred prisoners for babies to commit lethal experiments on.
🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟🌟
Don't know why you don't end these holes.
For the second to last story, in regards to trespassing if someone trespasses on your land because you have something like a swing set or a pool and you don't necessarily have no trespassing signs and they get injured because of that swingset or pool or something else you are liable potentially because it's called an "attractive nuisance". Meaning that if a child sees something that draws them onto your property and is dangerous, it's your responsibility because you should make it safe which is so stupid! Parents should be watching their children and it shouldn't be your responsibility, but America is a litigious society. Though if you have no trespassing signs, I'm not sure if that really negates it either though a fence certainly would
⭐😎⭐
Second story OP is the Karen. :/
EEE ZEE Up. It's a brand name. Not Ease Up.
⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
@RipeStories to make the story worse to the question you asked about if someone gets hurt on your property for the US people. there have been a few court cases where a thief breaks in and the home owner defense themself. the Thief gets caught, and the thief sued and won against the owner of the property they were trying to steal from. To be fair, it matters on the state, but because of this it's like a twisted joke to just go for the kill then having to defend yourself in court from the impending law suits.
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️