Can I set the sprinklers on the JW at the door?

[Cheesesteak]

@Blake

The question was whether such behaviour was legal. Not whether you could do it and get away with it by lying.

Who’s lying? Salesmen and JW’s are, by definition, animals. They are also unwanted. The sprinkler deters them. Therefore it is entirely true that it is designed to deter unwanted animals.

Because in one case your intent is to wet the person in order to deter them, and in the other case your intent is to deter them without wetting them.

I disagree, in both cases the intent is to keep them off your property altogether. In the first case, you warn the salesman that they will get wet by posting a sign stating that there is an automated sprinkler. In the second case you warn the salesman that they will get wet by having the sprinkler visibly activated.

In both cases, the salesman knows that he can stay dry by staying off my property, and that he will get wet if he goes on my property. The only difference is how he knows, by reading a sign or by seeing the sprinkler running.

[Snowboarder_Bo]

@Mk_VII

Why would anybody install a ‘motion-actuated’ sprinkler anyway. There’s no legitimate reason for inventing such a device. Do you actually want to have to run around the lawn in order to water it?

As has been said, these are used to shoo off pests (usually deer or pigeons or somesuch, but hey).

In fact, I once bought my mother one to keep the deer from eating her roses.

Google motion activated sprinkler and you’ll find about 89,500 hits.

[dragonlady]

@Mk_VII

Why would anybody install a ‘motion-actuated’ sprinkler anyway. There’s no legitimate reason for inventing such a device. Do you actually want to have to run around the lawn in order to water it?

People use them up here in the woods to keep the deer out of your yard. I guess the deer don’t have good lawyers.

How about posting a sign on your door that says “DAY SLEEPER”. When I was bartending, I had really good luck with that.
I realize that doesn’t answer the question, and I’m not at all sure that you actually want to solve the initial problem…

[Blake]

So very funny. Can I try?

Salesmen and Jews are, by definition, animals. They are also unwanted. The sprinkler deters them. Therefore it is entirely true that it is designed to deter unwanted animals.

Ho, Ho Ho.:mad:
Cheesesteak that sort of religious bigotry isn’t amusing. It’s disgusting. I have reported you and have no intention of engaging you further.

I’d start a pit thread, but my experience with people who find that sort of thing acceptable tells me its not worth it.

[Colibri]

@Cheesesteak

Who’s lying? Salesmen and JW’s are, by definition, animals. They are also unwanted. The sprinkler deters them.

[Moderator Warning]

Neither religious nor professional jabs are suitable for GQ. Calling either salesmen or Jehovah’s Witnesses “animals” violates GQ rules. Don’t do this again.

Colibri
General Questions Moderator

@Blake

Salesmen and Jews are, by definition, animals. They are also unwanted.

Just as a point of information, I believe that “JW” is intended to indicate Jehovah’s Witnesses, not Jews, who rarely go door to door proselytizing. It still stands as a religious jab.

[Colibri]

I’m seeing a lot more acrimony in this thread than sound legal advice. I think we’re past the point where the discussion is suitable for GQ. I would suggest that anyone interested in further discussion of the question should start another thread in GD.

Colibri
General Questions Moderator