OrthodoxChristianity.net
November 23, 2014, 01:58:52 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Poll
Question: Should the U.S. States or Federal Gov't Issue a "Right to Roam"?
Yes - 6 (25%)
No - 16 (66.7%)
Maybe - 2 (8.3%)
Total Voters: 24

Pages: 1   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Freedom to Roam in the US - Opinions?  (Read 6398 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
88Devin12
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,928



« on: February 04, 2009, 01:45:47 PM »

What is everyone's opinion, should the United States federal or state governments be able to issue a "Right to Roam"?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_to_roam

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CRoW_Act

I think it's bad that in the U.S. we have so much natural landscape, but so much is under private ownership and has access prohibited to it. It's even sad to see "No Trespassing" signs and "Trespassers will be shot" and other such signs. (Though IMO hunting and fishing can be prohibited)

Isn't land unownable? Although we may own the right to occupy it in our legal systems, isn't it a right for all men (and women) to be able to explore the vast countryside in this beautiful nation?
Logged
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Warned
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,963



« Reply #1 on: February 04, 2009, 02:01:13 PM »

No. No.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
88Devin12
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,928



« Reply #2 on: February 04, 2009, 02:04:30 PM »

Any reason/explanation as to why you argue "No"? I'd like to hear everyone's opinions and reasonings.
Logged
LizaSymonenko
Слава Ісусу Христу!!! Glory to Jesus Christ!!!
Global Moderator
Toumarches
******
Offline Offline

Faith: God's Holy Catholic and Apostolic Orthodox Church
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the U.S.A.
Posts: 13,453



WWW
« Reply #3 on: February 04, 2009, 02:34:01 PM »


What if I am sunbathing on my little plot of land, and you jump out from behind the bushes with your binoculars, chasing down the ivory billed woodpecker?
What if I have a dog and he attacks you?
What if I have small children and I want to feel relatively safe when I let them play outside?
How will I stop the neighbor from coming over and poking his nose about?
What if you trip and fall and then take me to court?

A person has a right to some privacy.  Once you let one person in, you won't be able to keep anybody out.

Besides, the owner of the land is the one paying the taxes on it, clearing out the dead trees, mowing the lawn, etc. 

If someone really wants to see the majesty of our Land (and it IS majestic) feel free to visit and support one of your local Federal/State/County parks.  Your support will ensure these places exist for our future generations to enjoy.

In the meantime, everybody stay off my postage size lot and stop snipping my roses!  (My neighbor does this regularly... and while I don't have the heart to tell her to stop...I am glad that when I muster up the courage, I have the right to tell her to stay on her side of the fence.)

Logged

Conquer evil men by your gentle kindness, and make zealous men wonder at your goodness. Put the lover of legality to shame by your compassion. With the afflicted be afflicted in mind. Love all men, but keep distant from all men.
—St. Isaac of Syria
HandmaidenofGod
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA (Ecumenical Patriarch)
Posts: 3,397


O Holy St. Demetrius pray to God for us!


« Reply #4 on: February 04, 2009, 03:06:12 PM »

Buy a house with a bit of property around it. Then get a job to pay for said house, property, and to maintain such. Then after working all day, come home to take care of said house and property. Then each quarter, send a portion of your hard earned paycheck to the municipality that you reside in to pay your property taxes (which is in addition to your mortgage and maintenance costs) to pay for said property.

Then see how you feel about people roaming freely wherever they want.
Logged

"For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, says the LORD, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope." Jer 29:11
Fr. George
formerly "Cleveland"
Administrator
Stratopedarches
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox (Catholic) Christian
Jurisdiction: GOA - Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 20,109


May the Lord bless you and keep you always!


« Reply #5 on: February 04, 2009, 03:34:56 PM »

Any reason/explanation as to why you argue "No"? I'd like to hear everyone's opinions and reasonings.

I would only say Yes if (a) there was a set distance around one's personal dwelling that would remain off limits, (b) if the liability of the owner would be limited or eliminated for injuries/damages/crimes on the land that has "free access," (c) corporations & tribes had similar restrictions/rights.  Because I don't think (b) and (c) will happen, I won't support it.

OTOH, all land belongs to the Lord.  He did, however, leave it to us to govern it.
Logged

"The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the one who can't read them." Mark Twain
---------------------
Ordained on 17 & 18-Oct 2009. Please forgive me if earlier posts are poorly worded or incorrect in any way.
scamandrius
Crusher of Secrets; House Lannister
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: I'm Greek and proud of it, damn it!
Posts: 6,241



« Reply #6 on: February 04, 2009, 03:41:26 PM »

Life, liberty and property are the very essence of our inalienable rights given us by our Creator, to paraphrase John Locke.  so, my answer is no.  If a person wants to open up his land for others to see, he is certainly free to do so.  But we should not infringe on that right just because we are deprived of seeing a certain tree up close and personal.
Logged

I seek the truth by which no man was ever harmed--Marcus Aurelius

Those who do not read  history are doomed to get their facts from Hollywood--Anonymous

What earthly joy remains untouched by grief?--St. John Damascene
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #7 on: February 04, 2009, 04:40:13 PM »

When this topic is moved into Politics, I'll reply.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Fr. David
The Poster Formerly Known as "Pedro"
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA, Diocese of the South
Posts: 2,828



WWW
« Reply #8 on: February 04, 2009, 05:23:16 PM »

It's none of the govt.'s business whether or not I let people on my property.
Logged

Priest in the Orthodox Church in America - ordained on March 18, 2012

Oh Taste and See (my defunct blog)

From Protestant to Orthodox (my conversion story)
88Devin12
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,928



« Reply #9 on: February 04, 2009, 07:39:48 PM »

I guess I'll kind of explain my understanding of the UK's version of free roam, which I like very much..

