Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-21-2008, 07:35 PM
 
2,838 posts, read 3,482,204 times
Reputation: 1406

Advertisements

No, if you build an addition without a permit, your insurance will not cover it; and you will be sued for damages.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-21-2008, 07:36 PM
 
Location: Jonquil City (aka Smyrna) Georgia- by Atlanta
16,259 posts, read 24,653,235 times
Reputation: 3587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomander View Post
If you mean "ANYTHING" as in things that can be shown to reasonably and logically endanger someone else, then no. If you mean so people can push around their busy body little opinions as to what they claim is for the common good, Absolutely.

The problem is there are a lot of people who think very highly of their own claims of the common good when it really is just a personal demand to fit their wants.

Individual rights are in the best interest of the common good.
Sometimes they are and sometimes they are not. The Framers knew that when the enumerated the Bill of Rights. They knew things like freedom of speech, the right to bear arms, freedom of the press and freedom of religion were necessary to the functioning of the democracy they created. However even the Framers, many of whom were farmers, knew that other rights- such as property rights- were not absolute- which is why they chose not to enumerate them. They did not wish to go back home from Philadephia and find that they could not farm because the landowner upstream decided to dam off the water and keep it all for his land. They knew what they were doing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2008, 07:38 PM
 
13,053 posts, read 12,899,488 times
Reputation: 2618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wendell Phillips View Post
No, that's certainly not true. Who is to determine "the spirit" in which law is written? To say that dissent shoud be subject to mob rule is to deny the law; for it is not public opinion that governs, it is the law.
Who? Why those who wrote them.

Laws are not written for the sake of law. Laws mean nothing if that is their design. Laws are written with an intent, a "spirit". It is the lawyer who seeks to see laws as merely words to be manipulated as one sees fit. Property rights are not subject to law, they are a protection and the law must abide within that protection. If not, then none of the laws mean anything, none of them stand for anything, they are as worthless as the paper they are written on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2008, 07:43 PM
 
2,838 posts, read 3,482,204 times
Reputation: 1406
No, all property rights exist only by law. And as far as the law being meaningless, that is a matter for the courts to determine.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2008, 07:46 PM
 
2,838 posts, read 3,482,204 times
Reputation: 1406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nomander View Post
Who? Why those who wrote them.

Laws are not written for the sake of law. Laws mean nothing if that is their design. Laws are written with an intent, a "spirit". It is the lawyer who seeks to see laws as merely words to be manipulated as one sees fit. Property rights are not subject to law, they are a protection and the law must abide within that protection. If not, then none of the laws mean anything, none of them stand for anything, they are as worthless as the paper they are written on.

Name one property right that is not subject to law.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2008, 07:50 PM
 
13,053 posts, read 12,899,488 times
Reputation: 2618
Quote:
Originally Posted by KevK View Post
Sometimes they are and sometimes they are not. The Framers knew that when the enumerated the Bill of Rights. They knew things like freedom of speech, the right to bear arms, freedom of the press and freedom of religion were necessary to the functioning of the democracy they created. However even the Framers, many of whom were farmers, knew that other rights- such as property rights- were not absolute- which is why they chose not to enumerate them. They did not wish to go back home from Philadephia and find that they could not farm because the landowner upstream decided to dam off the water and keep it all for his land. They knew what they were doing.
Yes, there are some exceptions. Endangerment is one. The example you give is a reasonable one as well, yet that isn't the issue most people get upset about concerning property rights.

What will be an issue is forcing people to live closer to the city through extreme zoning conditions, allowing majority opinoin in localities to dictate property rights (that color house is bad, the lawn isn't mowed, etc..).

The issue isn't the reasonable, it will merely be used to champion change that will afford the unreasonable. Which is done with most issues like these.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2008, 07:50 PM
 
19,198 posts, read 31,366,503 times
Reputation: 4013
Quite humorous. The wild mustangs defending their free and unfettered range over the open prairie. With somebody else's taxes maintaining it for them...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-21-2008, 08:01 PM
 
13,053 posts, read 12,899,488 times
Reputation: 2618
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wendell Phillips View Post
No, all property rights exist only by law. And as far as the law being meaningless, that is a matter for the courts to determine.
Ok, maybe we have our concepts mixed up. You are arguing a point of legal construct. That is, a law is what gives us are rights, all laws are subject to change. Is that what you mean?

What I am getting as is that laws have a purpose and reason. When the law becomes superior to the reason for the law, the law is irrelevant. I don't have a book to quote you as a "matter of law" or "procedure", but merely a fact of life and people. That is, man does not serve law, law serves man. The moment man is forced to serve law, law becomes irrelevant and this is why you have revolutions.

I am saying that if individual rights mean nothing other than simply a law to be changed contrary to its purpose, then I say as many others do, and it can even be reasoned by the founders own position that the law means nothing and will be subject to a the removal of its tyrannical nature. The pen may be perceived mightier than the sword, but a pen is useless without a hand to use it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2008, 08:15 AM
 
Location: Tampa
3,982 posts, read 10,425,293 times
Reputation: 1200
I didn't mean to focus only on property rights.

What about the saggy pants laws for example? While I don't really like looking at the guys walking around in them (girls i do like ), that is there right.

Or is it interfering with other peoples right to enjoy the scenery undie free?

In fact, what about nude beaches? why arent all the beaches clothing optional?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-22-2008, 08:47 AM
 
502 posts, read 1,062,850 times
Reputation: 329
Quote:
Originally Posted by bbkaren View Post
Right now, my right to enjoy the fruits of my labor, is curtailed by the fact that the govt takes a huge chunk of my money to pay for the "common good" of people who need help...
D'you mean Iraqis?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top