Jeep Booby Traps Help
08-26-2003, 03:42 PM
#141
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Jeep Booby Traps Help
>Did you not read the post of Texas law? California is VASTLY different.
I read the all of the relavant statutes in the Texas Penal Code, which is NOT
significantly different from California law as to what is required to justify
the use of force/deadly force for protection of property:
"§§ 9.42. Deadly Force to Protect Property
A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using (non-deadly) force against the other
under Section 9.41 (defense against trespass); AND
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is
immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery,
aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the
nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary,
robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with
the property; AND
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means;
or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or
property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or
serious bodily injury."
"§§ 9.44. Use of Device to Protect Property
The justification afforded by Sections 9.41 and 9.43 applies to the use of a
device to protect land or tangible, movable property if:
(1) the device is NOT designed to cause, or known by the actor to create a
substantial risk of causing, death or serious bodily injury; AND
(2) use of the device is reasonable under all the circumstances as the actor
reasonably believes them to be when he installs the device."
You should read section 9.42 again, very carefully this time. You cannot use
deadly force, even at night, unless "the land or property cannot be protected
or recovered by any other means" or "the use of force other than deadly force
to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to
a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury."
I rest my case.
Robert Bills
KG6LMV
Orange County CA
http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
http://www.RobertBills.com
I read the all of the relavant statutes in the Texas Penal Code, which is NOT
significantly different from California law as to what is required to justify
the use of force/deadly force for protection of property:
"§§ 9.42. Deadly Force to Protect Property
A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using (non-deadly) force against the other
under Section 9.41 (defense against trespass); AND
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is
immediately necessary:
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery,
aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the
nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary,
robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with
the property; AND
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means;
or
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or
property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or
serious bodily injury."
"§§ 9.44. Use of Device to Protect Property
The justification afforded by Sections 9.41 and 9.43 applies to the use of a
device to protect land or tangible, movable property if:
(1) the device is NOT designed to cause, or known by the actor to create a
substantial risk of causing, death or serious bodily injury; AND
(2) use of the device is reasonable under all the circumstances as the actor
reasonably believes them to be when he installs the device."
You should read section 9.42 again, very carefully this time. You cannot use
deadly force, even at night, unless "the land or property cannot be protected
or recovered by any other means" or "the use of force other than deadly force
to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to
a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury."
I rest my case.
Robert Bills
KG6LMV
Orange County CA
http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
http://www.RobertBills.com
08-26-2003, 03:49 PM
#142
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Jeep Booby Traps Help
A big difference is we in Kalifornia have the drag their dead body
inside our homes.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Robert Bills wrote:
>
> I read the all of the relavant statutes in the Texas Penal Code, which is NOT
> significantly different from California law as to what is required to justify
> the use of force/deadly force for protection of property:
>
> "§§ 9.42. Deadly Force to Protect Property
> A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
> tangible, movable property:
> (1) if he would be justified in using (non-deadly) force against the other
> under Section 9.41 (defense against trespass); AND
> (2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is
> immediately necessary:
> (A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery,
> aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the
> nighttime; or
> (B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary,
> robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with
> the property; AND
> (3) he reasonably believes that:
> (A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means;
> or
> (B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or
> property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or
> serious bodily injury."
>
> "§§ 9.44. Use of Device to Protect Property
> The justification afforded by Sections 9.41 and 9.43 applies to the use of a
> device to protect land or tangible, movable property if:
> (1) the device is NOT designed to cause, or known by the actor to create a
> substantial risk of causing, death or serious bodily injury; AND
> (2) use of the device is reasonable under all the circumstances as the actor
> reasonably believes them to be when he installs the device."
>
> You should read section 9.42 again, very carefully this time. You cannot use
> deadly force, even at night, unless "the land or property cannot be protected
> or recovered by any other means" or "the use of force other than deadly force
> to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to
> a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury."
>
> I rest my case.
>
> Robert Bills
> KG6LMV
> Orange County CA
>
> http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
> http://www.RobertBills.com
inside our homes.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Robert Bills wrote:
>
> I read the all of the relavant statutes in the Texas Penal Code, which is NOT
> significantly different from California law as to what is required to justify
> the use of force/deadly force for protection of property:
>
> "§§ 9.42. Deadly Force to Protect Property
> A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
> tangible, movable property:
> (1) if he would be justified in using (non-deadly) force against the other
> under Section 9.41 (defense against trespass); AND
> (2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is
> immediately necessary:
> (A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery,
> aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the
> nighttime; or
> (B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary,
> robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with
> the property; AND
> (3) he reasonably believes that:
> (A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means;
> or
> (B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or
> property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or
> serious bodily injury."
