OT - Tea Party Anyone?

Suzuki Phil
Posts: 64
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 11:31 am

OT - Tea Party Anyone?

Post by Suzuki Phil »

Did anyone get to drink the tea today? Couldn't make it to my local party due to work. Looks like Foxnews had good coverage. Wish I could have participated today but I did go to the John and Ken anti-tax rally in Fullerton last month, great turn out.

SP
Dan
Posts: 1624
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 2:49 pm

Re: OT - Tea Party Anyone?

Post by Dan »

I had to work, too. I had planned on it, but my schedule is not entirely up to me.

But I see a few million of my closest friends were on hand, LOL. Hmmmmm......I wonder if they are ALL right-wing nuts???
User avatar
castle
Posts: 351
Joined: Tue Apr 14, 2009 1:35 pm
The middle number please (4): 7

Re: OT - Tea Party Anyone?

Post by castle »

Even way back here in Arkansas, we had Tea Partys. Even in the rural area I'm in we had 150 to 200 people show up. I'll find out in the paper tomarrow how many showed up at the one in Ft. Smith that's been advertized on the radio.
Dan
Posts: 1624
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 2:49 pm

Re: OT - Tea Party Anyone?

Post by Dan »

Hey, Castle! What's shakin' there, youngster?
User avatar
EZRider
Posts: 801
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:39 am

Re: OT - Tea Party Anyone?

Post by EZRider »

If you're here for an "Environmental and Land Uses Forum" and not a political blog.......

You know what to do!

EZ
Kevin
Posts: 30
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 10:23 am

Re: OT - Tea Party Anyone?

Post by Kevin »

I went to the one in Prescott AZ. It was awesome. Could have used some global warming tho. It was frikken freezing ;)

Maybe now people will start to realize that the two parties that have been in power for so long now need to go. And please don't give me that BS about how the republicans are so much different than the democrats.

Peace,

Kevin
Goldseeker
Posts: 806
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 3:31 pm

Re: OT - Tea Party Anyone?

Post by Goldseeker »

Kevin wrote:I went to the one in Prescott AZ. It was awesome. Could have used some global warming tho. It was frikken freezing ;)

Maybe now people will start to realize that the two parties that have been in power for so long now need to go. And please don't give me that BS about how the republicans are so much different than the democrats.

Peace,

Kevin

Republicrat, Demican.
Dan
Posts: 1624
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 2:49 pm

Re: OT - Tea Party Anyone?

Post by Dan »

It seems the Tea Parties were mostly from all political parties, as well as independent citizens. A large portion of the public recognizes the power of the Federal Government has gotten completely out of hand. The remainder either don't much care, or are cheering for more government power over our lives and daily decisions, private property rights, where we live, where we work, who we associate with, what we do, and what we think.

3973 is a great example of over-regulation to the point where it infringes on the rights of private property owners to do what they wish with their own land. There are many other examples in states, counties, townships, cities, and towns all across America. I didn't notice any Tea Parties when Mr Reagan, and when either of the Bushes were in office. It's just now, when Democrats own both houses of Congress and the White House that the people are beginning to decide that enough is enough. Oh, and the last time this took place? 1994, when Bill and Hillary Clinton tried to ram through socialized medicine.

Yes, Republicans have had a hand also, but when they owned both houses of Congress as well as the White House, there were not several million people protesting in the streets. However, there is a reason I left the GOP, and it's that they were headed leftward toward tyranny as the Democrats have.

My allegiance is with conservative values, as they are quite consistent with our Founders' intent for us to live free to do as we please, up to the point where our legitimate rights begin to infringe on the legitimate rights of others. Parties will do as they please. Liberalism means something very different than it did 233 years ago. It used to be a strong limitation on government power to coerce individuals to conform to what our elected officials want us to do. Today, liberalism is about giving government the power to force their desired outcomes in favor of chosen groups, not about allowing each individual to produce his own life to the best of his ability without interference. It's now about "redistributing the wealth", as Mr Obama told Joe the Plumber.
User avatar
Plays In The Dirt
Posts: 870
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 5:51 pm

Re: OT - Tea Party Anyone?

Post by Plays In The Dirt »

Dan wrote: My allegiance is with conservative values, as they are quite consistent with our Founders' intent for us to live free to do as we please, up to the point where our legitimate rights begin to infringe on the legitimate rights of others.
And herein lies the reasons there are land closures and why laws like 3973 are created, (except the 10 riders and a permit part of it which I don't agree with). When irresponsible riders begin cutting down fences and riding across other peoples property, they are infringing on the personal property rights of others and laws are created to curtail that activity. When irresponsible riders begin tearing-up and trashing the landscape, tearing-up historic areas, and disrupting the lives of those who live there, laws are created to curtail that activity.

So, in an effort to not infringe on the rights of people to recreate, OHV use areas are created, such as the locations made available on the web site I provided earlier.

So, in lieu of laws, what would you suggest as a means to control this irresponsible activity? Does the property owner go out and try and reason with them?
Dan
Posts: 1624
Joined: Sat Mar 28, 2009 2:49 pm

Re: OT - Tea Party Anyone?

Post by Dan »

I propose the California Penal Code. In particular, two sections. First is 415PC, which makes it illegal to create noise and dust which annoy other people, and the second is 602PC, which makes is expressly illegal to trespass on duly marked, identified, posted, or fenced lands. 602 also makes it expressly illegal to cut fences or damage signs on private property. Both of these laws protect landowners against PRECISELY the sort of complaints that spawned 3973. Neither of these laws infringes on the rights of OHV users of any kind, recreational or otherwise. The California Penal Code is very well considered and written, as it proscribes the activities which infringe on the rights of others, and properly defines the boundaries between conflicting individual rights.

What 3973 does is increases the rights of one private property owner to define what any other private property owner can and cannot do on his own property, how many people with whom he can associate, and under what circumstances he can associate with them. It also infringes on the rights of the public to free access to their own public lands to associate with one another and stage for OHV use, if there are more than 9 people present. It additionally conflicts directly with the superior law of the state, which is 602PC, where it requires written permission to enter private vacant and unimproved lands that are NOT MARKED, FENCED, POSTED, CULTIVATED, HOSTING LIVESTOCK, OR OTHERWISE IDENTIFIED AS PRIVATE LAND.

Here's the exact wording:

PC 602.2 - Any ordinance or resolution adopted by a county
which requires written permission to enter vacant or unimproved
private land from either the owner, the owner’s agent, or the
person in lawful possession of private land, shall not apply unless
the land is immediately adjacent and contiguous to residential
property, or enclosed by fence, or under cultivation, or posted
with signs forbidding trespass, displayed at intervals of not less
than three to a mile, along all exterior boundaries and at all roads
and trails entering the private land.

What part of that is ambiguous? How is 3973 NOT in direct contradiction to this law?
Post Reply