Private property can be explored by the public... But with restrictions...

There are only some areas of private property that have to be open to the public. Cropland, developed areas, areas around homes, etc... are restricted and cannot be traversed.

Forests and open terrain (un-tilled/farmed) I think is generally what you can explore. As I said before, areas that are developed, farmed or areas near homes aren't open to public "roaming".

Also in some European countries you can even camp on the private property (I think provided there is no damage). Although some require you to seek permission by the landowner to camp.
Also, horseback riding, biking, fishing, hunting etc... are also restricted/prohibited.



I am currently in the Ozarks region of Missouri which has A LOT of natural beauty to it. Some of the greatest in the country (IMHO), even though there is a lot of protected land, still much land it still private and not "protected". This land is often even more "accessible" and closer to populated areas.


Maybe with a better connection to nature and our natural surroundings, we would be less inclined to consume it with senseless development as we have for the past century.
Logged
Jetavan
Argumentum ad australopithecum
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Science to the Fourth Power
Jurisdiction: Ohayo Gozaimasu
Posts: 6,580


Barlaam and Josaphat


WWW
« Reply #10 on: February 04, 2009, 08:23:16 PM »

There should be a continuous series of national parks, stretching from the Atlantic to the Pacific, such that a person could walk through the parks from coast to coast, without stepping on private property.
Logged

If you will, you can become all flame.
Extra caritatem nulla salus.
In order to become whole, take the "I" out of "holiness".
सर्वभूतहित
Ἄνω σχῶμεν τὰς καρδίας
"Those who say religion has nothing to do with politics do not know what religion is." -- Mohandas Gandhi
Y dduw bo'r diolch.
Órëlaurëa
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the midwest
Posts: 520



« Reply #11 on: February 04, 2009, 11:14:34 PM »

Forests and open terrain (un-tilled/farmed) I think is generally what you can explore. As I said before, areas that are developed, farmed or areas near homes aren't open to public "roaming".

Also in some European countries you can even camp on the private property (I think provided there is no damage). Although some require you to seek permission by the landowner to camp.
Also, horseback riding, biking, fishing, hunting etc... are also restricted/prohibited.

I am adamantly against Freedom to roam. Some reasons:

My parents own 35 acres (mostly wooded) in southern Missouri. They have the entire area fenced and posted for No Trespassing and No Hunting. Even with all of this, 2 years ago we found that someone had driven their pickup truck over the fence destroying it, and had taken a buck on our land. How do we know it was a buck? We know because they sawed the rack off of him and left the entire carcass to rot.

Also, we spend a great deal of time and energy trying to keep up with removing the trash that thoughtful drivers toss onto our land. About 3 years ago my parents had to call in the sheriff to remove the toxic meth-lab waste that someone deposited on our land.

If this is what people do when they are not permitted onto our private property, then what will happen when there is free admission? I don't want to find out.

As others have said, if you want to go wandering, go to a National Park. Or even ask the owner permission. . . and if they say no, then respect their wishes.
Logged

Domine Iesu Christe, Fili Dei, miserere mei, peccatricis.

órë: noun \"heart"\ (inner mind),   laurëa: adjective \"golden, like gold"\ http://www.uib.no/People/hnohf/quenya.htm
HandmaidenofGod
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA (Ecumenical Patriarch)
Posts: 3,397


O Holy St. Demetrius pray to God for us!


« Reply #12 on: February 05, 2009, 05:18:26 AM »

Devin,

I think you are being a bit naive in your approach. While you may follow good sportsmanship, and leave nothing but your footprints when exploring nature, others are not so generous.

People are disrespectful to the properties they are allowed to access currently; why would giving them more access to property change that?

If you want to change attitudes towards nature, start with the young. Get involved with scouting and nature groups for kids, and teach them the importance of respecting the planet. Education is where it begins; not legislation.

Maureen
Logged

"For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, says the LORD, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope." Jer 29:11
88Devin12
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,928



« Reply #13 on: February 05, 2009, 09:02:16 AM »

I know not everyone follows it, but just because a few people are stupid, does that mean everyone has to suffer?

Of course, this just comes from an environmental mindset as well as my personal opinion that the U.S. needs to become more like Europe in a lot of ways.
(Also, I was in Scouts a long time ago, but I quit b/c I had problems taking forced orders from kids my own age, I wanted to do my own thing exploring rather than sit and do arts and crafts)
Logged
LBK
No Reporting Allowed
Moderated
Toumarches
************
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 11,441


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #14 on: February 05, 2009, 09:15:10 AM »

Quote
Also, I was in Scouts a long time ago, but I quit b/c I had problems taking forced orders from kids my own age, I wanted to do my own thing exploring rather than sit and do arts and crafts

I do realise you're rather young, devin, but here's a bit of advice: If you haven't learned to serve, then you cannot hope to command.
Logged
88Devin12
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,928



« Reply #15 on: February 05, 2009, 09:27:27 AM »

I don't want to command though lol, my whole thing is, follow and live my life. The only thing I ever want to lead in is an architecture firm.

Also, that whole scouts thing was over 6-7 years ago, I've since gone all the way to college. Those problems are gone and fixed. (I think, I hope) I don't really have a problem with authority anymore.

