11

Help Me Understand This...

Posted by SaltyDog 9 years, 3 months ago to News
140 comments | Share | Flag

In one community recently, the local authorities were all puffed up over a family having a purple jungle set in their back yard and some of the locals didn't agree with the aesthetic. (Apparently the little girls for whom the swing set was erected liked purple. Go figure.). The authorities were promising fines, etc. if the family didn't take it down.

Fast forward to today in Orlando, Florida. It seems a local there has his own reality TV show. He also has lethal reptiles in his home. Well darn the luck, one got out the other day. Sadly, he forgot to mention it to anyone like, oh say, the cops for several days. Turns out the escapee is an EIGHT FOOT KING COBRA, which can grow to 14 feet. Further, said snake owner opined the the beast probably went into a local wooded area and most likely we'll never be found. Not to worry though...he probably won't bite anyone.

Is this a great country or what??!?!
SOURCE URL: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/09/03/8-f00t-king-cobra-on-loose-in-florida-school-takes-precautions/


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • 13
    Posted by $ jbrenner 9 years, 3 months ago
    We agree on the purple playset. Code enforcement by homeowners associations are a plague.

    As for the dangerous reptiles, I do not think that the government should have control over our lives, as Mamaemma said. However, I think SaltyDog's point was that the king cobra snake owner wasn't even fined for letting his snake go into the wild. This is a form of gross negligence or reckless endangerment that a society can reasonably sanction the former owner after the negligence.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Mamaemma 9 years, 3 months ago
      My thinking was that the snake owner would be sued after his negligence caused harm, by the person who was harmed. Otherwise the government can fine me if I lose my gun. Or what if I misplace prescription meds? They have great potential for harm. Or maybe I should be required to lock up my knives at all times.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by teri-amborn 9 years, 3 months ago
        ...but free will is involved in using firearms or meds to cause harm to another.
        A snake will act out of instinct. It has no free will to act a different way if it feels threatened.
        I have absolutely no problem with non-lethal snakes.
        When the animal is a slithering potential "deadly weapon" that can strike at any time, there is a real threat that should be dealt with or the thought of ownership availability should be re-examined thoroughly.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ nickursis 9 years, 3 months ago
          Oh, boy, look at the issues with the "invasive" species. There are african rats in Florida the size of cats running around, I remember a picture a year or so ago where a pack of them gathered under a streetlight and looked like a gang of hoodlums waiting for a tasty human to come by. Not to mention the issue of pythons and boas let loose now wandering around. People are too irresponsible for most non-traditional animals, and screw up with the traditional ones enough.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ jbrenner 9 years, 3 months ago
        Your point is granted, but does not the entire neighborhood around the snake owner's home suffer consequences through an increased reasonable fear of going outside? Here in Florida we know to expect gators and the occasional snake, but a king cobra is enough for me to keep kids indoors moreso than I otherwise would. In that respect, the freedom to travel of neighbors has been infringed even if no one is bitten. The professor who runs our transmission electron microscope facility along with me is a snake vision expert. Most of his snakes don't scare me, but his king cobra most certainly does. The speed at which snakes attack is quite remarkable.

        The biggest difference between guns, prescription meds, and knives vs. snakes is that the snake is a living, mobile threat. The other items have to be used by a human being to be a threat. Presumably that human being is capable of acting on his/her own responsibly.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ Suzanne43 9 years, 3 months ago
          Right, you are. With freedom comes responsibility. The snake owner has the freedom to own a poisonous reptile. He, therefore, has a responsibility to protect people from it. Since he was negligent, he should be prosecuted.
          I can see both sides of the problem over the purple jungle set. I live in a small town where a person who owned a large building painted it a very bright shade of pink. The people who live near this structure saw their property values go down, and they also lost some of their peace and quiet because of all the cars driving by to take a look.
          This country could use some common sense.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ nickursis 9 years, 3 months ago
            Suzanne, I think you have the right balance. I am all for personal freedom and no govt intervention, but the govt thing grew up on idiots who took their freedom and abused it, to the detriment of others. Now it has even decayed to where they legislate that others can even put their opinions, wants frivolus desires, in my face and I have to approve of it, or I am (alternately): racist, unfair, bigoted, a right wing conspiracyist, mean spirited, or any one of the numorous labels imposed by others on those who just do not want to participate in their stupidity. Go ahead and have all the snakes you want, but when they get out, it becomes my problem: you should have to pay for any and all costs to find and kill or capture said snake, then all snakes go bye-bye, since you can't have dangerous toys. Group labels are the powerful tool that the social engineers want to have to manipulate people, we need to take them out whenever possible and render the case to the individual and both their rights and responsibilities. Too often the responsibility part is what is left out.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ Suzanne43 9 years, 3 months ago
              Very well put, nickursis.
              P.S. Add these to your list: Lois Lerner called us a seven letter word that starts with "A", McCain called us crazies, and Hillary compared us to terrorists.
              This name calling is supposed to intimidate us into shutting up.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ nickursis 9 years, 3 months ago
                Oh, yes. That is a tactic that is used across the spectrum from right to left. It is indicative of the quality of their arguments when they have to resort to the "Labeling offense(or defense)" as the case may be. I ignore any discussion where it starts that crap. Lois Lerner needs some labels around her scrawny neck like "liar" "conspirator""political hack" and of course, "criminal".
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Mamaemma 9 years, 3 months ago
          So perhaps it is up to the neighbors, who I agree are harmed, to "fine" the irresponsible person through a lawsuit. I assume the purpose of a fine by the government is to discourage similar acts in others. I just don't think that is a proper function of government, jbrenner.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ jbrenner 9 years, 3 months ago
            The purpose of the fine is to tell the snake owner that he/she was irresponsible and that his/her actions or inactions have effects on others. Discouragement of similar acts in others (the so-called deterrent effect) is not the primary purpose of the fine. It might be a secondary effect.

