Morning Links

Friday, December 3rd, 2010
Digg it |  reddit |  del.icio.us |  Fark

43 Responses to “Morning Links”

  1. #1 |  dsmallwood | 

    Man to be Evicted from Camper

    i wonder if its because its a structure that doesn’t meet code …

    so if he set up a tent and said he was camping, would THAT be ok?
    i wonder if camping is legal?

  2. #2 |  MRK | 

    A penis story followed by a beaver story, eh?

  3. #3 |  damaged justice | 

    if we can’t keep illicit drugs out of the prisons, how in the hell does anyone expect us to eradicate them from society at large?

    By making society at large more like a prison.

  4. #4 |  M | 

    Wag More Dogs should just go get some high schoolers to tag her mural with those two lines. Cost would be four cans of spray paint instead of lawyer fees or $7k to pay her professional mural painter. They didn’t say it had to be nice.

  5. #5 |  Mattocracy | 

    “Gov. Bob McDonnel’s state agencies he’s targeting for elimination? The Freedom of Information Advisory Council.”

    Fuck. When government reduction goes wrong…

  6. #6 |  SJE | 

    VA doesn’t need a freedom of information advisory council, because whatever it advises will be ignored by the government and the police.

  7. #7 |  Marty | 

    #1
    this was my thoughts, exactly. we stayed in our tent for 6 weeks while we finished our house… I would’ve stroked if a bureaucrat came out here and told me I had to move off my land because my tent didn’t have running water or electricity!

  8. #8 |  Highway | 

    That’s what I was thinking SJE…

    “We can get rid of those guys, we never listen to them anyway!”

  9. #9 |  DaveG | 

    Is the beaver story from the files of police squad? RIP Leslie Nielsen

  10. #10 |  MDGuy | 

    Fisette says that while the Wag More Dogs case “is being cast as free speech issue,” he sees it as “a sign regulation issue.”

    “If you ask me, as one board member, I kind of like murals, and as a dog owner and dog lover, I like the mural,” he says. “But I also have a responsibility to ensure that what allows me to allow this mural will allow me to allow the next one on another business.”

    How about you allow all business owners to put whatever they want on their places of business because it’s their fucking property to do with as they please. What a pompous ass.

  11. #11 |  K9kevlar | 

    What does it cost to not have utilities? I pay $29 a month to NOT use gas during the summer. I think it is $35 a month to not use electricity.

  12. #12 |  Highway | 

    How about you allow all business owners to put whatever they want on their places of business because it’s their fucking property to do with as they please. What a pompous ass.

    But they might put up something that’s *ugly!* We can’t have something on your property that might have any effect on my Yertle the Turtle kingdom!

  13. #13 |  Yizmo Gizmo | 

    “COLUMBUS, Ind. — A former central Indiana police officer pleaded guilty to purposefully filing a false report linking illegal drugs found at a jail to the wrong prisoner.Former Columbus Officer Matthew Stephenson, 28, admitted to a felony charge of official misconduct during a Bartholomew County court hearing on Monday.The Republic reported that prosecutors dropped charges of conspiracy to deal cocaine and obstruction of justice in a plea deal.”

    Inmates, warden, guards, cops.
    Is there any real distinction anymore? Oh yeah, it’s the inmates’
    behavior that is straight and narrow.

  14. #14 |  J sub D | 

    County may evict an Indiana man from his own land because his trailer doesn’t have sewer or running water.

    From the comments in the linked article –

    Yeah he’s got 36 acres and he’s a health hazard? If he goes to the bathroom on his 36 acres he’s posing a health threat to the whole county? He’s not posing a health risk to anyone.If he simply digs a little hole and takes his dump there and then covers it up, all will be fine. After all it is 36 acres we’re talking about.

    I wonder how many shit wherever they stand cows he’d be allowed to own on 36 acres before it was considered a “health hazard”.

  15. #15 |  Matt | 

    A penis story followed by a beaver story, eh?

    A few years ago at my company we had a client named Cox and another (unrelated) client named Beaver. Everybody went nuts, so to speak.

    It was great to see a bunch of professional, middle age people revert to their grade school mentalities for a few days. I don’t know if there’s such thing as an inner child, but there’s definitely an inner-adolescent.