At this point in my life, I can serve really well, but I never want to or like to command.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2009, 09:28:37 AM by 88Devin12 » Logged
EofK
Mrs. Y
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 3,976


lolcat addict


« Reply #16 on: February 05, 2009, 10:25:14 AM »

Forests and open terrain (un-tilled/farmed) I think is generally what you can explore. As I said before, areas that are developed, farmed or areas near homes aren't open to public "roaming".

Also in some European countries you can even camp on the private property (I think provided there is no damage). Although some require you to seek permission by the landowner to camp.
Also, horseback riding, biking, fishing, hunting etc... are also restricted/prohibited.

I am adamantly against Freedom to roam. Some reasons:

My parents own 35 acres (mostly wooded) in southern Missouri. They have the entire area fenced and posted for No Trespassing and No Hunting. Even with all of this, 2 years ago we found that someone had driven their pickup truck over the fence destroying it, and had taken a buck on our land. How do we know it was a buck? We know because they sawed the rack off of him and left the entire carcass to rot.

Also, we spend a great deal of time and energy trying to keep up with removing the trash that thoughtful drivers toss onto our land. About 3 years ago my parents had to call in the sheriff to remove the toxic meth-lab waste that someone deposited on our land.

If this is what people do when they are not permitted onto our private property, then what will happen when there is free admission? I don't want to find out.

As others have said, if you want to go wandering, go to a National Park. Or even ask the owner permission. . . and if they say no, then respect their wishes.

^This.  My parents have the same problem on their acreage.  We've found deer (and cows mistaken for deer) carcasses also and I remember not being allowed to play outside in the fall because you could hear rifle shots all around the property, even though we'd not agreed to let anyone hunt on our land.  I do enjoy seeing the beauty of the land around us, but there are plenty of public places to admire and if you really want to admire someone's land, why not ask them first? 
Logged

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. -- Douglas Adams
yBeayf
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Posts: 708

/etc


« Reply #17 on: February 05, 2009, 10:32:50 AM »

Quote
^This.  My parents have the same problem on their acreage.  We've found deer (and cows mistaken for deer) carcasses also and I remember not being allowed to play outside in the fall because you could hear rifle shots all around the property, even though we'd not agreed to let anyone hunt on our land.  I do enjoy seeing the beauty of the land around us, but there are plenty of public places to admire and if you really want to admire someone's land, why not ask them first?

What level of force does their state allow to prevent trespassing? Here in Texas, messing with someone's livestock is a good way to get shot.
Logged
EofK
Mrs. Y
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 3,976


lolcat addict


« Reply #18 on: February 05, 2009, 10:35:28 AM »

Quote
^This.  My parents have the same problem on their acreage.  We've found deer (and cows mistaken for deer) carcasses also and I remember not being allowed to play outside in the fall because you could hear rifle shots all around the property, even though we'd not agreed to let anyone hunt on our land.  I do enjoy seeing the beauty of the land around us, but there are plenty of public places to admire and if you really want to admire someone's land, why not ask them first?

What level of force does their state allow to prevent trespassing? Here in Texas, messing with someone's livestock is a good way to get shot.

I'm not sure of the specific laws, but I do know that if a property is posted with "No Trespassing" signs and you find someone trespassing, you can call the sheriff and have them arrested.  My parents' land is posted in many places but we always found fences broken down or cut or gates forced open during hunting season.  I don't know about actually allowing a property owner to shoot a trespasser, though, unless it's to defend your life.  Anything beyond that seems a little over the top to me.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2009, 10:39:13 AM by EofK » Logged

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. -- Douglas Adams
88Devin12
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,928



« Reply #19 on: February 05, 2009, 11:39:24 AM »

Personally for me, I see nothing wrong with people hiking on other people's property... If someone is just walking through, no harm is done and the person doesn't deserve to be arrested or shot at.
However it is definitely a problem when there is hunting, fishing, bike/horse riding and vehicular traffic through someone's property.
Logged
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,432



« Reply #20 on: February 05, 2009, 11:46:55 AM »

Quote
Maybe with a better connection to nature and our natural surroundings, we would be less inclined to consume it with senseless development as we have for the past century.

So part of this idea is motivated by what you have written about in other threads on housing and the spread of urban areas?

There is a lot of public land and natural surroundings out in Montana; most of the state is plain and forest, ranches and farms, mountains and prairie with the towns and cities taking up a very small part of the total area.  Out there and in other parts of the country  "room to roam" has some other aspects.  It's been mentioned here about people shooting stock or taking a deer or other wild animal only to take a trophy.  How is it a matter of you or someone else 'suffering' because others do this?  There are other places to go besides someone's farm.  It's been an accepted practice to ask a rancher or farmer if one may hunt on their land out there.  Some may say no and that is their right, others will permit it.  But shooting cattle is a serious thing and leaving an animal carcass is bad hunting and can have other negative effects such as attracting predators who might then turn on stock animals or contaminate water among other things. Please note that I am not anti-hunting; the ones I knew did so for the meat and for being out in the wild.  But those who leave their kill are not true and honorable hunters.

Other problems could be leaving gates open so that stock escapes and getting hurt by stock, which can happen.  Or in the matter of crop land, does someone who wants to roam though know how to tell if a field is planted with winter crops/cover as opposed to lying fallow?  Trampling/driving on a farmer's hard work is a bad thing and one person's right to roam shouldn't trump the farmer having a crop.