            This issue actually is similar to the immigration issue we all have discussed recently when it comes to the infringement aspect. I think that SaltyDog and I are quicker to take offense about infringements on society, whereas most of the people in this forum are offended more quickly when the rights of the individual are infringed upon. Both are affronts and deserve our indignation.

            To expect the neighbors to bring a lawsuit is really too much of a burden on the neighbors. They have already been punished by their irresponsible neighbor. To have to go to court to get justice is more trouble than it is worth, unless, of course, the king cobra kills one of your family members (or more likely, pets).
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ nickursis 9 years, 3 months ago
              Not to mention the total dysfunctionality of the judicial system. If it was a snake liking judge, they may rule he was ok, and it wasn't his fault that a slimy slippery snake escaped, accidents do happen. Then they have to post a bond and pay to do it all over to try to find a judge with 2oz of common sense. Been there, done that, the legal system is as much a boondoggle as the political one today.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by term2 9 years, 3 months ago
          At least it was 8 feet long and pretty easy to spot. If mine got out I would alert the neighbors but definitely NOT tell the cops so they could fine me and keep the money for themselves and their city retirement funds. Also, I would want it BACK !!!
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 9 years, 3 months ago
        Mama, a snake like that doesn't 'cause harm'...it kills, almost instantly. There's no fixing that kind of harm, lawsuit or otherwise.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by term2 9 years, 3 months ago
          There are a lot of dangers, and kids should be aware of them at an early age, OR the parents should keep them safe. Florida has a LOT of lethal little and big animals out there all the time. If one wants to let young children wander unattended, put up a big wall that these critters cant get over.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by dukem 9 years, 3 months ago
    Not to beat a dead horse. . . . (or any other aphorism wherein one takes on the common wisdom).
    About a dozen years ago I was vice president of a Homeowner's Association in good old California. It was a high end new development. Rules were strict about almost everything, and everyone who bought in (or rented there, or purchased a used home) had to agree to the then current CC&R's as part of their recorded deed.
    For a certain percentage of homeowners, the CC&R's represented something representing authority for them to attack, almost constantly. On homeowner built a custom home and painted the outside quite gaudily (almost purple, actually) in defiance, and had his lawyer present at every conversation where we pointed out his transgressions. (Did I mention he was a leftist history professor who had recently won a Pulitzer, which he reminded everyone of at each meeting?)
    But I digress, and here's the point:
    IF one gives one's word (signs an agreement, executes a contract, use your own vernacular) is he or she not bound to that agreement, and if he/she chooses not to comply with it, then of course he/she (gotta be PC) has the opportunity to relocate and thereby void the agreement? As others on the list point out, it is a choice, and free people make choices. Free people also keep their agreements, IMHO. The idea that it's "unfair" or "takes away my rights" is to me invalid since one has already made an agreement giving away certain rights.
    By the way, I resigned after one year. It was a constant fight. One of the rules in the CC&R's was that "garage doors shall always be closed." Yet somehow everyone was able to get into and out of their garages, apparently without breaking the rules. You buy into fascism, that's what you get.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by JCLanier 9 years, 3 months ago
      Dukem: yes, "...free people also keep their agreements." but too many do not and this inevitably leads to dissension. I had four years on a condo board during a costly construction addition and it was nothing less than a war zone. The documents that govern these associations are usually ambiguous and wide open to interpretation. The experience was, however, a most close encounter with how vicious, how totally unreasonable and downright ugly people can be when they are called to account for their actions or lack thereof.