  16. #16 |  J sub D | 

    I think the lesson from this story is that if we can’t keep illicit drugs out of the prisons, how in the hell does anyone expect us to eradicate them from society at large?

    Cynical (and liberty loving) people have been pointing this out for decades. Drug warriors and the public that enables them refuse to listen. They won’t even respond because this points out what prohibition does to law enforcement.

  17. #17 |  Michael | 

    dsmallwood & K9kevlar,

    How can the county expect Thompson to have sewer or running water? He’s living in a trailer meant to be pulled by a motor vehicle and regulated by the state.

    I would bet that with a little digging, we’ll find someone with deep pockets connected to the county that wants the county to take the land on his behalf.

  18. #18 |  Robert | 

    “How about you allow all business owners to put whatever they want on their places of business because it’s their fucking property to do with as they please.”

    Because then he would be out of a job. Duh.

  19. #19 |  Bob | 

    Zoning violations:

    Wag more dogs should just paint in the lines themselves. Cost: 10 bucks. Problem solved.

    The reason local jurisdictions have sign ordinances like this is because not every town wants to look like Las Vegas. Sure, the doggie mural is cute, but it is a sign. If you allow that one, you must allow the giant ALLSTATE mural on the building next door.

    Guy in trailer. On my property in nowhere, Missouri there is only one rule: “Each dwelling in an unincorporated area must have a well and a septic system”.

    Aside form that, I can build whatever the hell I want. No permit, no inspection, nothing. It’s awesome!

    The reason for this rule is because engineers have determined that the area cannot absorb much human waste. Ever hear of Cholera? No? That’s because it’s been virtually eliminated in the US because of rules like this. Engineers in the US have learned the hard way that areas that lack municipal water supplies must also be careful of the handling of human waste.

    Oh hey! Look! A Cholera epidemic has killed 1817 people since mid-october in Haiti. While this epidemic may have been brought in, it demonstrates how fast the disease can spread when clean water and sanitation are not readily available.

    A common thread in the comments is to point out that animals shit on the ground. True, but animals are self limiting. Animals like Rabbits have minimally toxic waste that converts to fertilizer right away. Carnivores like Bears and Bobcats are self limiting in that they are territorial. Animals like Cows that can be concentrated by humans into small areas are regulated because of that.

    A Well and a septic system are high cost items to be sure. But low cost alternatives are usually offered on rural properties, Out houses are allowed in most areas, some require a concrete holding tank (That must be emptied). Temporary solutions like Porta Potties are also good for temporary use (Like if you’re building a house)

  20. #20 |  K9kevlar | 

    Bob if you don’t want cholera stay the fuck off the guy’s property.

  21. #21 |  perlhaqr | 

    K9kevlar: I would normally agree with you, but there is also the issue of externalities to be considered. (In general, probably not in this case, because cholera also requires concentration, and there’s no way this one guy is going to generate enough human waste for run-off to be an issue.)

    But the issue of needing to consider the possible impact of your waste leaving your property does need to be considered alongside “it’s my property”.

  22. #22 |  random guy | 

    “If you allow that one, you must allow the giant ALLSTATE mural on the building next door.”

    Um, bob, that is exactly what the commenters here are arguing. That the owner of the property has the right to put up whatever signs they want. This is only a bad thing if you’ve assume that the arbitrary rules of the city council are somehow more important than the rights of property owners.

    The one guy on 36 acres posses minimal threat to himself and none to anyone else. The same engineers that draft the rules you are talking about realize these exceptions, but the health codes are written and enforced by bureaucrats. The good ones try to get expert input but the bad ones ignore all semblance of reason and try to apply rules where they are logically unnecessary.

    Please dial down the fear factor a bit, its not like sewage systems are natural occurring. Hunter gathers managed without them for many thousands of years. Epidemics require a concentrated population and unsanitary conditions, like recently in Haiti. Clearly the justification for such systems does not logically apply in this situation. Pretending it does is just a way to abandon reason and let the regulators fuck with people.

  23. #23 |  JThompson | 

    @perlhaqr: Whether it can leave his property kinda depends on his property and what’s on his property. If it’s clay it isn’t going to be able to absorb much before it starts running off. If he’s shitting beside a creek it doesn’t matter what kind of ground it is, it’s leaving his property.