There are also different kinds of 'wild' country with different conditions that can be dangerous to the unprepared. Walking in much of Europe is not the same as in parts of North America.  There are more people in a smaller area.  There is not as much wild country.  Walking on England's footpaths is different from say heading into the ranges of the Rockies.  There was a story in the Montana papers in the last few weeks about a couple who decided to live in a cabin in the mountains.  They did not prepare for winter by having supplies or firewood or emergency plans and the woman died, apparently of cold and lack of food.  

On a further note one of the things that has been a tenet in Montana is that the waterways, the rivers and creeks are not "owned" but are open to fishing and floaters/boating.  While they pass through people's land, there is the idea of "Free Access".  Now there have been cases where people buy some land and think that they can keep people from "their" part of the river.  The rule the last I saw an article in Montana magazine was that people have legitimate access to the waterways to the high water mark on the banks.  Otoh, it is a serious question of visitors not doing things like leaving stock gates open.  

Another thing that just occurred to me is that in the big open places it's easy for a casual 'roamer' to get lost or hurt and it's hard to find one person in thousands of acres of forest or mountain or badlands.  This isn't an all or nothing situation.

Ebor
« Last Edit: February 05, 2009, 11:52:31 AM by Ebor » Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,432



« Reply #21 on: February 05, 2009, 11:51:19 AM »

Personally for me, I see nothing wrong with people hiking on other people's property... If someone is just walking through, no harm is done

Maybe, maybe not. Where are they walking?  Could they without realizing it or thoughtlessly trample or break things? What of picking plants or taking fruit or nuts or rocks or other things?   Some of the European laws say that private gardens and the area around homes are not open.  What if the walker's idea of close or private garden isn't the same as the one who lives there?

You see nothing wrong with it but can you try to look at it from other other side?

Ebor
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
88Devin12
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,928



« Reply #22 on: February 05, 2009, 12:10:23 PM »

Thing is ebor, the European Laws are more specific than whatever i've said on here... Areas are actually designated on maps as to where you can freely roam and where you cannot.
On those maps, farmland/cropland is excluded generally.

Of course too, America doesn't have the history that Europe does... You don't have landmarks and ancient structures laying on someone's property here.

Yes I am fully aware of all the differences between the US and Europe. Personally, I would simply like to see much more land designated as National Parks w/ developed areas being severely restricted to the area that can be built in. However this would be much more of a direct "attack" against private property than just simply allowing the public in.

For instance, a person may not be able to continue to own or live on their land if it is purchased to be a part of a National Park (though some residences and towns still exist within parks, some areas are made wilderness again). However allowing public into many more places on private land would allow people to still own and use their property, while allowing others to enjoy the natural beauty.

Man invented the wall and has since barricaded himself up continually against other men. Sure it is good that we keep out the bad and the destructive, but the majority of humanity out there are good, decent people. We shouldn't cater to our culture/society of being self-centered without any real sense of community.


Also, I was only looking for opinions, I personally am not a hard-core "free-roam" person, I just see it as one idea of many that could possibly be beneficial and can battle the horrible culture/society that we live in today.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2009, 12:11:44 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #23 on: February 05, 2009, 01:59:43 PM »

Private land ownership means that people tend to care for their own property, invest in it, improve it and generally take care of it.  As romantic as the notions of nomadism are, take a look at places that actually have much of their territory as common land (Mongolia, Kyrgyzstan, Kazakhstan for example): much of the land is overgrazed, strewn with rubbish etc.  Good luck actually enforcing that people don't litter, don't hunt, don't graze on others land if it is legal for them to be on it.  Granted, I really enjoyed being able to ride a horse wherever and set up camp anywhere, but that sort of land system really only works in a very sparsely populated area. 
Logged
Veniamin
Fire for Effect!
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the South
Posts: 3,372


St. Barbara, patroness of the Field Artillery


« Reply #24 on: February 05, 2009, 02:09:33 PM »

For instance, a person may not be able to continue to own or live on their land if it is purchased to be a part of a National Park (though some residences and towns still exist within parks, some areas are made wilderness again). However allowing public into many more places on private land would allow people to still own and use their property, while allowing others to enjoy the natural beauty.

In other words, you think you and everyone else who is so inclined should be allowed in to make whatever sort of mess tickles their fancy, while one person has to maintain it and clean up after everyone.
Logged

Artillery adds dignity to what would otherwise be a vulgar brawl. ~Frederick the Great
EofK
Mrs. Y
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 3,976


lolcat addict


« Reply #25 on: February 05, 2009, 02:11:48 PM »

Personally for me, I see nothing wrong with people hiking on other people's property... If someone is just walking through, no harm is done and the person doesn't deserve to be arrested or shot at.
However it is definitely a problem when there is hunting, fishing, bike/horse riding and vehicular traffic through someone's property.

Something else to keep in mind:  Many Americans are lawsuit-happy and would be glad to sue a landowner if they were hiking across the property and fell in an unmarked well, say, or when they they're gored by a bull or whatever else.  I'm not just concerned about people hunting without permission on private land, but if you have hikers out and about and you yourself are trying to hunt, then you have to worry about where those people are, if they're wearing visible colors, etc.  It would take a very well-spelled-out law to enact this and even then I'd bet there would be people who didn't realize jumping a fence into the bull pen would be a stupid idea.
Logged

Human beings, who are almost unique in having the ability to learn from the experience of others, are also remarkable for their apparent disinclination to do so. -- Douglas Adams
HandmaidenofGod
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the USA (Ecumenical Patriarch)
Posts: 3,397


O Holy St. Demetrius pray to God for us!


