Bad Judge: Woman Jailed For Having Messy Yard

[reitz]

<< well then all bird feeders/lawn fountains/swimming pools need to be outlawed immediately, they are breeding grounds for mosquitos. >>

Not quite. Fountains contain moving water, while mosquitos require stagnant water for a fertile breeding ground. Swimming pools are chlorinated, which kills any mosquito egss that may be laid. Bird feeders contain no water at all, so I'll assume you meant bird baths. In the case of a bird bath, most responsible people change the water regularly to prevent mosquito larvae from developing. Also, bird baths serve a purpose while piles of trash and pools of foul-smelling stagnant water do not.

<< Along these same lines it is also illegal in many areas to work on your own car on your property, does that change anyones tone? >>

Again, you are not making a valid comparison. While there are areas that outlaw working on your car on your own property, they are few and far between; usually found in wealthier communities where it is unlikely that many residents would do so, anyway. On the other hand, nearly every city, town, and borough has ordinances requiring proper upkeep of a homeowner's property. Also, working on a car is only a temporary activity and serves a purpose, unlike leaving trash and debris strewn about one's property.

<< ..but then with all the prissy elitists in this thread I suppose you would never do such a thing anyway. >>

How does expecting one's neighbor to follow the same standards that are set for everyone make him a &quot;prissy elitist?&quot; No one is forced to live in a community where these standards exist. If you do not like it, you and your trailer park bretheren are always free to move out and wallow in your filth elsewhere.

 

[warcleric]

GL: one persons junk is anothers treasure. The point I am trying to make is, how far are you going to let the government go before you say, whoa that is enough.

 

[rahvin]

<<Even if someone like her was living next door - what does that have to do with you? It's her property, no matter how hard you work for yours. So why is it any of your business to worry about how clean she keeps her yard?>>

Because the upkeep of her property effects the value of your property. Want a meth lab next to your property? It's not your property, doesn't matter if the fire potential is so severe the whole block could be killed right?

 

[warcleric]

<< How does expecting one's neighbor to follow the same standards that are set for everyone make him a &quot;prissy elitist?&quot; No one is forced to live in a community where these standards exist. If you do not like it, you and your trailer park bretheren are always free to move out and wallow in your filth elsewhere. >>



I am also free to live wherever I damn well please. You dont like it you move.

 

[reitz]

<< I am also free to live wherever I damn well please. >>

That is true, but you must live within the legal standards of the community you choose to reside in. It really should not be that difficult a concept to grasp.

 

[HansHurt]

Good...that will teach her.

 

[warcleric]

reitz: I will type slowly for you....my whole point is, the government should not be making such laws except where it becomes a hazard to the health or safety of other people. I have seen these &quot;standards&quot; go so far as to determine what color you must paint your house and what type of flora you are allowed to plant. This is all because we started sacrificing our rights for convenience.

 

[rahvin]

<<I am also free to live wherever I damn well please. You dont like it you move.>>

And so is she, she had ample time and ability to become aware of the community provisions for upkeep of the property before she was punished. If she didn't like the local laws she should have left.

 

[rahvin]

<<reitz: I will type slowly for you....my whole point is, the government should not be making such laws except where it becomes a hazard to the health or safety of other people. I have seen these &quot;standards&quot; go so far as to determine what color you must paint your house and what type of flora you are allowed to plant. This is all because we started sacrificing our rights for convenience.>>

Government is some big mysterious entity that passes laws that nobody wants, right? Get real, if you don't like a law petition to change it. These laws are constitutional and protected under the same vein as the local zoneing ordinances. They serve to protect communities and they are a result of local community goverment. This lady had ample opportunity to sell her property and move into a community that doesn't have these ordinances had she so choosen.

Although I personally don't agree with Jail time she got off EASY. Locally in Salt Lake a similar siutation occured a year or two ago, they didn't put her in jail. Know what they did? The city came out and cleaned the property up and billed the owner $25000 for the cleanup and disposal of the trash.

Frankly you have no understanding of the consitutionality of these ordinances and your side comment about building codes shows a complete lack of understanding about their intent as well.