    @random: If there’s a population center downstream from where his property runs off, it’s every bit of their business. Unless he’s living off of bottled water, I’m guessing there’s some kind of water source nearby.
    Sewage systems aren’t naturally occurring, we created them because we finally figured out the “Let everyone shit in the same water we drink out of” method of waste control tends to spread disease.

    Demanding he pay for electricity and water is pure nonsense, though. There’s no way the lack of either can hurt anyone else.

  24. #24 |  orogeny | 

    I don’t really understand what you folks are proposing. Approximately 150,000 people live in Madison County. The law is designed to apply to all of them. Do you think that county officials should have the discretion to be able to say “This law applies to you, but not not to this other person?” Exactly how would that work? Do you think that governments shouldn’t be allowed to regulate things like this? Should all 150,000 people be allowed to dump their waste on the ground, as long as they own the ground that they are dumping on?

  25. #25 |  perlhaqr | 

    orogeny: Should all 150,000 people be allowed to dump their waste on the ground, as long as they own the ground that they are dumping on?

    If you add the condition “and they don’t allow that waste to pollute anyone else’s property” then the answer you’ll get is “yes”. As long as you’re not hurting anyone else, then yes, you should be allowed to do what you want with property you own.

  26. #26 |  Bob | 

    #25 perlhaqr

    orogeny: Should all 150,000 people be allowed to dump their waste on the ground, as long as they own the ground that they are dumping on?

    If you add the condition “and they don’t allow that waste to pollute anyone else’s property” then the answer you’ll get is “yes”. As long as you’re not hurting anyone else, then yes, you should be allowed to do what you want with property you own.

    That’s what I do. I put up a sign between my property and the adjoining creek that says. “All runoff water containing harmful bacteria must remain on property”.

    It works great!

  27. #27 |  Cyto | 

    #25 | perlhaqr |
    I think you answered your own question there. “dump their waste on the ground” and “don’t allow that waste to pollute anyone else’s property” are mutually exclusive.

  28. #28 |  Meister574 | 

    I thought the small penis rule was this lift you put on your pickup truck is inversely proportional to your penis size (unless you actually are a monster truck driver).

  29. #29 |  Bob | 

    #28 Meister574

    I thought the small penis rule was this lift you put on your pickup truck is inversely proportional to your penis size (unless you actually are a monster truck driver).

    Dude, you need a huge lift so the Truck Nutz don’t drag on the ground.

    The alternative is to put laughably small Truck Nutz on your truck. And that just ain’t right!

    Proper Truck Nutz are made from two basketballs inside a synthetic leather pouch. You need an 8″ lift to give them adequate clearance.

    It ain’t easy being a Redneck.

  30. #30 |  Joe | 

    You have to be a giant to appreciate giant beaver.

  31. #31 |  Joe | 

    The other side of things.

    Often this site has police excesses (and rightly so) but here is an example of what cops also have to face.

  32. #32 |  EH | 

    Joe: Sad as that story is, it’s extremely rare.

  33. #33 |  Pete | 

    Joe #31 – sad that the guy was shot and killed, and that the other guy was too (whether he did it himself or it was done to him), but none of that article chain actually said why it happened – why they had an encounter (traffic stop? crazy guy?), what happened during that encounter to escalate it (asshole cop? crazy guy?) or what.

    If it’s a crazy guy, then that’s not an example of what cops have to face, that’s an example of what people might have to face. If he was disturbed and intent on hurting someone, he might have never encountered that trooper and then pulled up to a gas station to open fire on the customers and staff, or something.

    The point is, many of the ‘risks’ that law enforcement claim make them heroes are born by the populace as well. Violent drug dealers have to live somewhere, shop somewhere, travel where they are wont. A great many of the ‘risks’ the police powers in this country are exposed to are a direct result of the policies of this country. Individually I think it’s sad when a wife won’t ever see her LEO husband again, etc, but institutionally they are supporting the problems they claim as crosses they bear.

  34. #34 |  Joe | 

    EH, cops getting shot at traffic stops is not common but I would hesitate to say it is “extremely rare.”

  35. #35 |  Joe | 

    EH, cops getting shot at traffic stops is not common but I would hesitate to say it is “extremely rare.”