      This post represents, in many ways, the irrational world that we are immersed in and that we fight against everyday.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ nickursis 9 years, 3 months ago
        Yes. If you agree to something, there is a personal honor to uphold it. That is something that is nonexistent today. Our society has devolved into "beat the system" or "the rules do not apply to me" even when they voluntarily subject themselves to them. The flip side is the fascist application and manipulation of the rules to get to a minority groups exact controlling desires (i.e all houses will be red with white trim). But if you agree to such insane control freaks telling you that, you have purchased your own trouble, don't come back later wanting green and pink.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 3 months ago
      The professor. UC Berkeley goes by the nickname of Yoda?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ nickursis 9 years, 3 months ago
        Haven't we discussed Yoda before in some other posts?
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by khalling 9 years, 3 months ago
          There was the post where a newbie got mad and called me that
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ nickursis 9 years, 3 months ago
            Oh yea, now I recall, just a few weeks ago. OK. Thanks, now I don't feel so confused....
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
            • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 3 months ago
              I wasn't mad I was misled by the dotted lines. At least I think I was the culprit. Yoda is the nickname of the secular progressives theoretician works with and for Soros and Lewis the two billionaire leaders and funding sources who work through moveon.org and the ACLU. Their tactics iare changing the constitution not by amendment through carefully chosen court cases and carefully chosen judges and something called 'framing the debate. a form of perception management or spin. Framing The Debate is a book by Yoda. Acolytes are Obama, Clinton, Clinton, Biden, etc. etc. etc.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by dukem 9 years, 3 months ago
        There are many clones. This was UC Davis, History, can't recall the name. But you know the type.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
        • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 3 months ago
          I became an Zappist. If you want an education go to the library. I liked university towns. Lots of free reading just for walking in and sitting down with a book.Lots of other resources. Also it fulfilled the other half of the equation. If you want to get laid go to school. I worked a full time job always and used the time off to fulfill the other two goals.

          Legal satisfaction was through the military education center testing program. Later it was the external degree programs in three states.

          One day I received a Bachelors in the mail. Another day a second Bachelors. Some years later and a bit more difficult one step up.

          Useful but not enough to produce an income equal to what I made in the blue color skilled trades. I just through that in to explain my sometimes spelling and somewhat eclectic interests.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 3 months ago
    I agree with Mamaemma. I think that if someone wants to let lethal cobras swarm all over their own property, that is their business.

    But I think (and perhaps Mamaemma does not) that the moment that one of them wiggles a scale over the property edge, the owner is At That Moment guilty of having released a harmful animal into the environment. You do not have to wait for the snake to bite someone - right then, you go after the owner with the demand that he pay for a competent search for the reptile until it is captured or until he runs out of money. The owner is still legally responsible if the cobra bites someone - but that is a criminal charge.

    I think that you can do anything that is legal on your own property, but that 'it' cannot transverse the border of your land.

    Jan
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Mamaemma 9 years, 3 months ago
      Actually, Jan, I agree with you completely. I particularly like your thought that the owner should pay for the cost of finding the snake and also for any damage done.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Eudaimonia 9 years, 3 months ago
    Here's a twist to this conversation, and I fully admit that I'm playing Devil's Advocate here: what if the cobra which escaped into the wilds of the US was pregnant?

    I ask this because I lived in the northeast US. We had (and might still have) a big problem with Gypsy Moth Caterpillars.

    The caterpillar is not native to the area. It was accidentally released (I think in the late 1800s) by a scientist who was trying to find a better silk by researching Asian silk worms and caterpillars. To the researcher's credit, he immediately notified the local and federal authorities. The government ended up doing nothing. One hundred years later, during its peak cycle, millions of acres of forest are destroyed by these little bastards.

    So, what to do? It should be the individual's responsibility to clean up their mess. But with living things, a situation can quickly get beyond an individual's ability to responsibility control. And do we want a government which legislates away potential threats (the excuse for much of its current overreach and abuse)?

    Your comments are welcome.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 9 years, 3 months ago
      Government is the least efficient way to get things done. The absolute last group to ask to fix something. In the case of a non native species, I suspect that there are some things that it needs for survival that arent IN that area, and its scientists who would find this out and figure out how to control it. Government just takes money and does nothing.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ jbrenner 9 years, 3 months ago
      Your last paragraph really sums it up well, Rick.
      As I see it, the following are options.
      a) An overactive government decides that such pets can no longer be pets. That is an overreach.
      b) A government or homeowners' association fines them for infringing upon the safety of the neighborhood. There has been some harm done here, simply by people no longer feeling comfortable to let their kids loose in their backyards.
      c) Move along. Nothing to see here.
      d) Have someone whose family member or pet was killed sue for damages, after a tragic loss. Money can make up for some things, but not life.