>
> "§§ 9.44. Use of Device to Protect Property
> The justification afforded by Sections 9.41 and 9.43 applies to the use of a
> device to protect land or tangible, movable property if:
> (1) the device is NOT designed to cause, or known by the actor to create a
> substantial risk of causing, death or serious bodily injury; AND
> (2) use of the device is reasonable under all the circumstances as the actor
> reasonably believes them to be when he installs the device."
>
> You should read section 9.42 again, very carefully this time. You cannot use
> deadly force, even at night, unless "the land or property cannot be protected
> or recovered by any other means" or "the use of force other than deadly force
> to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to
> a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury."
>
> I rest my case.
>
> Robert Bills
> KG6LMV
> Orange County CA
>
> http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
> http://www.RobertBills.com
08-26-2003, 03:49 PM
#143
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Jeep Booby Traps Help
A big difference is we in Kalifornia have the drag their dead body
inside our homes.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Robert Bills wrote:
>
> I read the all of the relavant statutes in the Texas Penal Code, which is NOT
> significantly different from California law as to what is required to justify
> the use of force/deadly force for protection of property:
>
> "§§ 9.42. Deadly Force to Protect Property
> A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
> tangible, movable property:
> (1) if he would be justified in using (non-deadly) force against the other
> under Section 9.41 (defense against trespass); AND
> (2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is
> immediately necessary:
> (A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery,
> aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the
> nighttime; or
> (B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary,
> robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with
> the property; AND
> (3) he reasonably believes that:
> (A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means;
> or
> (B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or
> property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or
> serious bodily injury."
>
> "§§ 9.44. Use of Device to Protect Property
> The justification afforded by Sections 9.41 and 9.43 applies to the use of a
> device to protect land or tangible, movable property if:
> (1) the device is NOT designed to cause, or known by the actor to create a
> substantial risk of causing, death or serious bodily injury; AND
> (2) use of the device is reasonable under all the circumstances as the actor
> reasonably believes them to be when he installs the device."
>
> You should read section 9.42 again, very carefully this time. You cannot use
> deadly force, even at night, unless "the land or property cannot be protected
> or recovered by any other means" or "the use of force other than deadly force
> to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to
> a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury."
>
> I rest my case.
>
> Robert Bills
> KG6LMV
> Orange County CA
>
> http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
> http://www.RobertBills.com
inside our homes.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Robert Bills wrote:
>
> I read the all of the relavant statutes in the Texas Penal Code, which is NOT
> significantly different from California law as to what is required to justify
> the use of force/deadly force for protection of property:
>
> "§§ 9.42. Deadly Force to Protect Property
> A person is justified in using deadly force against another to protect land or
> tangible, movable property:
> (1) if he would be justified in using (non-deadly) force against the other
> under Section 9.41 (defense against trespass); AND
> (2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is
> immediately necessary:
> (A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary, robbery,
> aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or criminal mischief during the
> nighttime; or
> (B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after committing burglary,
> robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the nighttime from escaping with
> the property; AND
> (3) he reasonably believes that:
> (A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any other means;
> or
> (B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or
> property would expose the actor or another to a substantial risk of death or
> serious bodily injury."
>
> "§§ 9.44. Use of Device to Protect Property
> The justification afforded by Sections 9.41 and 9.43 applies to the use of a
> device to protect land or tangible, movable property if:
> (1) the device is NOT designed to cause, or known by the actor to create a
> substantial risk of causing, death or serious bodily injury; AND
> (2) use of the device is reasonable under all the circumstances as the actor
> reasonably believes them to be when he installs the device."
>
> You should read section 9.42 again, very carefully this time. You cannot use
> deadly force, even at night, unless "the land or property cannot be protected
> or recovered by any other means" or "the use of force other than deadly force
> to protect or recover the land or property would expose the actor or another to
> a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury."
>
> I rest my case.