  36. #36 |  Monica | 

    More fun with zoning laws: County may evict an Indiana man from his own land because his trailer doesn’t have sewer or running water

    When all else fails, bring in the Code Nazis.

  37. #37 |  Brian | 

    @26 Bob

    Yes, because all of our drinking water comes straight from the streams, without the inclusion of anything like chlorine in the process.

    Just to make sure I understand your “logic”, one man on 36 acres is a health threat, but all of the wildlife on the property defecating without a sewer system is not?

  38. #38 |  David | 

    Bob: If Mr. Thompson decided to keep horses on his 36 acres – not that many, maybe three or four, properly fenced in – would that be legal?

    Follow-up question: Have you ever seen just how much shit a horse produces?

  39. #39 |  C. S. P. Schofield | 

    Thoughts on the doggie mural;

    1) I may be alone here, but by me? That’s ugly. I’m sick to the teeth of cutsey-poo cartoon critters. Foo.

    2) That said, I think the woman has more right to put the mural up than the local zoning-fascists have to tell her to tae it down. I think the distinction between “commercial speech” and other kinds is bogus, regardless of what the Supreme Court has said.

    3) This probably wouldn’t work in practice, but what if we said “Business signs limited by zoning restrictions are protected by law from vandalism. Other signs are allowed under the First Amendment, but are NOT protected. If somebody spraypaints over them because they don’t like them – or because they are adolescent baboons with no manners – tough.”

  40. #40 |  Pete | 

    C.S.P. #39, how does that willy-nilly spray-painting of signs fit in with a reasonable property rights theory that vests any power in an owner’s ownership?

  41. #41 |  Bob | 

    #38 David

    Bob: If Mr. Thompson decided to keep horses on his 36 acres – not that many, maybe three or four, properly fenced in – would that be legal?

    Follow-up question: Have you ever seen just how much shit a horse produces?

    Biology lesson: Horses are herbivores with long digestive tracts. Their shit is essentially ready made fertilizer. It can be easily and safely composted, and with the addition of Bone Meal, is made into a balanced fertilizer. A horse can produce more than 50 pounds of manure a day. It’s astonishing.

    The processing of human waste is far more complex, and contains far more dangerous pathogens.

    #37 Brian

    @26 Bob

    Yes, because all of our drinking water comes straight from the streams, without the inclusion of anything like chlorine in the process.

    Just to make sure I understand your “logic”, one man on 36 acres is a health threat, but all of the wildlife on the property defecating without a sewer system is not?

    I don’t know where you get your information, but it’s wrong. Rural water supplies generally come from wells, and the water is not processed. It is important in rural areas to NOT allow the ground water to be contaminated.

    Yes, all the wildlife crapping on his 36 acres is perfectly safe, this is because wildlife is self limiting. It’s either being hunted, is small, does not generate toxic shit, or is territorial. Humans and domesticated animals don’t follow these natural rules, and as such, need to be regulated to protect ground water supplies.

    No, ONE GUY crapping in the woods is not a health hazard. The entire county crapping in the woods, however, would be a total fucking disaster. If you let this guy off the hook for well and septic, you have to let everyone off the hook for well and septic. A few decades later? Cholera epidemics.

  42. #42 |  Bob | 

    Because I have no interest in mindlessly supporting what could be bullshit zoning laws, I did a little research on Dick Thompson’s property.

    It’s not is the sticks at all, it’s on a fully paved road with all the trappings of civilization. There’s a housing development right next door. Those trees you see in the video? There are about 12 houses right on the other side and it’s only 2 miles from town.

    Basically, it’s legacy farmland that’s in an area annexed by the growing town of Alexandria to the south east.

    The guy could sell this land for a small fortune (Relatively speaking) and get what he really wants… land in the middle of nowhere where he can live with his animals in peace.

    Just because you own land doesn’t mean you’re the sole master of it. No one lives in a vacuum. There are other people around. You have to adjust and compromise to that.

  43. #43 |  C. S. P. Schofield | 

    Pete,

    I’m not claiming that my idea is in perfect accord with property rights. I frankly doubt it would work worth a damn in the real world anyway, but wanted to see if I could spark some ideas other than “trust in the taste and sense of the local government” and “let the owner of a property do whatever they damn please”; both seem to me to be flawed.

    Anybody else got any third ways?

Leave a Reply