GRANDMA IS GOING TO JAIL

[@AttorneyTom]

I AM MAD AT THE EDITOR! In regards to the wedding photo scenarios, my rant supporting the photographers was taken out. Urg.

[@The.Cow96]

Moo

[@baileyjerman5573]

They editor is currently laughing to himself

[@johnxina2465]

My editor, fired he is.

[@LeithJones]

Backing the working man. Nice.

[@The.Cow96]

Ahahaha now you basically given legal eagle free advertising

[@codnewbgamer]

A reasonable American also challenges bluffs. Obviously you wear a robe and drop it right as you enter the store

[@jawadulkarim9498]

Literally what I was thinking lol

[@Tylor_taichou]

That's good ol' American ingenuity in action.

[@bluepvp900]

The legal justification is reasonable person, thankfully, and not reasonable American.

[@VillagerJeff]

Depending on the state public nudity is legal as long as you can claim its part of some artistic endeavor or other criteria from state to state.

[@brunchninja]

Probably the perfect opportunity for Jury Nullification. The person is guilty, but they were calling a bluff, so acquit.

[@Mewse1203]

The deleted wedding photos: the groom told the photographer "either continue being a photographer or leave and not get paid". In my opinion that justifies deleting the photos. He was given an ultimatum by the groom and the photographer took one of the options.

[@MajorPwnage0620]

The knife is primarily meant for defending yourself against sharks and other threats while scuba diving

[@Sb_747]

The good old WASP

[@insanecamo]

Ah, so I did remember right then

[@the_inquisitive_inquisitor]

I gather it's a lot more effective when used underwater. Due to the thickness and special construction of the blade (read: width) it's not actually a very good knife and that CO2 spray is pretty underwhelming when used on ballistic gel.

[@danbasford7456]

"Don't yeet children. Drop kick them instead." - Tom 2021.

[@codylor3884]

Toms face at the Wasp Injection Knife. Little does he know this knife is meant for divers to fight off sharks! You stabby stabby the shark thats coming for you, and inject gas into the shark thats lighter than the water its in, causing the shark to (hopefully) rapidly float towards the surface away from you....very likely killing the shark through The Bends, but also very likely saving the diver with a single thrust which might be all they can get from a charging shark....knowledge knife!

[@airvent6199]

I don't think an 8 gram Co2 charger is going to make a shark blast off like team rocket. Not to mention, sharks almost never attack humans.

[@XDarksoulX1129]

@@airvent6199 sharks attack humans more regularly than you think. But yeah it would. It's offsetting the water balance the shark has.

[@koshi6505]

The Necromancer one is kind of interesting. Generally, raised creatures are under the control of the caster. Can their testimony be allowed if they're under complete, absolute control of one of the lawyers?

[@Hackedsound]

What if the lawyer uses true resurrection, would it still be murder when the victim is alive and without any form of scars and wounds

[@baconnator179]

@@Hackedsound it would both be murder and attempted murder

[@koshi6505]

@@Hackedsound Probably becomes attempted murder? There's also the fact that True Resurrection has a material cost six hundred times the annual salary of the average commoner.

[@jkephart4624]

it never made sense to me that Jason and Freddy were trying to kill each other . Wouldn't Jason have been under freddys control and just follow his comands?

[@felixcohen1247]

Nah, just cast speak with dead. While a bit limited the corpse keeps its free will. While raise dead or similar would also work, those spells have a high price and might turn the charge into attempted murder.

[@nip3004]

Granny understands, dead people can't sue. Mercy is why we can't have traps on our property

[@whoahanant]

With the wedding photographer one the groom did say for them to either leave and forfeit the 250$ (it was like 250-270 if I remember) or stay and not eat OR drink in like 90°+ weather. The photographer called his bluff and I think they can probably argue that their life could've been in danger with no food or water. So really it's the grooms fault tbh.

[@infinitivez]

Just to make you feel better, Tom, you're much cuter than Devin! So there. But omg, that was too much fun to see that post upvoted and your reaction 🤣🤣🤣

[@courtnie97]

That knife used is called a w.a.s.p. knife. It's actually meant for self defense for divers from sharks and from what I remember, illegal to use on people.

[@bethmoore7722]

I wouldn’t want to kill anybody for any of my stuff, but if someone breaks into my house when I am obviously home, I’m going to assume they want to hurt me, and respond accordingly.

