Man Getting Evicted from Land for living "to simply"

reply to post by thewholepicture


I don't quite understand this reply

Originally posted by MarineSniper12Kills
reply to post by thewholepicture

 

In iraq....for lack of better words was in a form of irony? English was never my forte

once again, I commend you for fighting. I admit I over reacted a bit.

I do believe in freedom and due process for all!

It is a truly sad day for humanity when an innocent person is hounded for living simply - not hurting anyone, not hurting animals, not hurting the world.

This man's footprint on this planet is almost invisible, and he should be honoured for that.

I honour him anyway, whatever others say.

To think he was hounded for greed makes me ill.

reply to post by thewholepicture


You may be labeled as a hater for the country but who cares, that's not harm. If you go to other countries and speak against the govt they kill you. Look at china. We do have it better than most countries.

reply to post by GhostLancer

You are missing the point that the individual owners of ONE to FOUR dogs do not GENERATE the amount of waste present with HERDS OF ANIMALS.

I disagree. I have been in dog owners backyards and I have been on farms and dairies. Per square yard a dogowners backyard easily competes with a dairy or farm. IMO

As for dairies and farms, they HAVE RUNNING WATER AND ELECTRICITY and usually, if not always, a PLAN for PROPER WASTE DISPOSAL. While dairies and farms generate MORE, they are also held ACCOUNTABLE for a PLAN to somehow treat and/or dispose of the waste in whatever acceptable form exists.

Ya it's called manure. The exact thing you are stating is dangerous is exactly what cow crap is used for. As a nutrient rich organic fertilizer.

Again, would you drink from water flowing downstream from his land? Really? Are you really defending his right to pollute?

I have drank from many flowing streams. They are all downstream from somewhere and animals generally don't use a toilet.

Originally posted by thewholepicture
I'm just curious, because someone has, supposedly, fought for our country, we now have to right no disagree with them without being labeled a hater of our country?

I may dislike most of our government, but do not hate our country!!! Quite the opposite, otherwise I wouldn't be fighting for this guys rights.

edit on 2-12-2010 by thewholepicture because: (no reason given)

What about this guy's neighbor's rights?

Just asking?

Originally posted by thewholepicture
I'm just curious, because someone has, supposedly, fought for our country, we now have to right to disagree with them without being labeled a hater of our country?

I may dislike most of our government, but do not hate our country!!! Quite the opposite, otherwise I wouldn't be fighting for this guys rights.

Your position seems to allow for the guy to pollute surrounding/downstream areas from a lack of proper management of waste, darn the health consequences. That's not right. Individual rights are GREAT. It's what America is about. But, we humans are SOCIAL animals, and have to interact and LIVE in groups for the most part. You can't simply BUY LAND and think you can dump waste onto it. People live DOWNSTREAM. His lack of running water and electricitySCREAMS that he has no PLAN for waste disposal from his MANY ANIMALS. Sure, give him due process, as anyone should deserve. Authorities would not have noticed his activities if his activities had not gained the negative attention of his neighbors. Apparently, this guy and his MANY animals gained attention. This suggests that he wasn't/isn't handling the management of these animals properly. Given the lack of information of the article, we must speculate about the biggest issue concerning MANY ANIMALS. Waste, anyone? Waste, without running water and electricity to help manage the situation?

Running water and elecricity (to power and effect MEASURES to manage waste) greatly aid in the conduction of waste material, I would imagine.

This isn't about this guy's rights to pollute. This is about the communiy's rights to keep him from polluting, should that be the case. We simply need more information to determine who is in the right or wrong.

Originally posted by MarineSniper12Kills
reply to post by thewholepicture

 

You may be labeled as a hater for the country but who cares, that's not harm. If you go to other countries and speak against the govt they kill you. Look at china. We do have it better than most countries.

Yeah, it's sad when one is labeled a hater for supporting our rights.

actually it's down right just wrong.

What happened to our country?