>
> Robert Bills
> KG6LMV
> Orange County CA
>
> http://www.outdoorwire.com/4x4/jeep/...p-l/billsr.htm
> http://www.RobertBills.com
08-26-2003, 04:06 PM
#144
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Jeep Booby Traps Help
"Jeepers" <moomesa@INVALIDfnbnet.net> wrote in message
news:moomesa-59F500.10484925082003@corp.newsfeeds.com...
: In article <JVp2b.254585$o%2.116759@sccrnsc02>, kevin <kevin@el.net>
: wrote:
:
: > Anyone got any good ideas for booby traps around my jeep. S
:
: A prison term for you will be the answer. Don't do it. Buy a video
: camera.
actually this is a great idea. one of my co-workers installed a camcorder
in his SUV that pointed to his back door because his house was getting
broken in to often. caught his neighbor breaking into is back door, the guy
even looked right at the camera as he went inside. called the cops had them
view the video and while the cop was watching the tape the neighbor came out
to check his mailbox (even though the mail doesn't come till three hours
later) said to the cop 'that's him right there' the cop after watching the
video agreed it was the same guy and arrested him on the spot...just so
happens he had priors and VOP...
08-26-2003, 04:06 PM
#145
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Jeep Booby Traps Help
"Jeepers" <moomesa@INVALIDfnbnet.net> wrote in message
news:moomesa-59F500.10484925082003@corp.newsfeeds.com...
: In article <JVp2b.254585$o%2.116759@sccrnsc02>, kevin <kevin@el.net>
: wrote:
:
: > Anyone got any good ideas for booby traps around my jeep. S
:
: A prison term for you will be the answer. Don't do it. Buy a video
: camera.
actually this is a great idea. one of my co-workers installed a camcorder
in his SUV that pointed to his back door because his house was getting
broken in to often. caught his neighbor breaking into is back door, the guy
even looked right at the camera as he went inside. called the cops had them
view the video and while the cop was watching the tape the neighbor came out
to check his mailbox (even though the mail doesn't come till three hours
later) said to the cop 'that's him right there' the cop after watching the
video agreed it was the same guy and arrested him on the spot...just so
happens he had priors and VOP...
08-26-2003, 04:13 PM
#146
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Jeep Booby Traps Help
In article <20030826154238.15843.00000493@mb-m12.aol.com>,
rdbillsjr@aol.comxxxxxxxx (Robert Bills) wrote:
> You should read section 9.42 again, very carefully this time.
> You cannot use deadly force, even at night, unless "the land or property cannot be
> protected or recovered by any other means"
Exactly what other way is there to protect or recover property? Shout at
them? Wave your hands furiously? Shine a flashlight at them? WTF?
> or "the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or
> property would expose the actor or another
> to
> a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury."
>
> I rest my case.
As a CHL holder in Texas I can assure you, you are mistaken.
TAKE IT TO TX.GUNS
(I crossposted anyway.)
If you don't, it shows you don't really know and are afraid to debate it
with folks who know.
Here's the law. Pay close attention to TxPC §9.42(2)(A) and (B)...
SUBCHAPTER D. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY
§ 9.42. Deadly Force to Protect Property
A person is justified
in using deadly force
against another
to protect
land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under
Section 9.41;
and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is
immediately necessary:
[BEGIN PART YOU ARE NOT GETTING]
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary,
robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or
criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after
committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the
nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any
other means; or
[END PART YOU ARE NOT GETTING]
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover
the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial
risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by
Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
rdbillsjr@aol.comxxxxxxxx (Robert Bills) wrote:
> You should read section 9.42 again, very carefully this time.
> You cannot use deadly force, even at night, unless "the land or property cannot be
> protected or recovered by any other means"
Exactly what other way is there to protect or recover property? Shout at
them? Wave your hands furiously? Shine a flashlight at them? WTF?
> or "the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or
> property would expose the actor or another
> to
> a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury."
>
> I rest my case.
As a CHL holder in Texas I can assure you, you are mistaken.
TAKE IT TO TX.GUNS
(I crossposted anyway.)
If you don't, it shows you don't really know and are afraid to debate it
with folks who know.
Here's the law. Pay close attention to TxPC §9.42(2)(A) and (B)...