      This really is a fascinating debate the Gulch will have.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 9 years, 3 months ago
        It is an interesting limit to the idea that we only limit your actions if you actually harm someone. There are potential harms that can be so serious that no post-harm remedy is sufficient to compensate for the damage.

        This rapidly evolves into the preventative use of force which doesn't seem very attractive. I guess you could claim you are using retaliatory force against the probabilistic future act that forcefully impacts your rights.

        But that slope isn't just slippery, it's greased.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 9 years, 3 months ago
          “But on the matter of protecting people from physical danger, if certain conditions of employment, let us say, are unsafe and it can be proved that there is a physical risk – I don’t say that we have to wait until somebody dies – then the employer who is creating this risk can be sued, and can be severely punished financially. In other words, there can be a law protecting a man from physical injury by another man. In this case, the employer who puts men into conditions of danger – not accidentally, but intentionally or carelessly – can be penalized because he is infringing the right of his workers not to be injured physically.” -- Ayn Rand on Edwin Newman's "Speaking Freely" collected in the anthology Objectively Speaking: Ayn Rand Interviewed, edited by Marlene Podritske and Peter Schwartz (Lexington Books, 2009).
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 9 years, 3 months ago
            The problem is proving a risk. The EPA would claim that they have proven that there is a terrible risk from CO2 so they can severely punish financially any company that is producing CO2.

            When you are dealing with unrealized risks the word 'proved' becomes very important.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by khalling 9 years, 3 months ago
              note in the edited quote above (which Mike seems very adept at finding obscure quotes, usually taken out of context for the purpose of argument sake), she says law and then only mentions a civil solution, which exists anyway. She is not advocating a criminal solution of Minority Report
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ WilliamShipley 9 years, 3 months ago
                Jan and I were just discussing Minority Report over lunch -- which she hasn't seen. I said that if all they did was stop the crime it would have made more sense -- but less of an opportunity for drama.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ jdg 9 years, 3 months ago
        I could live with any of those options. But I wouldn't want to put anyone in jail for something like that.

        If it were me, I'd do nothing. The snake will probably take off in search of food. Now if it were a case like the Gypsy Moth Caterpillars, I think I'd do some research and see if some predator which eats them can be introduced without creating a worse problem than it solves. But if I thought the answer was yes, I'd ask the city council for permission first, because I don't want to p off my neighbors. I have to live with them.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Mamaemma 9 years, 3 months ago
    I think what you are saying is that the government should leave the homeowners with the purple playset alone, but should control the ownership of dangerous reptiles. Am I right? Because I don't think it should control either one.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by jhagen 9 years, 3 months ago
      There was mention of the a homeowners association above (I've heard of the purple swing issue, but didn't check it out), But for argument's sake; let's say putting put a purple eyesore is against the homeowners association rules, and a person agrees to move into the association - no one forced them to, it's NOT the government sticking their nose into something, it's a group of free people agreeing to a set of rules - now a member of the homeowners association renigs on his commitment to live by those rules. Why would that person be the one in the right?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 9 years, 3 months ago
        HOA's are socialist institutions. I just wont live in a place with one. I have better things to do that get all worried about a few weeks in the front yard.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by jhagen 9 years, 3 months ago
          If all HOA's are socialist institutions, wouldn't The Gulch then be one also? It too is a group of people agreeing to live by a certain set of rules.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by term2 9 years, 3 months ago
            It could be if the rules let the gulch group take away its citizens rights. I say if you either own your house or you dont. If you do, you should be able to do with it what you want. If what you want takes away the RIGHTS of the others, then there is a problem. Somehow I just dont see how a few weeds in the yard, or the planting of 'unapproved' plants violates anyones rights.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by jhagen 9 years, 3 months ago
              What if you bought into a neighborhood with an HOA that prohibits weed filled yards. You agree to it. You are assured the neighbor across the street agreed to it (thereby giving up his right to a yard full of weeds). You paid extra for this assurance. At that point don't you have some right to not see a yard full or weeds across the street? And isn't that neighbor trampling on your right?
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by term2 9 years, 3 months ago
                I understand that argument, but it troubles me. First of all , the HOA rules transcend the owner who agreed to them. They stay with the land. True, future owners can decide NOT to buy there. I am one of those. I wont live in a place that has HOA. HOA rules tend to get more and more restrictive over time and they can be changed by "votes" of the board. What if the rules prohibited any display of ones philosophy or religion, or forbid being a jew or mormon. Other than the fact that it would be illegal today, what about the morality of it? It just seems like a bad road to go down. I think that working with the neighbors to have an attractive community would be a better way to go. Maybe one of the neighbors has arthritis and cant bend over to pick weeds and someone could actually help him instead of reporting him to the HOA where he gets fined. Maybe someone wants to plant snapdragons because it reminds him of a better time in his/her life, but its against the HOA rules that you cant change the flowers that are in the yard?
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 3 months ago
        Why would anyone live in a condo or a homeowners association situation. If you are going to pretend to own property all that does it give you two sets of rent to pay on top of buying and you get to pay three times really owning only the liability.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 3 months ago
          You would buy into a HOA because you have a limited set of options. It is the only thing you can afford to buy in the path to your eventually owning a ranch in the wilderness.

