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.
Contempt of court is absolutely consitutional. The funny thing is that it really doesn't matter if your original charge is valid or not Btw, I am not a lawyer but I'm 100% sure in her case there are few precedents.
One last time .. there would be no contempt of court charge were it not for the a fore mentioned unconstitutional law.
As I was outside today picking up dog poops roughly the size of cantaloupes I was thinking "it's a good thing I'm a nice neighbor, taking care of this mess every day."
See, I never go in my back yard because the first mosquito who sees me rings the dinner bell for all the others in the area. My dogs are fastidious so they go in the right corner of the yard, and they never step in their own poop. My only real reason for cleaning it up every day is consideration for the neighbor on the other side of the fence. If I didn't the smell would waft over into his yard, interfering with his enjoyment of his own property.
I wish one of you guys singing the property freedom song would come move in next door. I'm sure since you are so convinced that I have the right to do what I want on my own land you wouldn't mind if I just let nature take care of that waste at its own slow pace. I would love to hang up my poop bags and scooper forever.
The previous owners of our place used to pile up their 2x lab poop and leave it by the back corner of the lot, about 15 feet from the neighbor's plastic kiddie fort. I had no idea until one day while cutting the grass when the lawn mower found it and turned it into a gray cloud.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robynn
From her facebook page...she has been doing this for sooo long....I would be so bored with it by now
"
December 28, 2010
Can't decide... to paint the front yard grass pink... or put down a checkboard of astroturf and play checkers with yard ornaments."
If she's hard up for cash, why's she buying a bunch of lawn junk, astroturf or pink paint?
Village ordinances do not violate the Constitution
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyCh
Contempt of court is absolutely consitutional. The funny thing is that it really doesn't matter if your original charge is valid or not Btw, I am not a lawyer but I'm 100% sure in her case there are few precedents.
The issue of property rights has already gone to the Supreme Court of the United Stated, more than once. Each time it has been ruled that local ordinances do not violate a citizens constitutional rights.
Also, I consider myself very conservative and a advocate of property rights, and agree with the decision of the court, believing that governance not explicitly granted to (or individual rights protected by) the Federal government should be handled at the local level.
You do not see stories from all the other towns about forming a task force...
The task force bothers me too. There are ordinances. The ordinances allow for penalties. These things exist. But in Mt Pleasant, task forces are formed.
I have Seen task forces before. Every single one of them served a purpose and served it well. The story generally went like this. Problem was identified. Solutions were suggested. Two solutions were diametrically opposed to one another Solution (for the sake of simplicity let's just call it) A made the most sense and was suggested by someone low on the totem pole. Solution B was expensive, shaky and likely to fail but was suggested by a manager. Solutions A and B were the last two standing so a task force was formed. The manager was part of the task force but the person who suggested solution A was not (usually due to scheduling like she was a second shift employee and the task force met in the morning or something). Invariably, the task force would choose solution B.
The purpose of a task force is to bully people into towing the line. I hate task forces. We may as well call them what they are: brute squads.
Quote:
Originally Posted by moneill
doesn't it depend on neighbors. In most cases a municipality will only act on these laws if a neighbor brings it to their attention.
BINGO! WE HAVE A WINNER!
This isn't really about the obnoxious homeowner vs the town of Mt Pleasant. This about the obnoxious homeowner vs the other obnoxious homeowners.
In this corner we have the woman who won't cut her grass and, lacking another source of income, stacks piles of "junk" that she can sell to make her mortgage payments in front of her house. And in this corner we have a bunch of people who are better than her, you and everyone else and have nothing better to do than worry about how other people live their lives.
The issue of property rights has already gone to the Supreme Court of the United Stated, more than once. Each time it has been ruled that local ordinances do not violate a citizens constitutional rights.
Also, I consider myself very conservative and a advocate of property rights, and agree with the decision of the court, believing that governance not explicitly granted to (or individual rights protected by) the Federal government should be handled at the local level.
That case set a ZONING precedence .. not a 'cut your grass and no lawn gnomes' -precedence.
That case relates more to Mt. Pleasant's ordinances that had been used to block 'Big Box Stores'.
And the case you reference is nearly 100 years old at that. It wouldn't be the first time the Supreme Court has reversed itself (as it has done so over 130 times since 1946).
So did everyone else see the news report where Dorchester County sent crews out to the local schools seeking out vehicles with out of state tags? I would link the P & C article, but it requires a subscription.
I'm sure there is plenty of outrage, right? After all, this poor MP woman was "harassed" by the city about an unregistered vehicle after complaints were filed. Dorchester isn't even waiting for the complaints.
Although they are encouraging it. Here's a handy link where you are encouraged to report on others who haven't gotten their tags switched out yet. Dorchester County Out Of State Tags. Now I know the bigger issue that people are objecting to on this thread is her right to pile junk (or decor depending on perspective) in her driveway, but you have to admit the timing is a little amusing.
FWIW, even though I disagree with you guys about the primary right of this woman to trash her front yard I am also uneasy with the idea of a "task force".
So did everyone else see the news report where Dorchester County sent crews out to the local schools seeking out vehicles with out of state tags? I would link the P & C article, but it requires a subscription.
I'm sure there is plenty of outrage, right? After all, this poor MP woman was "harassed" by the city about an unregistered vehicle after complaints were filed. Dorchester isn't even waiting for the complaints.
Although they are encouraging it. Here's a handy link where you are encouraged to report on others who haven't gotten their tags switched out yet. Dorchester County Out Of State Tags. Now I know the bigger issue that people are objecting to on this thread is her right to pile junk (or decor depending on perspective) in her driveway, but you have to admit the timing is a little amusing.
FWIW, even though I disagree with you guys about the primary right of this woman to trash her front yard I am also uneasy with the idea of a "task force".
I agree with the policing of people who do not get their tags switched over.
Other than military personnel, everyone who moves here is required to do so and by NOT doing so, they are avoiding paying taxes. It's not news btw .. this has been an on-going issue in the greater Charleston metro area....
I know it's not news, but it was on tonight's broadcast and I thought it was funny. There was at least one poster on here who was upset about her being cited for an unregistered vehicle.
I was just curious if he/she was equally upset about this practice?
Personally, I don't like the idea of siccing citizens on each other to look for violators, but I also don't have a lot of sympathy for people who ignore the laws and then get caught. I guess for me it becomes a wash.
I know it's not news, but it was on tonight's broadcast and I thought it was funny. There was at least one poster on here who was upset about her being cited for an unregistered vehicle.
I was just curious if he/she was equally upset about this practice?
Personally, I don't like the idea of siccing citizens on each other to look for violators, but I also don't have a lot of sympathy for people who ignore the laws and then get caught. I guess for me it becomes a wash.
There's a difference between an undriven, unregistered car in my backyard and someone from OHIO driving around with OHIO plates even though they've lived here for three years.
There's a difference between an undriven, unregistered car in my backyard and someone from OHIO driving around with OHIO plates even though they've lived here for three years.
Ok. And we know that unregistered car of hers (that was in her driveway, not her backyard) wasn't being driven because?
Oh, did she say so? Then it must be true.
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.
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.
Btw, I am not a lawyer but I'm 100% sure in her case there are few precedents.
Village ordinances do not violate the Constitution