« Reply #26 on: February 05, 2009, 02:39:26 PM »

I know not everyone follows it, but just because a few people are stupid, does that mean everyone has to suffer?

Because it's not just a few people that are stupid. Heck, it's because of our stupidity and inability to follow God's law that mankind suffered the fall and Christ had to die for us!

Also, I don't see how any "suffering" is going on by allowing people to protect the property they bought and paid for. Examples have been provided already as to how people abuse property where "No Trespassing" signs are posted. You think removing those signs would remove the abuse? No.

If you think Europe is so swell than move there. Nobody is twisting your arm to stay here.
Logged

"For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, says the LORD, thoughts of peace and not of evil, to give you a future and a hope." Jer 29:11
scamandrius
Crusher of Secrets; House Lannister
Warned
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: I'm Greek and proud of it, damn it!
Posts: 6,241



« Reply #27 on: February 05, 2009, 02:43:06 PM »


Of course, this just comes from an environmental mindset as well as my personal opinion that the U.S. needs to become more like Europe in a lot of ways.

Then go to Europe and stay there!  What's stopping you?  Your need to make everyone else conform to your opinion?  Just go.
Logged

I seek the truth by which no man was ever harmed--Marcus Aurelius

Those who do not read  history are doomed to get their facts from Hollywood--Anonymous

What earthly joy remains untouched by grief?--St. John Damascene
88Devin12
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,928



« Reply #28 on: February 05, 2009, 05:52:15 PM »

Because I realize that no place is perfect. I also do not believe everyone else should conform. If the majority of Americans wouldn't want something like this, then it shouldn't be done unless a very good reason is found for doing it.

I will say that I do not hate the United States or anything. I just really don't like our culture or our society. Also, I believe true freedom lays in letting the people choose how they want to be ruled, what sort of economy they want, etc...

IMO it'd be ideal to allow each city (or even each county) to choose it's own government style to allow for diversity and to allow all types of people to live in ways that they want to live. (save for Anarchy/Chaos, which is bad in all aspects) However, it isn't an ideal world and that sort of setup would probably have many drawbacks, including problems with administration, etc...

It'd just be nice to be able to not have to go to a foreign country to change a way of life and way you are being ruled. We have a very large country, and it's tough enough to vacation in another country. Many are pretty much forced to live the "American" way because they have nowhere else to go. But, like I said, it's not an ideal world and things aren't ever perfect.

Also, I value my faith, and my family above all other things. Just because I'm not perfectly happy with the way things are doesn't mean I'm going to sacrifice living with my friends, family and attending my current parish. Those are more important than being happy/content with the economy and government.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2009, 05:53:45 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
Justinian
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: GOA
Posts: 176


« Reply #29 on: February 06, 2009, 01:52:44 AM »

There should be a continuous series of national parks, stretching from the Atlantic to the Pacific, such that a person could walk through the parks from coast to coast, without stepping on private property.

Something similar to that already exists: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Discovery_Trail
Logged

"All this indignation have I hurled, At the pretending part of the proud world. Who, swollen with selfish vanity devise: false freedoms, holy cheats, and formal lies, Over their fellow slaves to tyrannize." - John Wilmot
ytterbiumanalyst
Professor Emeritus, CSA
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the Midwest
Posts: 8,790



« Reply #30 on: February 06, 2009, 04:25:39 AM »

That's really cool. We may have to check out the parts that are in Missouri.
Logged

"It is remarkable that what we call the world...in what professes to be true...will allow in one man no blemishes, and in another no virtue."--Charles Dickens
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,432



« Reply #31 on: February 06, 2009, 11:28:18 AM »

88Devin12,

Perhaps if you would post some of the things that you think are better in Europe they could be looked at and compared with things in North America and consideration given to what factors led the the present situations.


I will say that I do not hate the United States or anything. I just really don't like our culture or our society. Also, I believe true freedom lays in letting the people choose how they want to be ruled, what sort of economy they want, etc...

IMO it'd be ideal to allow each city (or even each county) to choose it's own government style to allow for diversity and to allow all types of people to live in ways that they want to live. (save for Anarchy/Chaos, which is bad in all aspects)

Along with your dislike of tract housing in suburbs, could you please give some concrete examples of what you don't like? 

Also, what does "true freedom" mean to you?  To others it might mean "I can do what I like without anyone telling me what to do or stop me." (sounds a bit like my children sometimes   Smiley )  and that way lies danger in seeing only their desires as having any merit while those of other humans do not matter. 

What "government styles" are you thinking of, please? I would seriously like to know what you mean and what ones you do think are good as well as why do you think Anarchy is bad?  There are some people who are political anarchists, after all.

What if one town or county is taken over by a "Strongman" with goons who terrify the people into agreeing with them?   

Quote
It'd just be nice to be able to not have to go to a foreign country to change a way of life and way you are being ruled. We have a very large country, and it's tough enough to vacation in another country. Many are pretty much forced to live the "American" way because they have nowhere else to go.

Can you expand on what kinds of "changes" to ones way of life you think are good as well and what is living the "American way"?  Thank you in advance.

Ebor

Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,432



« Reply #32 on: February 06, 2009, 11:51:49 AM »

Thing is ebor, the European Laws are more specific than whatever i've said on here... Areas are actually designated on maps as to where you can freely roam and where you cannot.
On those maps, farmland/cropland is excluded generally.

Yes, I read the link you provided to the article about the different ways countries in Europe defined the "Right to Roam".  And while there are certain areas excluded, just putting it on a map does not necessarily ensure that people follow the law.