          Jan
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by Mamaemma 9 years, 3 months ago
            Elton John once said that true luxury is being able to mow your lawn in the nude.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 3 months ago
              I like the image, but will add to it: But not totally nude - wearing a revolver. And drinking a beer too...

              Jan
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by Mamaemma 9 years, 3 months ago
                Way, way better! I love it! There's my laugh for the day!
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 3 months ago
                  Down south of the border we have the Bichi Burger. My mind of course went first to "Son of..."

                  "No Senor it means naked or nude.It's a local term.What you are thinking of is perra in the polite sense and bruja for wha tyou of thinking. That of course is the feminine gender version of perro or dog. The burger itself is one piece of very high grade ground round with nothing else on the platter ergo naked.

                  So Bichi or Bici burger but beware there is also bicha a snake, biche green and bicho a wierd sort of odd ball all pronounced the same.

                  Which brings us back to doing something au natural or in proper Spanish desnudo. That wasn't in the dictionary but nudo was and it means (k)not. No relation but one must be careful. Some perfectly harmless words aren't A saying is if you like the mother you will love the daughter. but the local phrase is gusta la vaca amo la becerra. cow and calf. You may say that and refer to the daughter as a calf but you may not refer to the mother as a vaca or cow. that would mean very very wide to be polite. That word is gordo or grueso but gross is grocera not meaning 144 unless it's kilos while the store for food is groceria.

                  The moral of the story is have a two language dictionary in the hand that doesn't have the cold beer and mind the brizna de pasco y su dedos. Blades of grass for your fingers (also means toes) especially if you are grocera sin ropa and mowing the lawn. Ropa is clothes. Helping at the dock don't say throw me su ropa ask for a soga which can also ve used to make fun of your Spanish or warn you of being in dire straits

                  Ask the why the prefer Spanish they will tell you English is too difficult.

                  When you go to the next state or region it will all change. they do that to get a good laugh.

                  the final caution for safe nude lawn mowing is the slang for a certain other appendage is pistol. i let you guess the rest.

                  Save me a beer.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 3 months ago
                    Thank you for the improptu tour of the Mexican dialect! I will save you a cerveza but do not bring a bruja with you because I do not have a cauldron out for her to stir.

                    Jan
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by jhagen 9 years, 3 months ago
          Because builders are somewhat free to compete. Many homeowners associations are good. I live in a small subdivision of about two dozen single family homes. The people who bought here didn't want to look out their windows and see eyesores - a reasonable goal. And we run the association ourselves (we being this small group of like minded people), so have a say in what our dues are and what they go toward. To most of us, the dues are pay are a very small price to pay for living in a beautiful neighborhood.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ jdg 9 years, 3 months ago
          Depends on how the HOA is set up. I would love to see libertarians set one up, where nobody can be charged to pay for an expense he didn't approve.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by hattrup 9 years, 3 months ago
        Exactly - the HOA rules may not be explicit - so the board/committee may be left with judgement on approving color (and can be challenged) - but I have not seen that level of real detail in this press splash.
        But in general - there may be people that want to live in a quite (color or noise, etc.) community and signed a group agreement on the matter
        (the HOA CC&R's). This is an explicit contract.

        Other folks may like living next to bright pink and green houses, using drums and jack hammers as entertainment - or at least taking the risk without and local/neighborhood CC&R's. Other like to collect appliances and vehicles and park them in the front, side, and back yards,
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 9 years, 3 months ago
      Ayn Rand was more pro-active about the government's rightful role in protecting people. See: http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts...
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 3 months ago
        Thank you MikeMarotta. That is very helpful. So if Ayn Rand says that we can look at an environmental situation at a workplace and predict a likelihood of harm to a worker and then take action against the employer - before harm to an employee has occurred, then that implies a set of standards external to the workplace against which the employer's environment can be compared. If fault is found with the results of that comparison, then action may be taken against the employer (even in absence of a actual case of injury) for the crime of 'having generated a dangerous environment'.