 

[warcleric]

rahvin: I understand the suppsed reasoning behind building codes. I just dont agree with them. So show me where in the constitution it says that a government agency has the right to force you to conform to whatever they deem tasteful.

 

[rahvin]

<<rahvin: I understand the suppsed reasoning behind building codes. I just dont agree with them. So show me where in the constitution it says that a government agency has the right to force you to conform to whatever they deem tasteful.>>

Warcleric,

I will answer your question when you answer this one. What is the purpose of building codes?

 

[reitz]

<< my whole point is, the government should not be making such laws except where it becomes a hazard to the health or safety of other people. >>

And just who is responsible for electing the government that enacts these laws? The people who elect their government are the ones responsible for these laws.

Again, your argument is flawed. You are also conveniently overlooking the fact that laws regarding trash and debris are ensuring the health and safety of other people. Have you ever lived in or visited a neighborhood that is infested with rats?

<< I have seen these &quot;standards&quot; go so far as to determine what color you must paint your house and what type of flora you are allowed to plant. >>

The standards that determine the color of paint or the type of flora that can be planted are enacted at the request of the citizens who elect their government. I would not wish to live in such a strict community, but I respect the rights of those who do.

<< This is all because we started sacrificing our rights for convenience. >>

Come again? There is nothing &quot;convenient&quot; about enacting laws regarding upkeep and maintenance of property. If anything, they inconvenience all of us at least a little, but for a reason. These laws are about the quality of life, as determined by the community's residents. Of course there will always be dissenters, but those people are not forced to purchase a house or rent an apartment in the towns where the laws exist. The dissenters also have a right to challenge those laws through accepted legal means (speaking out against them in an attempt to gain support, voting for representatives who oppose the laws, or by challenging them in the courts), not by violating them.

 

[warcleric]

To ensure the safety of the house, its occupants, and property around it.

BTW, you can come down off your pulpit now, and have a conversation with us lowly folks. F*cking arrogant bastard.

 

[87horsepower]

Look at her home. She is not in a $400,000/house neighborhood, and if she is, the house was there long before the $400k houses started appearing. I know it may look bad and yes she should clean it up, but at what point can you now get thrown in jail? She may not even be totally mentally stable. Is that what you do with mentally ill people. This is BS

 

[rahvin]

<<To ensure the safety of the house, its occupants, and property around it.>>

Close. To quote from the 1994 Uniform Building Code, Volume 1, Preface:

&quot;The Uniform Building Code is dedicated to the development of better building construction and greater safety to the public by uniformity in building laws. The code is founded on broad-based principles that make possible the use of new materials and construction systems.&quot;

Being that the majority of non-engineering/architecture people in this country couldn't design or construct a house without it being a public hazzard the building codes were enacted to protect the public safty. This not only includes those that currently own the house but those that will own the house in the future. You deny the reasoning behind building codes yet you said this:

<<my whole point is, the government should not be making such laws except where it becomes a hazard to the health or safety of other people>>

In fact building codes are directly responsible for the saftey and health of the public. So explain to me the logic you use to dismiss building codes when in fact by your own admission they are something that government should be involved in.

 

[reitz]

<< So show me where in the constitution it says that a government agency has the right to force you to conform to whatever they deem tasteful. >>

Amendment X:The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people. Those powers that are reserved &quot;to the people&quot; are the very powers that are used to enact and enforce these laws. Amendment X is what allows us to create our local governments, and enact our own local ordinances.

Why don't you show us a clause in the Constitution that prohibits governments from enacting such legislation?

 

[Stark]

She told the judge to send her to jail. IMO, she's a lazy slob who had been warned multiple times by city officials to clean up her crap. She chose not to.

Anyone who lives in brushfire areas is requried to clear their property of dead, dry brush. If they can force you to avoid a fire hazard, they can force you to clean up a public safety hazard.