Quote
Of course too, America doesn't have the history that Europe does... You don't have landmarks and ancient structures laying on someone's property here.

Sometimes there are.  There are "ancient structures" in North America, things like mounds, or petroglyphs or the cliff dwellings in the southwest US.  Archeology finds things on what is private property sometimes and it may eventually become public land or it may not.

Quote
For instance, a person may not be able to continue to own or live on their land if it is purchased to be a part of a National Park.

That's another aspect: "purchased" as in the owner willingly sells or as Eminent Domain where land is taken, with some recompense but without the owner's consent?

Quote
Man invented the wall and has since barricaded himself up continually against other men.

That isn't the only reason that walls/fences were built Undecided  Sometimes they keep things in that shouldn't be allowed to wander off.

Quote
..our culture/society of being self-centered without any real sense of community.

Perhaps you do not have any sense of community or your experience of society is self-centered, but that is not the case every where.  Could it be that you are projecting your views on a larger screen?

Quote
I just see it as one idea of many that could possibly be beneficial and can battle the horrible culture/society that we live in today.

To use the more recent idea of the "curate's egg" parts of the American culture/society are excellent.  It's not all "horrible".  I'm sorry if that is all you have experienced.

Ebor
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
88Devin12
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,928



« Reply #33 on: February 06, 2009, 01:32:59 PM »

Quote
Along with your dislike of tract housing in suburbs, could you please give some concrete examples of what you don't like?
The consumerism mindset of people in this country, in addition to the capitalistic style of economy. Capitalism doesn't always have to equal democracy/republic. The "Me first" mentality of most Americans, and the attitude that ones success should be measured on material things. On that note, the material worship of many Americans. The whole attitude of individual being more important than the community. The degree to which many Americans are so wasteful. The idea of demonizing an opponent because they don't agree with you (though this can be considered more universal than unique to the US) The lack of appreciation for the environment as compared with the perceived value of one's "right" to do what they want with their land. The general lack of self-control and moderation among Americans (though this is also seen around the world, IMHO it is really bad here)

Quote
Yes, I read the link you provided to the article about the different ways countries in Europe defined the "Right to Roam".  And while there are certain areas excluded, just putting it on a map does not necessarily ensure that people follow the law.
Just putting in a law telling people not to steal and murder doesn't ensure that people will follow that law either. Does that stop us from putting in those laws?

Quote
That's another aspect: "purchased" as in the owner willingly sells or as Eminent Domain where land is taken, with some recompense but without the owner's consent?
Either way, but preferably willingly selling land. Eminent Domain should be even beyond a last resort. Example: A farmer unwilling to sell his land to developers, ED shouldn't EVER be used... Or... A person living across the country still owns an abandoned, run down home in the inner city that is used by criminals now, ED should def. be used if the person can't be reached or won't sell it. ED should only be an issue if there is obvious harm to the community through criminal activity.

Quote
That isn't the only reason that walls/fences were built   Sometimes they keep things in that shouldn't be allowed to wander off.
What shouldn't be allowed to wander off? Animals? Animals shouldn't be pinned in like they are now... Building up fences harms the natural animals as well as the domesticated. (However guard dogs, and things like that obviously ought to be chained, but I'm speaking about farm animals like Cattle, Horses, etc..)

Quote
Perhaps you do not have any sense of community or your experience of society is self-centered, but that is not the case every where.  Could it be that you are projecting your views on a larger screen?
I'm sorry, but the whole suburban and sprawl oriented lifestyle is not community. It's individualistic and self-centered. Even poverty stricken inner-city neighborhoods have more community than suburban sprawl neighborhoods do.

Quote
Also, what does "true freedom" mean to you?  To others it might mean "I can do what I like without anyone telling me what to do or stop me." (sounds a bit like my children sometimes    )  and that way lies danger in seeing only their desires as having any merit while those of other humans do not matter.
"True freedom" is a priviledge. Our only "right" is our own free-will and the right to be alive. All other "freedoms" and "rights" are up in the air. True "freedom" comes from being able to make your choices under a controlled situation.
What I mean by this is: Man HAS to be governed and controlled, there cannot be a lack of any law and order or government. However, true freedom lays in man's ability to choose how he wants to be governed (that is, government/economical types).

Quote
What "government styles" are you thinking of, please? I would seriously like to know what you mean and what ones you do think are good as well as why do you think Anarchy is bad?  There are some people who are political anarchists, after all.
My last answer leads me to this question... "Government styles" are many, Democracy, Republic, Communism, Monarchy, Theocracy, Oligarchy, Authoritarianism, Aristocracy, Autocracy, Tribalism, etc... and all their subtypes.
Another part of "true freedom" would be a person's right to choose their economy and what their commerce ought to be, like Socialism, Capitalism, etc... and all their subtypes.

From those levels, a people can choose, or their leaders can choose any other rights/priviledges and laws, etc...

________________________________

Also as a disclaimer... These are only my positions right now... They are subject to change (even drastic) over time.
Logged
Νεκτάριος
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,437



« Reply #34 on: February 06, 2009, 03:44:23 PM »

Quote
Along with your dislike of tract housing in suburbs, could you please give some concrete examples of what you don't like?
The consumerism mindset of people in this country, in addition to the capitalistic style of economy. Capitalism doesn't always have to equal democracy/republic. The "Me first" mentality of most Americans, and the attitude that ones success should be measured on material things. On that note, the material worship of many Americans. The whole attitude of individual being more important than the community. The degree to which many Americans are so wasteful. The idea of demonizing an opponent because they don't agree with you (though this can be considered more universal than unique to the US) The lack of appreciation for the environment as compared with the perceived value of one's "right" to do what they want with their land. The general lack of self-control and moderation among Americans (though this is also seen around the world, IMHO it is really bad here)

You are working under too many assumptions and stereotypes here.  To an extent there is grain of truth in them, but they only go so far.  Part of these differences have to do more with geography, demographics and history than any actual cultural differences.  I've travelled pretty extensively, lived abroad and can handle myself pretty effectively in a few languages.  It is amusing to me when Europeans talk of Americans being so wasteful, but don't think twice before flying off to Prague or Krakow for a stag weekend.  Once the romance wears off when considering European culture, you start to realize they have just as many quirks and weird traits as Americans - they just tend to be manifested in different ways.  For as much as Europeans love to talk about how liberal and enlightened they are, could a politician like Haider become a prominent, main-stream politician in the US?   And if you travel with Europeans in Asia you quickly realize they are just as ignorant of languages, cultures and the world outside their own area as the typical American.  Don't get me wrong - I love Europe and Europeans, but let's not romanticize daily life for the average European.   And of course there is nothing to stop you from implementing some of those ideals in your daily life here.  I get everywhere I need to go almost exclusively with public transportation and bicycling.  It is VERY easy to consume less.  And if you want to complain about community, when was the last time YOU invited your neighbors over for a nice chat over some beer? 
Logged
Órëlaurëa
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: OCA Diocese of the midwest
Posts: 520



« Reply #35 on: February 06, 2009, 10:44:22 PM »

Devin, I am reminded of a famous quote from Mahatma Ghandi. . .
Quote
You must be the change you want to see in the world.


If we see that things need to be different, then we should be the first ones to make those changes. Just something to consider. . .

Logged

Domine Iesu Christe, Fili Dei, miserere mei, peccatricis.

órë: noun \"heart"\ (inner mind),   laurëa: adjective \"golden, like gold"\ http://www.uib.no/People/hnohf/quenya.htm
VirSpeluncaeOrthodoxae
Da Orthodox Caveman! aka "Cavey"
Member
***
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antioch...for now
Posts: 102



« Reply #36 on: February 07, 2009, 07:47:01 PM »

Ghandi also worshiped idols, denied his wife modern medical care (though had NO qualms for himself) and also had no qualms ordering beatings, rape and murders of those who opposed him. Google it yourselves.

I say  "NO!" because if it aint broken don't fix it, and that'd be another step to socialism...and we've had too many as it is.
Logged

Medieval, backwards, rigid, narrow-minded Traditionalist, Western Rite lover and proud of it! Make my day.
Ebor
Vanyar
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 6,432



« Reply #37 on: February 10, 2009, 04:20:44 PM »

Quote
Along with your dislike of tract housing in suburbs, could you please give some concrete examples of what you don't like?
The consumerism mindset of people in this country, in addition to the capitalistic style of economy. Capitalism doesn't always have to equal democracy/republic. The "Me first" mentality of most Americans, and the attitude that ones success should be measured on material things. On that note, the material worship of many Americans. The whole attitude of individual being more important than the community. The degree to which many Americans are so wasteful. The idea of demonizing an opponent because they don't agree with you (though this can be considered more universal than unique to the US) The lack of appreciation for the environment as compared with the perceived value of one's "right" to do what they want with their land. The general lack of self-control and moderation among Americans (though this is also seen around the world, IMHO it is really bad here)

You use a lot of sweeping generalizations.  How do you know so well what "most Americans"/"many Americans" think or do?  Communities are made up of individuals, so both have to be taken into account and cared for.  Both are important, not one over the other. 

Demonizing an opponent is a human trait and certainly not limited to the US by a long chalk. 

I would also like to suggest to you that it is the matter of caring for the environment that is what some people want to do with their own land as well as with the public lands.  When landowners don't want garbage and junk dumped there, when they don't want fires set or things torn up, it can be for the land's sake

Quote
Quote
That's another aspect: "purchased" as in the owner willingly sells or as Eminent Domain where land is taken, with some recompense but without the owner's consent?
Either way, but preferably willingly selling land. Eminent Domain should be even beyond a last resort. Example: A farmer unwilling to sell his land to developers, ED shouldn't EVER be used... Or... A person living across the country still owns an abandoned, run down home in the inner city that is used by criminals now, ED should def. be used if the person can't be reached or won't sell it. ED should only be an issue if there is obvious harm to the community through criminal activity.

But in the proposal that more national parks and lands be set up, would you permit those in the designated area who do not want to sell to remain and to have free access to the "outside world" if they are surrounded?

Quote
Quote
That isn't the only reason that walls/fences were built   Sometimes they keep things in that shouldn't be allowed to wander off.
What shouldn't be allowed to wander off? Animals? Animals shouldn't be pinned in like they are now... Building up fences harms the natural animals as well as the domesticated. (However guard dogs, and things like that obviously ought to be chained, but I'm speaking about farm animals like Cattle, Horses, etc..)

"Shouldn't"?  Have you ever spent any time on a farm or ranch?  Do you know that some animals, like sheep for instance, will wander and can come to harm without some kind of protection?  Not just to keep them off of the roads and highways, but from falling down coulees or into rivers. Sometimes edges give way and an animal or a person can fall to their injury or death.   "Pinned in"?  How are open range or hundreds of acres of pasture/grazing land "pinned in"?  Out in Montana, the "fences" are not 10 foot high wood or brick walls.  Most are posts with log/wood/wire.  (that's not counting the snow-fences that keep blowing snow off of highways either).  Elk, deer, wolves and other creatures can get over/under/around it.  Wild birds aren't hemmed in at all. 

I also think you draw an incorrect dichotomy between "natural" and domesticated animals.  There's nothing "unnatural" about cattle or horses. Horses are also working animals, partners with the rancher or farmer, like some dogs; they can be vital in caring for the ranch.  It's not in the interests of a rancher or farmer to mistreat his stock.  And speaking of farmers, crops need to be protected from getting eaten or driven over or taken among other things. There is nothing inherently "evil" or wrong about fences.  It depends on the use and some of them are for good reasons.

Also, I wasn't just talking about animals.  Small children, kids with disabilities, people with dementia among other examples might need to be given some protection that a fence can provide both to keep them from getting out in the street or other forms of harm (cliffs, water, cold etc) and to keep things that could hurt them away.  Our youngest has mild Down Syndrome.  For a while, one neighbor had a large strong dog in the yard and a driveway that ran along the side that would have people in trucks or cars sometimes driving down to the back.  The children like to play in the yard and there is supervision.  But as he got older, he got faster and he likes dogs and trucks and the temptation to go next door would happen at times.  We put up a nice white post and board fence to at least slow him down. The fence did not take the place of having supervision. It is an additional aid to keep him safe and well.

Quote
Quote
Perhaps you do not have any sense of community or your experience of society is self-centered, but that is not the case every where.  Could it be that you are projecting your views on a larger screen?
I'm sorry, but the whole suburban and sprawl oriented lifestyle is not community. It's individualistic and self-centered. Even poverty stricken inner-city neighborhoods have more community than suburban sprawl neighborhoods do.

How many poverty stricken inner-city neighborhoods have you personally lived in for some time?  How do you know this.  Your description does not describe our neighborhood, but then maybe we don't fit your ideas.  Our house and the others here were build nearly 50 years ago.  It's not a vast "sprawl" but a quiet set of three streets. The elementary age children gather at the end of our street in the morning with 2 or 3 adults or more and walk to the local school.  They play together.  Our yard backs on the playing field and we have a path and gate that neighbors use to get to this end of the short street coming back from the local grocery store or other places in the little shopping rows on the larger road that runs through.  People help their neighbors when they're sick or need a ride and have all the time we've lived here (16 1/2 years) and long before from what the older inhabitants say, some of whom have lived here since the houses were built.  When a daughter of one family graduated from college they had a party to which we and the other neighbors were invited.  Not for gifts but to celebrate her accomplishment.  When there were deaths, there was sympathy and people took food to the bereaved. At Christmas people exchange cookies or sweets, even the ones who aren't Christian.

So your definition and description of "suburbs" doesn't fit here. It doesn't fit the small towns on the high plains or in the mountains or other places that people live in this planet.

Some places can be as you describe them, but how have you gained your data to form your opinion, please?  These are still real Human Beings and real lives in many conditions and situations and how much have you traveled and experienced?  Did you grown up in a "suburban sprawl"?  It may be that that is what you know, but is not the only way, nor possibly the majority way.  There are other ways people live, even in the US.  I've lived in big cities, small cities, old neighborhoods with some of them pre-urban renewal 'student slums', towns and now a kind of older "suburb" in that we're between two large cities.  And I still know that there are lots of other ways that people live.

Quote
Quote
Also, what does "true freedom" mean to you?  To others it might mean "I can do what I like without anyone telling me what to do or stop me." (sounds a bit like my children sometimes    )  and that way lies danger in seeing only their desires as having any merit while those of other humans do not matter.
"True freedom" is a priviledge.

And are not "privileges" things that are granted to a person at the discretion or decision of another?  Who will have that power, one wonders.
 
Quote
True "freedom" comes from being able to make your choices under a controlled situation.
What I mean by this is: Man HAS to be governed and controlled, there cannot be a lack of any law and order or government. However, true freedom lays in man's ability to choose how he wants to be governed (that is, government/economical types).

There are those who would say that any control takes away true freedom. And if human's have a voice, a real voice and choice in their government, then there is a component of democracy there already. 

Quote
Quote
What "government styles" are you thinking of, please? I would seriously like to know what you mean and what ones you do think are good as well as why do you think Anarchy is bad?  There are some people who are political anarchists, after all.
My last answer leads me to this question... "Government styles" are many, Democracy, Republic, Communism, Monarchy, Theocracy, Oligarchy, Authoritarianism, Aristocracy, Autocracy, Tribalism, etc... and all their subtypes.
Another part of "true freedom" would be a person's right to choose their economy and what their commerce ought to be, like Socialism, Capitalism, etc... and all their subtypes.

From those levels, a people can choose, or their leaders can choose any other rights/priviledges and laws, etc...

And who will guard the guardians?  Have you had any political science classes about how governments and ruling systems evolve or happen?  It's not like ordinary people trying to have enough to eat and a roof for their families decide to be under an oligarchy for a while and then decide they'll try something else. In History such changes have happened due to stresses and conflict and conquest much of the time because we are of "the race of Men who above all desire power."  The common people don't get much of a voice.   

Ebor
Logged

"I wish they would remember that the charge to Peter was "Feed my sheep", not "Try experiments on my rats", or even "Teach my performing dogs new tricks". - C. S. Lewis

The Katana of Reasoned Discussion

For some a world view is more like a neighborhood watch.
Tags: Chuck Norris 
Pages: 1   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.144 seconds with 66 queries.