[@liarwithagun]

Yeah. 90% of every burglar case I've heard of involved the burglar murdering and raping people if they happened to be home.

[@kaylastarr7863]

@@liarwithagun are you sure you're not just hearing about rapists and murders?? bc ppl who are robbing a home usually target empty homes to avoid being caught and will run if they get caught. if someone is entering your home while you're there, they more than likely are targeting you.

[@squidcaps4308]

@@kaylastarr7863 Check his username, you've been trolled.

[@howardbaxter2514]

You HAVE to assume your life is in danger. Assuming the burglar doesn’t have the capabilities nor intention to harm/kill you can/will lead to you being harmed/killed.

[@kaylastarr7863]

@@squidcaps4308 My first sentence was more of a joke, bc i did read the name. But what i said after is still true

[@SD-oi9gr]

Imagine not letting your photographer eat during your wedding day. The photographer should be treated pretty much just as well as the guests, then they will do the best job.

[@whoahanant]

They also weren't allowed water and it was extremely hot that day

[@NateBee]

Many wedding photographers and DJ’s write into their contracts that the wedding meal must be provided to them.

[@doms.6701]

I'd delete all their photos too. Not let me eat, fine. Not let me have a break or I'm fired, well I know my worth and you undervalued your photos. So they are gone

[@Drummerchef13]

The photographer asked for water after being denied the food because he had done 10 hours of shooting already because it was a hot day and went through his supply and was denied. Definitely not worth the $200 he was going to get paid

[@pyredynasty]

When someone says, "bear with me" I assume that is a secret message that they are being held hostage by a bear.

[@MrNoobed]

9:30 in my self defense courses I was always taught pretty much never ever use a knife. DA do not like them, almost impossible to justify using a knife vs running away or doing anything else. If you're expecting so much trouble you got a co2 shark knife you should just have a CCW and a pistol. Could just be fuddlore, I forget the arguments against the knife. Something like if you have the strength and mind to get into a knife fight with someone, they probably weren't using deadly force first, or you should have ran away instead of bringing your deadly force to a parity of they started it. Edit:.typo

[@whoahanant]

It really is dumb though. I have mace and a knife on me (woman who walks home from work in the dark) I keep my mace in my hand already but if someone actually manages to get closer than I can safely use my mace I'm going to get in a knife fight with them. What it really depends on is if you ARE running and they can outrun you. At that point I think it's fair to turn around and use a knife if they catch up to you. Kinda pointless to say it's dumb to use a knife when any fit person can outrun many types of people.

[@jewels3846]

@@whoahanant I agree. Its circumstantial buy some circumstances are absoloutlely warranted. I refuse to leave the house after 9:30 if avoidable because i have been followed to my car and harrassed at night, it is so scary and I am just thankful I was in a relatively busy area for the time of day. (Leaving work and there were other employees at closing time, my managers near by who watch us get out of line of reasonable sight/into our cars and a 24/7 mcdonald's in the vicinity. I hate feeling so paranoid but I would rather be safe than another victim of assault or worse body found on the streets

[@commandertony4963]

Attorney Tom: it may not be justifiable if you kill someone for harming your dog John Wick: Hold my beer

[@tinaplexico9790]

LoL 😆

[@factswithhunter5611]

Tom could you do an analysis of Man Defends Home With Battleaxe? I found this video to be interesting, but I feel as though there maybe more details that I didn't see in the video. Perhaps you could do some more digging?

[@tinaplexico9790]

LMFAO cause my Dad use to call my Mom a battleaxle. Cray cray 😜😜😜

[@KiithnarasAshaa]

"I don't even know if a knife like that is legal..." " *_SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED_* "

[@Mostlyharmless1985]

*”WELL REGULATED”*

[@Telogor]

@@Mostlyharmless1985 "Well regulated" applies to the militia, not the people or the arms. Learn to read. *THE RIGHT OF THE PEOPLE TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED*

[@Mostlyharmless1985]

@@Telogor so, if the first bit is in regards to a militia, then the second bit is as well.

[@nicksurfs1]

@@Mostlyharmless1985 Go back and read the whole thing. Don’t worry about what someone told you it says, read it and find out for yourself.

[@KiithnarasAshaa]

​@@Mostlyharmless1985 @Telogor Alright kiddos, siddown and lemme school you on something. "Well Regulated" does not mean "A High Degree of Government Control and Restraint," in this context. In 1791, this would be directly, strongly, and extremely antithetical to the mindset of the time, of a people that just had successfully split away from a government that exercised broad and all-encompassing control and restraint on its people. The language of the time often used the term Regular to refer to an army or commissioned militia, e.g. Regular Army, Virginia Regulars, "Call(ing) up the Regulars." While not terribly commonly-used in common parlance, Regular Army is still used in official documents today to differentiate the active-duty component (Regular Army) and reserve component (Reserve Army) of the armed forces. This jives even with the typical usage of "Regulation" today. We often truncate what is in fact "Government Regulation," to a single word. This Regulation is just another form of standardization, and Regulation from the Government has the force of law behind it. There is ample Regulation that does not, like the various IEEE standards for electronic equipment - your USB 3.0 and USB-C are not Government Regulations, but Industry Regulations, standards that are voluntarily adopted by electronics manufacturers (except Apple, jerks) for compatibility and uniformity. Normal and Standard are much more common terms today, but they share much in common with Regular. Thus, a militia that is Well-Regulated is merely one that has or has available all of the tools, equipment, training, materiel, and weapons of the type seen in Regular military service. If your Regular army employs M1 Abrams tanks, your Militia should be able to acquire, train with, and utilize in appropriate situations M1 Abrams tanks as well (although I do not mean this is as advocacy for tanks given freely to specific recognized militias, such could reasonably be implemented by individual States). While official State Militias do exist (and some States go so far as to unilaterally and automatically induct every adult or adult-male into said Militia), the Second Amendment was never meant to or implied to apply to only them, nor that such militia service should ever be compulsory, nor that possession of arms was meant to be contingent of some Federal recognition or licensure. Again, the idea that a state, locality, or even individual would have to ask or beg some powerful central authority for permission to possess and wield weapons was _wildly_ antithetical to the prevailing mindset of the time focused on individual rights and freedoms (i.e. Liberalism or Classical Liberalism, not to be confused with Modern Social Liberalism - 'Liberals' from the 1930's onward to today, also known as Progressive Moral Authoritarians). The right to keep and bear arms, of the type and nature used, previously-used, likely-to-be-used, or of a lesser nature than what is used in Regular military service, is and always has been an Individual right because a Militia can be as small as a single person with the mindset to protect the rights of themselves and their neighbors. Finally, the first half of the Second Amendment is functionally and linguistically a preamble, a qualifying statement. "Why are we passing what should be seen as a broad and unambiguous protection of people to own, possess, and use weapons of a type on par seen in Regular military service? Because it is necessary for the security of a Free state." Preambles do not usually have the force of law behind them, and this is true in both Contract law and Constitutional law - the Preamble to the Constitution is broadly interpreted as the equivalent to a mission statement with no explicit legal weight. Legislative law and Judicial law generally don't bother with Preambles as far as I'm aware.

[@crimsondenizen]

Very interesting as far as the posted sign, however, public indecency is still a crime. So I'd say the overarching state law regarding public indecency would take precedent over the establishments posting. Just like you could put up a sign saying "murder legal inside" but because of the building being a part of a county and province or state, the overarching law of murder bad would still apply regardless of the posting

[@anon6000]

IANAL, but in Texas, the indecent exposure law states, quote, "A person commits an offense if he exposes his anus or any part of his genitals with intent to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person, and he is reckless about whether another is present who will be offended or alarmed by his act." So, since you're only getting naked to own the libs, not to arouse anyone, it would appear that you are in the clear. I mean probably the cops/prosecutor will find something to get you on anyway, though.

[@germimonte]

idk, it's legal to be naked on private propriety, and inside some public places like hotel rooms or spas, so if the owner says it's ok then it could go either way

[@marc-andreservant201]

@@anon6000 The converse is also true. If you're entering a private business and you see a sign at the entrance saying nudity is allowed, then by entering you consent to seeing naked people. Therefore a reasonable person could assume that removing their clothes would not cause a disturbance, because everyone around them has agreed to see nudity.

[@MJM17]

@@anon6000 while I think I figured out that by “IANAL” you mean “I am not a lawyer”, I also think there’s a reason this isn’t a common acronym… 😂

[@whoahanant]

There are nudist beaches, spas and other private property that allow the nudist lifestyle so maybe you could get away with it. There might be rules for nudist places though like posting that "this is a nudist establishment" or something. I don't know what you need in order to make a nudist establishment.

[@cphVlwYa]

Hahahaha that top voted posted is one of the best things I've seen in a long time. Amazing work everyone

[@jackbrax7808]

HAHA You really do need to knowledge hammer yourself. Devins gotta love this. Great job guys!

[@stonegiant4]

I'd say a mask or nude sign bluffcaller could be defended as an act of protest political or otherwise and there is some precedent for nudity as protest being legal even in public spaces.

[@sambromley7394]

That yeet edit was just *chefs kiss*

[@kennethdixoniii4113]

Justified or not. I don’t care. Do not attempt to harm my dog, and we both walk away. Seems simple.

[@cevichegrace]

Tbh. If we view a dog as an object or property, I've spent tens of thousands of dollars in upkeep on this object. Probably the most important piece of property I own. I will do whatever I can to keep my most prized object free of harm.

[@wispa1786]

@@cevichegrace if you shoot somebody to stop them stealing your Ferrari, you're probably still going to get arrested. The value of something doesn't change the fact that it is property.

[@justaguyyknow8730]

Tbf, if you are ready to blast them and deal with any and all the criminal charges you will get afterwards, you can do that, and I will respect you for that. But the law won't respect your feelings, that's just the reality. Who the F shoot people's dog for the sake of it tho. You may be able to pull of a self defense clause with some evidence if your lawyer is godly enough

[@terig8974]

@@cevichegrace The key difference is that an inanimate object can't experience pain and suffering. The law needs to change.

[@Luke_Marinara]

AttorneyTom, if he's actually a necromancer, why would that first one not work, huh?

[@charlesrense5199]

I would vote to acquit the nudist challenger. And I would salute them. Also: Grampa got some Zatoichi moves!

[@SlimThrull]

Yeah, Grampa needs a high five for that.

[@slywolf1972]

A firearms course I took said the hardest part is explaining to people that self defense laws do not protect your pet and this was in Alabama.

[@CptJistuce]

An unjust law should be broken lovingly. -probably not what King meant

[@thortheimpaler7962]

You should come to UNT in Denton and do a “change my mind” type deal except make it “legal advice: it depends”. Shit would be grreeaaattttt

[@connorkitchen7285]

Explanation: That CO2 knife is mostly used by divers to combat sharks and other predators, since if it gets near their gills, it startled them and makes them run away.

[@sharkinahat]

Classic BoatyMcBoatface, never let the internet decide.

[@JunctionWatcher]

Me: is r/attorneytom the greatest subreddit on the internet? Attorney Tom: It depends Me: 😱😱 so you lied to us 😱😱

[@rummysingh6486]

It depends

[@robertphillips9833]

The sign saids no clothes at it’s core. You’re good to go with no clothes.

[@Abp33329]

“What could come out of this if it was filled with rocks or something heavy?” A lot of rocks

[@chesthoIe]

Arkansas has a specific law about booby traps. "It is unlawful for any person to install or maintain a booby trap upon his or her own property or any other person's property." Only instance of boobies in the law that I could find.

[@Drummerchef13]

But would it really be a booby trap if they very clearly have signs posted no trespassing ect

[@chesthoIe]

@@Drummerchef13 Prolly not, the next section reads: "As used in this section, "booby trap" means a device designed to cause death or serious physical injury to a person."

[@anthonyher1953]

@@chesthoIe yeah, Booby Traps are created with the intent to cause death/serious injury, such as installing a trapped door with a shotgun or some sort of IED. I think most states have outlawed booby traps though not 100% sure. The spike strips are designed to stop cars from driving on his driveway, but I think a reasonable person would agree that the spike strips are not designed to cause death/serious injury to the driver. Depending on the state, county, local codes, etc, I think it would be legal since it’s on private property

[@squidcaps4308]

@@anthonyher1953 If your intention is to stop people using your driveway you need to indicate that there are spike strips on the ground. The driveway is most likely in a location where it is understandable that people want to use it to turn around. Putting spike strips there would be akin to booby trapping, hiding something that no one can foresee, it would be the intention to puncture tires. But, put a sign there and all of that goes away. I mean, answer this: What HARM does the sign cause? What are you trying to accomplish overall? To stop people using your driveway, right? So, the sign will do MORE about that problem, whereas leaving it out, in a case where you KNOW people would use that driveway unless instructed otherwise.. Intent... it really, really matters. Putting up a sign will do MORE to deter the behavior you wanted to deter, whereas hiding spike strips will only cause you MORE harm as your driveway is now blocked for hours, it doesn't deter the behavior but punishes AFTER the act has been committed. Intent matters..

[@knighthunter1791]

Booby traps could've meant mines, spike pits, falling logs, OH especially bear traps placed in the woods in your property.

[@doms.6701]

As for the driveway spikes, here in my state the driveway is only your property after a certain length. A portion of it is owned by the DOT, the entrance where it touches the road is not yours.

[@0oShwavyo0]

That's what I was thinking, but I suppose people should be just doing a k turn rather than using his entire driveway to turn around? Seems a bit selfish, reversing into traffic is obviously at least marginally more dangerous than going straight the whole time, but I guess we dont know all the details like how far onto the property

[@RichardBaran]

I love the tire spikes! I have a circular drive way at a 4 way intersection, might invest in one of those.

[@Kaanfight]

Lol so glad my post was most upvoted

[@colejohnson66]

Should make that a weekly thing where Tom just advertises some other law firm that’s not his

[@Kaanfight]

@@colejohnson66 Bruce rivers next week

[@user-vn7ce5ig1z]

• 3:55 - The grandpa wasn't trying to intervene, he was just trying to moon-walk out of the way so he doesn't get hurt. 🤷 • 7:30 - It's not a matter of if the spike-strips are legal, it's a matter of them not stopping people from driving through her drive-way and making it worse because now she constantly has disabled cars stuck in her driveway. 🤦 • 8:50 - No Country for Old Grannies - If even spring-assisted knives are usually illegal, then yeah, this is illegal. ¬_¬

[@MJM17]

The spike strips won’t stop the car from moving so if she can put them close to the end where most people leave the driveway, they might be off her property before they figure out what popped their tires 👍🏻 (although if they go both ways, not so great. Probably see gates in her future)

[@AaaaNinja]

I'm glad grandma is at least wearing proper safety equipment.

[@RikoLime]

In a course taught by a retired officer, registered and certified who went around teaching courses on laws particularly to crimes, guns, and defense.. He explained it so plainly and simple: You can only use the amount of force to defend yourself UP UNTO and EQUAL TO the force presented to you. IE: Someone pointing a gun at you threatening to shoot you, you have the right to do the same (and fire potentially) to defend yourself But if someone grabs your arm, bruising you, and twisting your arm but releases and leaves, you dont have the right to shoot them, because this is an unreasonable response to the force. You maybe could, push them off or rip your arm away, but you cannot retaliate with harsher force. Especially after the fact. The point is, a broken arm, or twisted shoulder, does not warrant you to believe you may die, and thus you cannot defend yourself via gunshot. He also taught us apparently anyone older than (iirc) 65, or some form of disabled (like wheelchair) can retaliate with harsher forms than presented to them because of their "delicate" nature). I remember asking ifsomeone I knew who had knee surgery but wasnt old qualified and he said yes, theyre technically disabled, whether you can see it beforehand or not. In the end "it depends", but he was teaching us general rules to follow, because, as he said, these variables turn a black and white situation into a whole shitshow that youll be fighting for years.

[@TheTrueUlfhednar]

As a rather excessive weapon enthusiast, I LOVE the WASP knives (CO2 injecting bad boys). They're really neat. Also, they're meant for diving and defending against sharks.

[@locodez]

Unfortunately, the law views dogs and other pets as property, so even though they are family to the owner, the law is not going to treat it as such.

[@kstricl]

You know, Dr Mike appears to be planning on Boxing with legal eagle, maybe Tom should get in on that action...

[@V4lkyr1es]

The photographer was supposed to get paid $250 dollars. No one paid them. They were originally a guest, with a seat and a meal. Then op was asked to photograph a wedding, something they'd never done before. It was 90 degrees and they weren't allowed water. OP even was talked into doing a reshoot for $250.

[@arcaderat1613]

Adding to the wedding one: The photographer was originally a guest at the wedding. After being "hired" as the photographer, they disinvited her and then refused to let her even have a break to eat or fill up her water bottle during it.

[@TheRumpletiltskin]

The Legal Eagle post being the most upvoted is HILARIOUS.

[@thefranChise1]

Dababy is SUS

[@w.nurmi58]

Agree 100%

[@c3kile]

0:47 literally the entire plot of the first 3 games, and spirit of justice

[@madbro8848]

9:25 those knives are used to fend off sharks when diving

[@SlimThrull]

3:43 Probably acquit, honestly. The way the sign is written it makes it SEEM like they are actually inviting people to do so. They ever double down by adding a second line that says, "It's all or nothing. It's all about choices." Then go on to say that the management of the store thanks them. Also, do we get pics of Devin on the LED truck? Also also, can Devin now sue you for using his likeness without consent?

[@LeithJones]

I always acquit for public indecency.

[@howardbaxter2514]

Meh, depends. Public indecency at this store? Acquitted! Public indecency in front of a church of school? Yeah, do the time there bud.

[@colinlpeace]

Those knives are so expensive. Compressed air is no joke.

[@KiranasOfRizon]

>Do you acquit or do you convict for public indecency I'll acquit and say it was a private establishment which permits nudity on the premises.

[@CAsnowman]

I would acquit 100% if someone had the literal balls to bear it all in the sake of making a statement lol

[@spenceralbiston1674]

The CO2 knife is called a Wasp Knife. They are legal to own. Divers use them to protect themselves if attacked by a shark, dolphin, whale, etc. while diving. If you stabbed someone with it you would be going to prison for killing them.

[@kikicogger2284]

In the state of Vermont, it is legal to be naked in public as long as you started out naked (leaving your house naked is okay, but undressing in public is not). So if a person followed the sign, if they were originally naked, they would be in the clear.

[@applejarjar]

One of the houses in my subdivision has a circle drive and their solution was to put pots on one side of the driveway to stop people from using it for turnarounds

[@thatchrisb2372]

That sign was asking for it, Acquited!

[@jerubaal101]

"Just shoot them in the leg,"- Uncle Joe.

[@jkephart4624]

Am i the only one that sings the Attorney Tom song everytime its comes on? or does everyone else sing it also lol?

[@Falconifan]

I woke up with it in my head the other day.

[@qerupasy]

Don't know if this is the same story, but I seem to remember something about the wedding photographer being (unintentionally?) given a way out by the groom. Something like "if you leave to eat, the deal is off and you don't get paid". Not sure, so apply grain of salt as required.

[@HandsomeLongshanks]

I feel like a good lawyer could argue that even if the sign was being sarcastic and "making a point" the defendant was making one of their own to show the lengths people are willing to go for their freedoms back and that's it's protected speech

[@setlerking]

Breaking the law isn’t protected speech lol wtf

[@jewels3846]

It might also depend on the type of business. If you can reasonably expect kids to be there (think a family restaurant or retail store) breaking the public indecency laws would probably trump the signage defense. Tho even if the nude person is charged the business might still be able to get fined even if not sued for the sign prompting the action in the first place.

[@about823jews]

That CO2 knife Granny had is legal They are divers knifes they're used by divers incase of a shark attack.

[@JcBravo8]

“Bear with me” - whose this, Senior Chang?

[@JasonDambrosio]

Spike strips? Hope he doesn’t expect any deliveries or he would paying a lot more to replace their tires.

[@tree9638]

For the sign, I would say "it depends" where is the store located? Some places, like Portland. OR, public nudity is legal.

[@kevinoconnor6577]

that knife is a war crime. If twisty knives are bad, that thing is worse.

[@Burning.Phoenix]

Love the word facetious, it has all the vowels in alphabetical order. And facetiously, sometimes.

[@bluntbeagle797]

0:59 when tom said: "eh erh euw" I felt that.

[@OGimouse1]

The tire spikes are going to attract kids.

[@FBOMBS4you]

Well done. Interesting info on the dogs and danger. And grandma is a total bad ass

[@cancerianStargazer]

9:28 this knife was also on an episode of SVU apparently its a wasp injection knife used by divers to defend against deep sea predators. the person in law and order used it to kill a serial breeder who forced multiple women to have over 47 of his kids. probably legal to have if its for divers 👀

[@mattobronco8468]

Alright guys we now know we can steal Tom's cat and not be scared of leathal force. Lol

[@viciousimpaler]

3:46 Marvel's Alternate Universe where Uncle Ben survives

[@henrycollins2478]

1:50 time to call the bar

[@rustystratten499]

The store clearly challenged the patrons, Not Guilty!!!!!!!!

[@lotsoffreetime8392]

We need to see attorney tom on billboard truck featuring "The Knowledge Hammer" with quick phase that "for tiktok imitation" boom yeet..

[@Ghakimx]

r/attorneytom users: *Upvotes Legal Eagle to become LED billboard pic* Legal Eagle: _It's free advertising_

[@yah_boy_fat_gabe8094]

3:40 "Do it again!"

[@Qheneng]

The wedding photographer actually was given a deal by the groom to leave and not be paid

[@L337f33t]

Catch 22 on the naked to enter, the sign says you “Must remove all your clothes to enter” this must be done before entering the establishment. In which case they would be removing their garments outside the establishment, this would take place ostensibly in public. This would be a case of indecent exposure before they could get through the doors.

[@zadinal]

It actually WOULD change the analysis because that knife isn't legal in many places so while it depends you can definitely get in a lot of trouble for carrying that knife around.

[@MikeyC172]

As far as the walking in naked, if i was on that jury i would 100% vote to acquit.

[@zorod5475]

I'd laugh and let the naked man go as a juror. The shop owner asked for it.

[@persianprince6213]

last time I was this early the Persian Empire still existed!

[@ScholarsOfGOLB]

I’ve worked Ems for some time and seen some pretty bad stabbing sand slashing but that knife would do some serious harm inside the human body filling it with gas that fast rupturing smooth muscles it might even force your intestines out like silly string you won’t be able to fight or get away due to the pressure build up inside you abdomen

[@slc2882]

Not legally justified, but morally justified. Stay away from my dog.

[@thepenguin9]

Call that a knife?

[@theperson6167]

Might explode the person's stomach

[@postapocalypticnewsradio]

PANR has tuned in.

[@TheManCalledDrHorse]

Granny's gonna get the Hague called on her

[@PCDelorian]

From an English perspective in respect to the dog. The question would solely be whether it is reasonable and proportionate to the standards of reasonable people for the prevention of crime (Criminal Damage to the Dog).

[@weirdsciencethe2nd205]

The co2 knife was dreamed up in the late 90s in Germany I belive and the inventors then moved to the USA were it was pitched as a low noise sentry removal weapon for special forces apparently its heavy bladed enough to go into the skull were it will dump 12g of liquid co2 which rapidly expands to a gas due to the heat inside and will crack the skull like an egg but was rejected but some have allegedly been privately purchased by some members of certain groups domestically and abroad

[@farkasmactavish]

Buddy, it's an anti-shark knife.

[@MG-hx3ym]

The dog skit: it depends where this takes place. Is it a state that employs the Castle Doctrine or Stand Your Ground Law? If someone approaches your property, steps onto your property, opens your door while you and/family inside then deadly force criteria was already met by them opening your door without permission to enter and you can reasonably assume that they are there to cause harm or you fear for your life by their presence. if you live under Castle Doctrine. If it’s a Stand Your Ground state you actually have to give them opportunity to leave and use escalation of force as much as possible before employing deadly force. This doesn’t mean in either case this would be a simple legal matter. You’re going to jail for shooting someone no matter the circumstances until it gets figured out.

[@bbgunp]

As a question regarding to the whole dog thing. What if you used non-lethal force (for example using fists or restraints) on the thief. Since they did trespass and did try to steal the dog would it be arguable that they could be jailed for theft of property.

[@mufasaiam7794]

This brings up a question, if someone steals your dog and you chase the perpetrator but instead they stop and run to you to harm you, are you allowed to use your weapon on them? Or would you counter argue that you shouldn't use your weapon on someone if you chase after them.

[@blix225]

I would argue that in cases of pets being stolen you should be able to use you weapon against them even if they dont stop Pets are living and breathing creatures and thus cannot be replaced so using lethal force to protect them from someone trying to kidnap them should be justifiable

[@mufasaiam7794]

@@blix225 pets are considered as property in the US and you don't have the right to use deadly force to protect property in most states

[@blix225]

@@mufasaiam7794 i know that what im saying is they shouldnt be considered property they are living breathing creatures that cannot be replaced

[@KJW742]

This channel is hillarious

[@The.Cow96]

Moo

[@cjweber3186]

Moooooooooooooooooo

[@Franwow]

Moo

[@Sam11714]

Mooooooooooo

[@randomguy1371]

I could go for a steak…

[@The.Cow96]

@@randomguy1371 there's always one of you....

[@navybrandt]

If you're stabbing someone in self-defense, you goal is to stop them from hurting you or someone else. It's not necessarily trying to kill them, though in some cases killing them is the only way to get them to stop. If the CO2 knife stops them faster, than it's valid self defense.