Originally posted by harvib
reply to post by GhostLancer

 

I have drank from many flowing streams. They are all downstream from somewhere and animals generally don't use a toilet.

THIS EXPLAINS A LOT.

reply to post by GhostLancer


No, that is not my position! My position is:

DUE PROCESS,

how many times do I have to say this

reply to post by MarineSniper12Kills

And harvib im sorry if my reply came off how it did but im tired of seeing people on here rip our country to shreds, calling it amerika and saying how horrible it is. I agree with you we DO need to discuss the issues you are very correct. Just be glad we CAN discuss the issues. Before we soldiers came in to iraq, there citizens couldn't discuss govt issues or they would be shot. Yet we fought for no reason.

No apology needed. I think what you are witnessing is peoples' feeling that there is a division in this Country between those who create the laws and those who are bound by them. I think people are feeling that some lawmakers and enforcers are not acting in their best interest but in the interest of their corporate financiers.

I would wager that those who use the term "amerika" do not feel that they are the ones ripping the Country to shreds but that the Country is being ripped to shreds and they are expressing their frustration at such actions.

Originally posted by thewholepicture
reply to post by GhostLancer

 

No, that is not my position! My position is:

DUE PROCESS,

how many times do I have to say this

This is not about fighting for a person's right to POLLUTE. This is about the community's right to keep that person FROM POLLUTING.

reply to post by GhostLancer

THIS EXPLAINS A LOT.

LOL. Oh come on now. A flowing stream is generally some of the cleanest mineral rich water you can drink. If you are really worried about tainted drinking water, it is the tap water you should avoid.

reply to post by thewholepicture


Im not labeling u as a hater, you think i believe in this gvt to the fullest....hell no im not blind, what i do have a problem with is people hating us. We risk our lives to do what we believe in and come back home to this....my father was in nam and went through the same thing, its sickening. Eventually war will come on our land, and after all the hatred towards us u think we will wanna fight for these people....what has this country come to

Originally posted by GhostLancer

Originally posted by thewholepicture
reply to post by GhostLancer

 

No, that is not my position! My position is:

DUE PROCESS,

how many times do I have to say this

This is not about fighting for a person's right to POLLUTE. This is about the community's right to keep that person FROM POLLUTING.

So from your way of speaking, if you do something that is looked at as wrong, then you can be kicked off your land with no where to do, if I just get your city council to not like what your doing?

OK, where do you live.

No wait, you'd be screaming for a court hearing.

You claim to support peoples rights, but totally disregard this guys right.

If the guy is found guilty of the crime of polluting, and the jury recommends he get thrown off his land, then I support that 100%, but the fact of the matter is he is not being given a fair chance.

What makes you think that this man doesn't have his waste trucked away and disposed of properly?

As you said things are missing, but I sure don't remember seeing anything about the city having a problem with his waste.

reply to post by harvib


And i agree with that, but the govt and the troops are two opposite worlds that many try to innertwine together

reply to post by thewholepicture


But this is where we need more information on the article....he may have been warned numerous times which then he should def be removed....if this was his first time i can see working out a plan with him or warning him or something

Originally posted by MarineSniper12Kills
reply to post by thewholepicture

 

But this is where we need more information on the article....he may have been warned numerous times which then he should def be removed....if this was his first time i can see working out a plan with him or warning him or something

I live in Madison county, Indiana. The policy here is that this man would have to be warned numerous times and allowed many months to resolve problems before he is evicted.

Originally posted by MarineSniper12Kills
reply to post by thewholepicture

 

But this is where we need more information on the article....he may have been warned numerous times which then he should def be removed....if this was his first time i can see working out a plan with him or warning him or something

I would agree with that, as long as the warnings and city codes are warranted. just not having running water and electricity is no warrant. if he is polluting the environment, than that should have been addressed long before now through due process.

But the point is...WAS he or was he NOT. Firstly you should know your county ordinances before you deficate on the land