        Hmmm.

        Jan
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 9 years, 3 months ago
      I have to respectfully disagree with you there, Mama. One is an inanimate purple swing set and slide in someone's back yard, the other one of the deadliest serpents on the planet, now loose in an urban environment near at least one school. I shot a coral snake in my front yard several years ago. I never once felt the need to blast a swing set. Venomous snakes is where the philosophical discussion ends. Or at least gets put on pause.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Mamaemma 9 years, 3 months ago
        Not in the least. The principle is what power the government should have to control our lives. If you want to grant power to the government for what you consider a worthy purpose, then you cede power for any purpose.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 9 years, 3 months ago
          But what you're describing is anarchy, and I want no part in it.

          The organizing principle of any society is the protection of the weak, and at some point and in some areas of our lives, we're all weak. As to government overreach, that almost seems inevitable any more.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by Mamaemma 9 years, 3 months ago
            The organizing principle of any society is the protection of the weak. That gives me the willies. How about the organizing principle is the protection of rights.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by khalling 9 years, 3 months ago
              you're doing great mama :)
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by Mamaemma 9 years, 3 months ago
                Thank you, K, bedause this post has a definite whiff of statism, and that gets my hackles up.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by Mamaemma 9 years, 3 months ago
                  "The government should do something!"
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by khalling 9 years, 3 months ago
                    the parent
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by strugatsky 9 years, 3 months ago
                      Don't know if this is an appropriate point to chime in, but here are my two cents, with a prefice that I am as ardent of a supporter of individual rights and freedoms as, I think, there ever was one. I believe in the right of a person to have a tank, but that is because tanks, like guns, do not kill people - it takes a person inside the tank to make it dangerous, and I trust people to be responsible. A venomous snake, however, is deadly automatically the moment it gets out. And they do get out. Kind of like I wouldn't want my tank-owning neighbor to shoot over my house because most of the time the shells will safely pass overhead... I also don't care if someone has a grenade in their home, but if they start tossing it in front of me, I'll have an issue with that, too.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by khalling 9 years, 3 months ago
                        should we do away with circuses?
                        Innocent until proven or found guilty. what about someone who sends their child to school with the flu?
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by strugatsky 9 years, 3 months ago
                          Don't know about circuses - Having a 3-ring circus in DC and 50 semi-local circuses seems to be enough for me...
                          You bring up a good point regarding the flu, or any other infectious desease and associated immunizations. I've been on the fence on this issue. Seems to me that both sides have valid points. In Japan people voluntarily put masks on when they have a flu, yet I remember when my son was in child care, there was one kid who had green crap running out of his nose all the time and we had to keep our son home because of that (while paying for the child care). Eventually, the resolution was to pull our kid out of that childcare. But that begs a question - does the owner of the childcare has the right to stop the infectious kid?
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by 9 years, 3 months ago
              That's simply restating what I said.

              I have a right to my property. If someone stronger or better armed comes to take it, it's the responsibility of government to either prevent it of have my property returned and/or I be made whole. The opposite is anarchy.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
              • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 3 months ago
                And if that someone stronger or better armed IS the government? Worse. The one's you just voted for?

                Anarchists are the extremists of the right. By definition of zero government they are loners.Anything above that would constitute the start of a government.

                The left or the opposite extremists are the Nazis, the Communists, the skin heads, and so forth at the extremes of the left which are any group proposing, actively carrying out or supporting government control of the citizens.

                Fascist simply means complete government control of everything using any and all means available. The government you are referring to is right smack dab in the middle usually calling for citizen control through rights and responsibilities with some limited government. One part of which is usually law enforcement and the other is military defense. They may stretch from the center but always are attached to and support the center and NEVER violate the basic tenets, beliefs, and rights as set forth by the citizens.

                For us the best description of the center was the Constitution. The right or near right probably Libertarians and a few others just to use the direction. The left of course starts, for us, with a coalition of two plus parties the Republicans, the Democrats and a few odds and ends Independents. All of which believe in government control of citizens and most by virtue of their recent actions versus their rhetoric believing in complete control of the citizens. The only connection the Republicans have with the right is they are the right wing of the left. .

