pdp1@EARTHLINK.NET on thu 26 jun 03
'dumpsters' anyway...
Hi Roger,
Yes...good mention...
I am not a lawyer either, but I have known lawyers at times,
and I enjoyed talking with them about their 'cases' or other
Law matters...
Most of all tho', it is fun to wonder about things...fun to
try and think...fun to learn...fun to 'try' things...see
what happens...
I am certain of this...that,
A District Attourney, or their Office, would be entirely
within the Law to file charges of theft or misdemeanor
burglary or similar, as respect the removal of anything from
a Dumpster, as, whatever is in there is ( most likely,
depending on the Contracts at force) the property of the
Disposal Company as hauls them off...
Now, they would not tend TO file such charges, nor care in
any way...and it would seem frivilous if they did...but, if
they did, they'd be right-with-the-law to
do so.
The university here called "U.N.L.V.", or, 'un-love' as may
be...some years ago threw out a donated collection of
'Fortune' Magazine, from it's Volume One - Issue One,
through something like 1941...so, hundreds of these minty
perfect and very excellent Magazines went into the
dumpster...( I understand they do this routinely when some
naive benifactor donates Book collections or rare Magazine
collections and so on...)
Now a friend of mine saw them there, and began to retrieve
them...some university employee came out and told him to
stop it, and
then got some university security to show up...they read my
friend the 'riot-act', and threatened to arrest him if he
tried again to save these Magazines...my friend left,
returned later and there was still a security guard watching
the dumpster...
The Garbage Truck showed up while my friend was still
waiting for a renewed chance to save these wonderful
Magazines...and...into the Truyck they went with the
kitchen slop, and so on...to be gone forever...
..sigh...
It is a very bad place...!
So it goes...
'higher-education'...
etc...
Phil
lasvegas
----- Original Message -----
From: "Roger Korn"
> Hi Phil,
>
> My take exactly. And the case could be made that the
refuse removal
> contractor's interest lay in there being les trash to
remove, so
> ownership of the trash would be subordinate. And since
distribution is
> not-for-profit, it'd be hard to assert monetary damages.
>
> But I'm not a lawyer, so don't shoot me,
>
> Roger
| |
|