SUBCHAPTER D. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY
§ 9.42. Deadly Force to Protect Property
A person is justified
in using deadly force
against another
to protect
land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under
Section 9.41;
and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is
immediately necessary:
[BEGIN PART YOU ARE NOT GETTING]
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary,
robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or
criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after
committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the
nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any
other means; or
[END PART YOU ARE NOT GETTING]
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover
the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial
risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by
Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
08-26-2003, 04:13 PM
#147
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Jeep Booby Traps Help
In article <20030826154238.15843.00000493@mb-m12.aol.com>,
rdbillsjr@aol.comxxxxxxxx (Robert Bills) wrote:
> You should read section 9.42 again, very carefully this time.
> You cannot use deadly force, even at night, unless "the land or property cannot be
> protected or recovered by any other means"
Exactly what other way is there to protect or recover property? Shout at
them? Wave your hands furiously? Shine a flashlight at them? WTF?
> or "the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or
> property would expose the actor or another
> to
> a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury."
>
> I rest my case.
As a CHL holder in Texas I can assure you, you are mistaken.
TAKE IT TO TX.GUNS
(I crossposted anyway.)
If you don't, it shows you don't really know and are afraid to debate it
with folks who know.
Here's the law. Pay close attention to TxPC §9.42(2)(A) and (B)...
SUBCHAPTER D. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY
§ 9.42. Deadly Force to Protect Property
A person is justified
in using deadly force
against another
to protect
land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under
Section 9.41;
and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is
immediately necessary:
[BEGIN PART YOU ARE NOT GETTING]
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary,
robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or
criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after
committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the
nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any
other means; or
[END PART YOU ARE NOT GETTING]
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover
the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial
risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by
Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
rdbillsjr@aol.comxxxxxxxx (Robert Bills) wrote:
> You should read section 9.42 again, very carefully this time.
> You cannot use deadly force, even at night, unless "the land or property cannot be
> protected or recovered by any other means"
Exactly what other way is there to protect or recover property? Shout at
them? Wave your hands furiously? Shine a flashlight at them? WTF?
> or "the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover the land or
> property would expose the actor or another
> to
> a substantial risk of death or serious bodily injury."
>
> I rest my case.
As a CHL holder in Texas I can assure you, you are mistaken.
TAKE IT TO TX.GUNS
(I crossposted anyway.)
If you don't, it shows you don't really know and are afraid to debate it
with folks who know.
Here's the law. Pay close attention to TxPC §9.42(2)(A) and (B)...
SUBCHAPTER D. PROTECTION OF PROPERTY
§ 9.42. Deadly Force to Protect Property
A person is justified
in using deadly force
against another
to protect
land or tangible, movable property:
(1) if he would be justified in using force against the other under
Section 9.41;
and
(2) when and to the degree he reasonably believes the deadly force is
immediately necessary:
[BEGIN PART YOU ARE NOT GETTING]
(A) to prevent the other's imminent commission of arson, burglary,
robbery, aggravated robbery, theft during the nighttime, or
criminal mischief during the nighttime; or
(B) to prevent the other who is fleeing immediately after
committing burglary, robbery, aggravated robbery, or theft during the
nighttime from escaping with the property; and
(3) he reasonably believes that:
(A) the land or property cannot be protected or recovered by any
other means; or
[END PART YOU ARE NOT GETTING]
(B) the use of force other than deadly force to protect or recover
the land or property would expose the actor or another to a substantial
risk of death or serious bodily injury.
Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., p. 883, ch. 399, § 1, eff. Jan. 1, 1974. Amended by
Acts 1993, 73rd Leg., ch. 900, § 1.01, eff. Sept. 1, 1994.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
08-26-2003, 04:37 PM
#148
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Jeep Booby Traps Help
Please don't crosspost, as only inconsiderate ******** do.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Jeepers wrote:
><Snip>
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Jeepers wrote:
><Snip>
08-26-2003, 04:37 PM
#149
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Jeep Booby Traps Help
Please don't crosspost, as only inconsiderate ******** do.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Jeepers wrote:
><Snip>
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
Jeepers wrote:
><Snip>
08-26-2003, 04:39 PM
#150
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Jeep Booby Traps Help
In article <3F4BC473.39F0EEF6@***.net>,
L.W.(ßill) ------ III <----------@***.net> wrote:
> Please don't crosspost, as only inconsiderate ******** do.
You are correct. My bad. What's your solution?
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
L.W.(ßill) ------ III <----------@***.net> wrote:
> Please don't crosspost, as only inconsiderate ******** do.
You are correct. My bad. What's your solution?
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