                So....if the individual(s) coming for your property are the government to whom do you turn? And having found the answer please share it the job is completely open.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 9 years, 3 months ago
        If not for fear of reprisals from some "government" agency with the ability to fine you and keep the money for themselves, I bet the owner would tell the neighbors right away so no one got hurt AND he could have better chance of getting HIS SNAKE back !!!! If it were me, I would definitely tell the neighbors and enlist their help in locating it for me.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by johnpe1 9 years, 3 months ago
    Salty, we are really good at logic -- what's good for me is good
    for you. . it overrides your judgment,,, in the color of swingsets
    or the nature of pets,,, so that you should adopt MY ideas just 'cuz ........
    well, just 'cuz I am ME and you are not. . so there!!!

    and it I have the power, watch out -- ME counts over YOU. -- j
    .
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Thoritsu 9 years, 3 months ago
    Snake escape is negligence, resulting in a forced contract (like air pollution) with the rest of the community.

    Like jbrenner, I don't like excess rules from government. However, if one is negligent and there are consequences, one is responsible.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Abaco 9 years, 3 months ago
    Well, children enjoy purple playsets. A king cobra can kill many children.

    I hope this helps you figure it out...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 9 years, 3 months ago
      So dont let them wander outside unattended without realizing when they SEE a snake to leave it alone. Earlier they learn the dangers of certain animals and situations, the better.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ Abaco 9 years, 3 months ago
        Cobras regularly kill people in populations that live around them. Those folks surely know all about them. They are nasty critters. I can't imagine running across that snake anywhere in America. Pretty hard to plan for that. We live around rattlers and my kids know about those. Rattlers are pretty shy, though. I wouldn't necessarily place all the blame on the parents if some toddler wandering around in his back yard gets nailed by this thing. I was using a little bit of sarcasm above, by the way. A little... In general, society doesn't like kids, surely doesn't really value them. Playset bad. Wild cobra, eh...
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by term2 9 years, 3 months ago
          The hardest things to plan for are the unexpected ones to be sure. I still remember learning how slippery bricks can be during a slight drizzle. I found out going about 1 mph in a Sam's club parking lot trying to turn into a parking slot. Right into another car- so slow, but totally out of control !!. I dont know what a king cobra really looks like, but anything slithering and 8 feet long would send me running
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ Abaco 9 years, 3 months ago
            Haha...yeah. I hang with the rattlers around here sometimes - finding them fascinating. My neighbor, a snake collector, picks them up with his bare hands (no thanks).

            Kids run rampant all over the place. I get a bit paranoid - clearing the yard of black widows and snakes. Lots of black widows here too. I friggin hate those things! They are nasty.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by term2 9 years, 3 months ago
              We have black widows here in nevada too. Bites ae very nasty. Brown recluse spiders are the bad ones. I havent seen one, but I just dont like spiders anyway.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by JCLanier 9 years, 3 months ago
          Abaco: IF I had a child and it was "nailed" by this creature, I would hold the owner of this animal responsible for nothing less than manslaughter.
          And, the negligence of waiting to inform authorities that might have been able to quickly contain the situation?
          Exotic dangerous animals should not be allowed in residential areas. Wild animals in cages?! I find this cruel and unusual punishment. But I have a hard time accepting the rationale behind a zoo (maybe a long time ago before television).

          If a child got wounded or killed by a gun accidentally left unguarded... well... you would be considered responsible and there would be hell to pay. IMHO, this dangerous animal is no different.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by term2 9 years, 3 months ago
            Interesting, but I would worry more that the thing gets loose and goes after ME. I cant understand why someone would want something that powerful that couldnt be domesticated.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by dbhalling 9 years, 3 months ago
    In common law these issues are treated only in civil law. The law classifies animals as domesticated or inherently dangerous. In both case there had to be actual harm for the plaintiff to have a case. With inherently dangerous animals strict liability is applied. For domesticate animals the case was judged based on negligence.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ jbrenner 9 years, 3 months ago
      You are correct in what you said here, db. The problem is that with inherently dangerous animals like the king cobra, the actual harm would be death, in which case no amount of remuneration in civil court could possibly be sufficient.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Watcher55 9 years, 3 months ago
    "Losing" a deadly snake (in the wild they kill a lot of people) is not like losing a gun, it is more like losing a land mine, except one that hunts you out. So it is a negligent use of force (considering that deliberately releasing a cobra would be a direct initiation of physical force).
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by starznbarz 9 years, 3 months ago
    HOA follies: My property is on a private dirt road in a cypress bayhead on a brown water canal, I have been here 25 years, I am "grandfathered in" as it applies to zoning, property use, etc. - as long as I am the property owner, no one can impose their will on me. A few years ago the 40 acre sod farm adjoining my property was sold to a developer, they sold "conservation lots" that overlooked the bayhead - my bayhead, for $800,000.00 a pop, they also imposed a strict HOA that restricts the color of paint, what type of vehicle you can park in your driveway, etc. Well, to say I was not happy about the development is an understatement, but, as a free market kinda guy, I did`nt cause too much of a ruckus. I chose to embrace MY free market principals in response, namely, we can shoot on the back property, so we do. We have celebrations of Freedom on our property a couple times a year, upwards of 200 people gather for a weekend of live music, food, drink and various merriment activities. We also decided to expand our event photography business to offer multi camera video shoots for local bands for upload on their websites, as well as the occasional movie scene shoot. The point of all this is, the folks that paid large for their house and pay large monthly sums to an HOA that regulates their life to minutia cannot regulate, control, or otherwise alter my chosen use of my property, which renders the HOA as effective as an 8 foot stuffed king cobra. Is it wrong that I enjoy setting up a live band on a Saturday morning in the woods several hundred yards beyond the control of the HOA ? Is it wrong that I take great pleasure in shooting in the same location? I maintain it is not, as I, unlike the poor fools that paid outrageous sums for "security", refused to allow my property rights to be usurped by a select group of would be authority figures. I am, however friendly and always smile wide and wave at those poor souls from my treestand that overlooks the "community".
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 3 months ago
    I like purple I painted my kids swing set purple some decades ago. The answer is if you don't like purple why are,,,make that....why is your long nose peeping over my fence?