 

[warcleric]

rahvin: for the most part I agree, but it is taken to the extreme. Builing a deck on my house or adding a sidewalk cannot endanger others, unless I am completely incompetent and that should be a civil matter, not a criminal matter. Anyway this is nitpicking.....the lady should have been forced to clean her yard. Jail was too extreme....just make her pay a fine. We, as a society just need to think about the rights we give up everytime a new law is passed. My biggest problem with this is, I have had to deal with property inspectors in a few areas of the US, and they are usually power hungry, corrupt individuals. I can imagine how this whole fiasco started just by the few involvements with them that I have had. The pictures do not show a very bad situation, definitly not one worth incarceration.

 

[rahvin]

<<rahvin: for the most part I agree, but it is taken to the extreme. Builing a deck on my house or adding a sidewalk cannot endanger others, unless I am completely incompetent and that should be a civil matter, not a criminal matter.>>

If constructed incorrectly a sidewalk can present an equal hazzard to the travelling public as does failure to clean said sidewalk of snow and ice. When you add a deck that is contructed incorrectly you could cause a safety hazzard and property threat to FUTURE owners of the property. Building codes are very easy to comply with, all the city usually asks is that you provide notice so that inspection of proper contruction can be done. If you have corrupt inspectors in your area then it is your responsibility to combat that corruption. I really don't understand when people agree with the merits of the rules then complain that they shouldn't exist because they as a citizen fail to combat corruption in our government.

And maybe you missed the part where I agreed that she shouldn't have been sent to jail but in reality we don't know the REAL reason she was sent to jail. I would guess she was held in contempt of court for failure to obey a court order. That is a jailable offense. I think they should have just cleaned it up for her and placed a lean on her property for the cost of the cleanup. It's a very viable solution.

 

[warcleric]

Are you assuming I dont combat the laws I disagree with? because I have never stated that I didn't. Also, prohibition was a very easy law to comply with too, but that didnt make it any more right. Yes that could have been the case, and I agree with your solution.

 

[crystal]

When you choose to live in a society, social law over ride that of private right if that private right is in conflict with social law. If everyone believe their private rights are the only right, then society as a whole will not work.

 

[warcleric]

Crystal: that is where you and I differ, I believe that private rights should override social law.

 

[rahvin]

<<Are you assuming I dont combat the laws I disagree with? because I have never stated that I didn't. Also, prohibition was a very easy law to comply with too, but that didnt make it any more right.>>

No you are complaining that you can't add a deck to your house without a building permit and inspection. Whaaa, if you don't like building codes get your local community to toss them out. My GF's parents live in a community where the building permit for a 1000 sqft addition to a home was granted based on a one sheet hand sketch by the home owner using simple geometric shapes, no dimensions and no structural design.

If you don't like building codes move somewhere that they are less stringent or get them changed in the community you live in, but stop whining about them. And on the same note if you don't like community standards for cleanliness of property then get the law changed or move.

 

[OutHouse]

How sad. We might as well just give up the idea of private property, and start paying rent to the government.

Umm we do pay rent TO the government. Its called property tax, If you dont pay your tax the government will take you home. You might pay off your house but you will never own the house.


I watched the news witht this story. The lady was given every opportunity to clean it up, she was offered parole but refused. She tied the judges hands and the judge had no choice but to UPHOLD THE LAW. the Law voted in by the city council of Longmont.

 

[cavingjan]

Somethings I'd like to point out. Most inspectors dealing with these types of issues aren't proactive but reactive. Someone has repeatedly complainted to warrent a visit. Its not that hard or take up too much time to put things in a somewhat decent manner. These aren't strict rules that are being inforced but just things that should be common courtesy to everybody. Government shouldn't have to enforce that type of behavior but I guess people just don't feel the personal responsability anymore.
Also realize that all of these rules are local ordinances. If you have a problem with them, go to the monthly town meeting and take an active role in the community. I don't have a lot of free time but I make sure to go to a meeting at least every couple months to at least keep abreast of what is going on. And I take time to read the minutes of the meetings I've missed.

On another note: I believe decks and porches are still the number 3 location in the house for injuries. Too many easy and overlooked mistakes can take place. Improper footings being the number one problem.