To Protect and to Serve II

No, city workers doing their job tending to neglected properties that are abandoned/neglected. He lives in the city in close proximity to neighbors who are unreasonably affected.

If he wants to live as a recluse in an unkempt property he can move to a rural area and do so affecting no one.
How does this guy not cutting his grass affect you?

And why do you want to violate their property rights and cast them out of the neighborhood the chose?

You don't use the brute force of govt or violate their rights or use coercion to get people to act the way you want them to act in a free society.
 
That was in response to:



Obviously, several juries disagreed.
Lol you might want to educate yourself on that ruling. They served time in federal prison anyway. The only charge that was deadlocked was the first degree murder because 1 crazy juror refused to budge no matter what. Rocky Houston and his brother are nutjobs who believed the FBI was spying on them thru their TV

It’s amazing that you believe it’s ok to shoot and kill someone who is legally doing their job
 
  • Like
Reactions: UT_Dutchman
The response by the city for violating a petty azz ordinance was to trespass on his property with landscapers.

You guys unknowingly open the door to all kinds of govt intervention when you don't see anything wrong with this.

What happened to "my property, my choice"?
Someone doesn’t understand property laws either. Even private ones. Jesus
 
Again, let's be clear... you have no issue with a petty azz ordinance leading to the city being able to encroach on your property and make modifications to your property?
That’s part of the agreement that you make when you buy property inside a city. You follow their ordinances. You can’t abandon your property inside a neighborhood to the point that snakes and rats and diseases would breed there. On top of that even if the law WAS “unjust” you can’t shoot someone on your property just because they are there
 
That’s part of the agreement that you make when you buy property inside a city. You follow their ordinances. You can’t abandon your property inside a neighborhood to the point that snakes and rats and diseases would breed there. On top of that even if the law WAS “unjust” you can’t shoot someone on your property just because they are there
This x1000000
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
That’s part of the agreement that you make when you buy property inside a city. You follow their ordinances. You can’t abandon your property inside a neighborhood to the point that snakes and rats and diseases would breed there. On top of that even if the law WAS “unjust” you can’t shoot someone on your property just because they are there
So as a matter of public health, the govt has the right to encroach on your property?
How much further can the govt go with regards to public health?
 
How does this guy not cutting his grass affect you?

And why do you want to violate their property rights and cast them out of the neighborhood the chose?

You don't use the brute force of govt or violate their rights or use coercion to get people to act the way you want them to act in a free society.
Not cutting your grass invites mice, insects etc and artificially lowers your property values
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
So again, as a matter of public health, how far can govt go to get you to comply?
If you aren't going to do it they'll do it for you. They attempted to, he attempted to kill them for doing it after being given notice.

Again he can choose to live as a recluse, have an unkempt yard. If that's what he wants he can live in the country away from neighbors. It's all about choices, everyone is free to do as they wish until you negatively affect others. There are consequences to actions and inaction.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jp1 and Rickyvol77
So just so we are clear here.
You believe this nut had the right to shoot and kill someone on his property that hasn’t committed any violence or broke any other law?
Just so I'm clear, you believe that the city had the right to send people on his lot to mow his grass and escalate this situation to point of a swat team being deployed?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rasputin_Vol
There is a basic disconnect between we the city have rules and I the homeowner have rights.
I live in a suburb of Norfolk. We have a neighbor who will call the city when you have one blade of grass or weed over 6”. The inspector comes out and writes a ticket for city ordinance violation that comes with a $1000 a day fine if the cited problem is not resolved to their satisfaction after the deadline. She did this to several people and even reported our neighbors house as abandoned. She reported mine as abandoned when my lawnmower broke and we were waiting for it to be shipped to us. I did look into having it mowed it was robbery just like the fines. She came over and mowed my lawn, she felt bad about the report in the process she broke my fence, my sewage drain cover and ran over the end of my hose. She replaced the sewage cover.
It is a far stretch from having weeds that can grow 6” in 3 days here and raining for 2 weeks straight to being a negligent homeowner who’s property can be called a health and safety hazard.
I was trying to address the problem and she was falsifying claims of abandonment. It was the perfect storm. Does she face any consequences for false reporting? No. She’s a former council member and none of the neighbors will have anything to do with her. Yet when she calls the city they respond.
I talked with the inspector, told him the plan and he was good. He could see exactly where my lawn mowed bought the final mow. Rip. He seemed pretty unconcerned and bothered to be here. Left me his phone number and I texted him a picture of a mowed lawn. Much ado about nothing.
Maybe this guy has been harassed ad nauseum by his neighbors. It would be time to move if that was the case. That would be my solution. It wouldn’t be at the end of a gun for people who were just doing their jobs. He was literally shooting at the wrong people. If he was being needlessly harassed then there are solutions to that too. I don’t know what was in his mind. No one does.
 
Just so I'm clear, you believe that the city had the right to send people on his lot to mow his grass and escalate this situation to point of a swat team being deployed?
Yes and the city didn’t “escalate” anything. He SHOT at innocent people and tried to kill them. Geez it’s amazing how many people try to justify violent felons
 
Just so I'm clear, you believe that the city had the right to send people on his lot to mow his grass and escalate this situation to point of a swat team being deployed?
They didn't escalate anything, they just attempted to cut his grass as they asked him to do while also advising they would do it for him if he did not. He shot at them, which of those two parties was reasonable?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77
Advertisement





Back
Top