    I don't like green I was in the Army...I object to green lawns.

    Same type of reasoning.

    I I wanted my life to look like yours I would have been born stupid.

    Same level of answer.

    As to the snake guy. He's liable and so is his home owners insurance and so is the local government. If I was Orlando's carrier I'd be dropping that policy like in a NY Second.

    Florida is home to some rather large snakes of it's own. Western Duvall Country a few years ago saw one rattler long enough (once killed) to drape from a tall man's shoulders with both ends touching the ground. Maybe one will eat the other? Maybe deputize the rattler?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 9 years, 3 months ago
      Why would you waste being born stupid?;-)
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 3 months ago
        I didn't ergo the reply ...same level of answer. If you noticed the original statement said nothing about condos or owners associations so I ignored it to keep my comments on the same level as the others until that part came up. Condos don't have back yards they have common yards in back That aside some other part has the comment on buying once for the privilege of paying rent twice which speaks for itself. I thought it was time well and accurately spent.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 9 years, 3 months ago
          I didn't mention condos because in truth, I rarely ever think about them. I consider them the worst of both worlds, but that's just me. When someone tries to get me to buy something and then I find that I'm restricted to whom I can sell it (and by extension, how much I can charge), they lose my attention pretty quickly.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
          • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 3 months ago
            Got it! Same sheet of music. My sister and I ended up with one she had gone into and then got out of it before the crash. Bought a house and I had one apartment at the end of the garage area. but I don't stay in one place so we sold that not too long ago and without loss (no payments we just bought the house. She's now in an apartment. Really decent place at half the cost of a condo everything added up.)

            The rest went into her retirement account. We are thinking of buying one down south of the border and she's looking at an RV the same way I looked at a boat.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ Abaco 9 years, 3 months ago
      Must have been an eastern diamondback. Those get huge. By our place we have plenty of western diamondbacks. Biggest I've seen so far is 6' and that's exceptionally large for them. Lots of 3-4 footers. Nasty little critters.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ allosaur 9 years, 3 months ago
    May grow up to14 feet? Article says 18 feet.
    But who cares? I also read the statement that Already Deadly As Hell Huge-Assed King Cobra probably won't bite anyone.
    So move along. Nothing to see here, folks.
    One thing is for sure. Me dino will damn well move on.
    Me dino don't wanna see nuttin' near or about that snake-handling bozo's bungle in the jungle place.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by LibertyBelle 9 years, 3 months ago
    Well, what if it does?--After all , It might just quali-
    fy as a member of an endangered species, mightn't
    it? And besides, man must learn to live in accord
    with nature, mustn't he? So what if a few human
    beings get killed?--As to the purple jungle swing
    set in the backyard on private property, anybody
    knows, doesn't he, that anything on private
    property that defends the aesthetics of one's
    neighbors is an unthinkable atrocity?!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 3 months ago
    Purple Jungle Set a no-no. A deadly King Cobra capable of taking down an elephant -- OK so long as you have a permit. I'm planning to raise Black Mambas in my backyard. They like to drop on you from tree branches delivering a bite deadlier than the King Cobra. Of course, I'll need a permit, but it shouldn't be a problem because I know several folks on the City Council. Next year I am undecided as to whether to raise Black Widow spiders or the Brown Recluse type.
    This IS a great country -- no or what about it.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by wiggys 9 years, 3 months ago
    Kill all of his snakes so it can't happen again and if he doesn't like it let him move. of course kill the one that got away when you find it.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo