Are you a law-abiding citizen?
-
Must be dumb friends. The answer is no.
A warrant isn't permission from the owner, or anyone inside the house.
but it's a cop so likely won't be following the rules even for a vampire
-
No they wouldn’t tbh
Needs reasoning
-
What is a pwrson? What if the vampire git a comouter program to intrude every system it could and make every speaker it got access to invite them in?
What if the vampire limitation extends to the digital world? What if a vampire can't be a hacker because they need permission from the admin on the target system?
-
This post did not contain any content.
My wife asked me this just this week! I said that it would depend on how far the vampire is 'removed' from vampires "tradition". As in, if they were a more recent conversion, maybe more archaic methods like legalistic language wouldn't be enough and a vampire cop could enter with just a warrant. But I think an older vampire-cop who would be more bound by whatever lore suits the trespassing curse/stigma, would still be unable to enter your home without your express permission. Its about domain, not so much ownership.
-
Must be dumb friends. The answer is no.
A warrant isn't permission from the owner, or anyone inside the house.
Actually the answer is yes, you mention ownership as a key thing for your logic. Hence ownership is transferred to owners, managers of managers, bosses of bosses, etc. Hence yes they would be allowed.
You however misunderstand the implications of vampires. Vampires are essentially a criticism of the old who have lived to long, grown withered and cold. Husks of man with no life or soul left to gleam joy.
However they still don the mask of man and must weave within society. They are bound to be polite as they are not to arouse alarm, the alarm will be the corpse they leave behind. The youth they have sapped and the decrepit infection he has implanted.
Come on man, seems like an obvious metaphor for old men being polite and exploiting young women for the sake of 'new blood' or allusions to virginity. The yes is not about ownership, it is about concent.
-
In this same vein, if a vamp-cop's partner entered the home, then invited the vamp-cop in, would the vamp-cop be able to enter then?
wrote on last edited by [email protected]Good question, and I dunno, but I wouldn't think an invitee has the power to invite others. Seems kind of dodgy.
-
Must be dumb friends. The answer is no.
A warrant isn't permission from the owner, or anyone inside the house.
What if you're renting? What if the house was appropriated? What if there's a land dispute? What if the land was appropriated? What if it fall under imminent domain? What if it's split ownership? What if there's a dissociative personality involved?
There's so much to be straight up dismissive as "they're dumb friends".
[In the US] A warrant is permission from the representative of a governmental entity that is ultimately in charge of the land and could legally take it from you, so if theydo take it from you, do you still own it? Even if you can't get it back? By that logic does the US own any of the land, since it was first the land of a different peoples?
-
What if you're renting? What if the house was appropriated? What if there's a land dispute? What if the land was appropriated? What if it fall under imminent domain? What if it's split ownership? What if there's a dissociative personality involved?
There's so much to be straight up dismissive as "they're dumb friends".
[In the US] A warrant is permission from the representative of a governmental entity that is ultimately in charge of the land and could legally take it from you, so if theydo take it from you, do you still own it? Even if you can't get it back? By that logic does the US own any of the land, since it was first the land of a different peoples?
Ability to seize isn't the act of seizure nor by that definition is any land owned because most everything has been taken by force at some point.
Renting wouldn't change anything unless they got permission from the owner.
-
What if the vampire limitation extends to the digital world? What if a vampire can't be a hacker because they need permission from the admin on the target system?
Okay, so you add human in the loop. Pay some poor fucker in india to press one button.
-
Yes, a vampire could enter with a warrant, whether or not you invited him in. The state ultimately 'owns' your property; if it didn't, then it couldn't kick you out and seize it if you don't pay property taxes. So therefore the state has the authority to give a vampire the right to enter your dwelling. (But what if the warrant was illegally issued, and so the vampire didn't have actual permission to enter? Hmmmm.) Similarly, if you rented an apartment, your landlord could give a vampire permission to enter for a valid reason, e.g., the vampire worked maintenance, and you had a water leak that was damaging another apartment and needed immediate access.
Ability to tax isn't ownership
-
Wait but if building a tent around it doesn't kill them, which I agree with, it means that they would be allowed in if the domicile was formed around them without their knowing.
So by that logic, do Vampires get squatters rights?
If they get into a domicile not knowing there is an owner, then the owner arrives, are they ejected or are they allowed to stay? What if you build your house on top of the entrance to their tomb? Are they forced to ask permission to leave their tomb and thus enter your domicile?
I think that they wouldn't be able to enter regardless of whether someone was home and they would know when they noticed they couldn't do so.
-
does that mean that a vampire doesn't need permission to enter a house if he rents a bulldozer?
I feel like this is both correct and opens a hole in most vampire films. Vamps should have been burning down homes to get at the people.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote on last edited by [email protected]
That wouldn't stop him.
At least if the MF is already like this on a flat surface.
-
If you’ve voted, you’ve essentially agreed to the ToS
I don't think voting implies content. People continue to consent with some laws out of moral duty others because they like life outside of a cell.
-
Must be dumb friends. The answer is no.
A warrant isn't permission from the owner, or anyone inside the house.
But what is ownership? Ownership is the society-recognized right to the exclusive use of property. But society establishes certain limitations on those rights, including requirements to allow the lawful access by law enforcement to the property.
You intrinsically give law enforcement permission to access property if they have a warrant. It's just part of the bargain of land ownership.
-
Ability to tax isn't ownership
wrote on last edited by [email protected]It's not about ability to tax, it's about ability to sieze. If the government didn't own your land, then taking it without your permission would be theft. Since it isn't theft if they take your land without your permission, it stands to reason that they own it. You don't own the property, you own a piece of paper saying you're allowed to live and build there.
-
This post did not contain any content.
Gotta rewatch Forever Knight I guess.
-
This post did not contain any content.wrote on last edited by [email protected]
The power that repels the vampire is supposedly god, which is supposedly stronger than the US Gov (citation needed) meaning no.
However a good question is what exactly is a home and does it need to be sanctified? Can a Vampire enter a graveyard blessed by a cardinal when a groundskeeper lives on the far side?
-
But that's kinda the flaw in all of it. If I live with other people, any one of them can let the vampire in, but he never got permission from me then it's not about individual permission.
If we say anyone with authority over the space can let someone in, then that would probably extend to the law or property owners.
To quote myself: "Vampires are older than property law, I think the power that keeps them out comes from physically dwelling in the place." Just my take on it, I have no references to cite.
-
It's not about ability to tax, it's about ability to sieze. If the government didn't own your land, then taking it without your permission would be theft. Since it isn't theft if they take your land without your permission, it stands to reason that they own it. You don't own the property, you own a piece of paper saying you're allowed to live and build there.
If I own something I can put it to any lawful use without restriction or compensation. Neither taxation nor seizure for failure to pay taxes are anything like ownership.
Your mental picture fails to encompass the nuance which indeed isn't particularly subtle.
