Marine vet's 20-foot flagpole has homeowners association filing suit over a display of patriotism t

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by mydarkpassenger

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by mydarkpassenger

Originally posted by Sinnthia

Originally posted by mydarkpassenger
Yes. Really. That HOA board is simply pissed that this man is defying their ruling, even as that ruling is unlawful.

I was simply disputing your errant guess with the facts. Sorry you used that as a jumping point to shift from. Deny knowledge!

You are great at insulting people when your argument fails.


The HOA ruling is unlawful.

Except that, as has been proven here ad nauseum, it's not. Try again.

Actually not. Please support your opinion with facts, and try again.

Re read the thread. RE: section 4 of the flag act of 2005. I dont have any inclination to post it a 5th time.

Again, re-read it yourself. This Marine is not in violation since, the HOA has had no complaints, and cannot justify a loss of property value because of the way this man chooses to display the flag. Federal law trumps a home owner's association, period.

reply to post by mydarkpassenger


Please quote the part that says there must be a complaint...

also, reasonable is a subjective word. If the HOA deemed something like this 'unreasonable', and this man moved in anyway, that is his poor choice.

20 feet is a bit like overkill for a home. Couldn't he just install a Shaq-sized flagpole and be content?

Originally posted by SyphonX

Originally posted by mydarkpassenger
Why does the phrase "as full of sh*t as a Christmas turkey" come to mind on reading this?

Maybe it has something to do with your attitude. Your blanket attitude and opinion of Marines tells me you have spent exactly zero time among them.

So you were in Mosul? In what capacity prey tell?

Why did you even ask me if I served or "put my ass on the line" if all you were going to do is call me a liar? I seldom talk about being in the military, as a means of "debate", but you asked and you received. I'm not going to keep listing my experiences to you.

Frankly, I knew you would do this, so I'm left to question myself why I answered you.

Good luck on your quest to find that every soldier fits neatly into your close-minded checklist of a "patriotic soldier", you may have difficulties completing said quest in the year 2011.

(and when I speak of Marines, I'm referring to the "outspoken" among them)

Apparently, the facts have nothing to do with your discourse or your assertions that you even have ever been around Marines in general, or were ever in Mosul in particular. I think you are a liar.

That said, this Marine has the right to raise the US flag, as the flag law of 2005 recognized before he bought the property, despite a bunch of little dictators on some local HOA board.

This man is remembering his comrades. And he is recognizing all those others who have fallen. This man is honoring those who have fallen, who have served, and those who still or will serve.

This takes first place, against a bunch of small people having a small power trip.

Semper Fi Marines!!!

I have to say this - for all of you who are arguing the semantics of the HOA rules versus the Act of 2005, etc. - this is exactly the quagmire that HOAs caused in the first place. HOA's have been taken from something that was supposed to manage common property or landscaping/snow removal/etc. and are now some God-awful form of fascist control.

Those of you saying "he didn't have to move into a neighborhood where there was a HOA" or "he knew where he was moving in was a HOA", etc. - OK, sure. Got it. WHATEVER. Please - the point here is he is being brave enough (and showing that he actually has a pair) to challenge the bullsh$t HOA rules and to stand his ground for something that is patriotic and just. This country has come to be a pitiful shame when our own Congress has to pass an Act in 2005 to PROTECT THE DISPLAY OF THE US FLAG. For those who don't like it, I'll pitch in for the next coach-class ticket to Congo for you. Adios.

HOA's get to the point where they think they can do whatever they want, whenever they want. The homeowner still OWNS THE PARCEL AND PROPERTY, albeit it is shared and attached as a structure. There have been movements to take over HOA's just for this kind of Nazi behavior. There have also been movements to abolish HOA's for the same.

It is a shame when some neighborhoods get to the point where you can SEE the individuals taking their "daily walks" just LOOKING for violations so they can "screw their neighbor". The rules were meant to be for CHRONIC problems, not daily harrassment. But now... got the wrong light bulb in your coach lamp? GET A FINE! Is your animal tethered in the back yard? GET A FINE! Are you feeding the ducks in the retention pond? GET A FINE! You didn't mark your garbage bin correctly? GET A FINE! On and on and on with the most LUDICROUS examples of rules that shouldn't exist. Most are retired with nothing better to do than cause problems for others. If anything, they should move into a retirement community where they can spend their forgetful days writing each other up for a new fine.

These kinds of HOA's are usually run by people who never really had a purposeful life, so they want to exercise control over their little corner of the planet and screw people over because they didn't get their chance.

I salute this Marine, and I back him up 200%. If I was his neighbor, I would support him in this endeavor with every ounce of effort I could. Because it is usually neighbors like him that are willing to help you, and are not about to report you for some frivolous violation.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by mydarkpassenger

 

Please quote the part that says there must be a complaint...

also, reasonable is a subjective word. If the HOA deemed something like this 'unreasonable', and this man moved in anyway, that is his poor choice.

It is called common sense.

For there to be a drop in property values, the HOA board would have to demonstrate complaints. They can not.

And the federal law trumps this bunch of little neo-nazis.

reply to post by rarelibra


You said it! Thanks rarelibra!

Originally posted by mydarkpassenger
Apparently, the facts have nothing to do with your discourse or your assertions that you even have ever been around Marines in general, or were ever in Mosul in particular. I think you are a liar.

Semper Fi Marines!!!

Isn't that cute. Well, I like to pretend it never happened either. Forget names, and forget it all, so I can sleep at night.

Originally posted by SyphonX

Originally posted by mydarkpassenger
Apparently, the facts have nothing to do with your discourse or your assertions that you even have ever been around Marines in general, or were ever in Mosul in particular. I think you are a liar.

Semper Fi Marines!!!

Isn't that cute. Well, I like to pretend it never happened either. Forget names, and forget it all, so I can sleep at night.

Have a nice night. Maybe tomorrow, we'll hear how you were at the battle of Midway.

Originally posted by mydarkpassenger

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by mydarkpassenger

 

Please quote the part that says there must be a complaint...

also, reasonable is a subjective word. If the HOA deemed something like this 'unreasonable', and this man moved in anyway, that is his poor choice.

It is called common sense.

For there to be a drop in property values, the HOA board would have to demonstrate complaints. They can not.

And the federal law trumps this bunch of little neo-nazis.

SO you cant quote it. Thats right, because it doesnt exist. There does not have to be complaints. There are many ways of proving loss of property value. It would be as simple as providing a shill prospective buyer that would testify to the fact that he wouldnt buy because of the pole.

That law, as I have said so many times in this thread, has a specific provision, section 4, which allows for HOA's to do just this. To define what they feel is reasonable.

I understand why you are arguing as you are. It sucks. HOA's for lack of a better word, suck. But the fact of the matter is, they exist, and giving them you money while standing up against them isnt a brilliant tactic, especially when the law is on their side.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by Violater1

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
Just love how these elite corporations infringe on the American, much less the pride that some have! I'm glad to see this guy stand up for what he believes in.

Also good to see that the Flag Act of 2005, supersedes the HOA bylaws. Hope it goes to court, so the HOA in question will be seen as the asses they are!

www.chron.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

edit on 7-1-2011 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)

I am not a fan of homeowners associations, but he chose to live in one, and therefore to follow the rules of it.

There was a time when people lived in the south and had slaves. Some of those people openly protested slavery and ended up in jail! And your saying, for those objecting Southerners, they are wrong? Because they weren't following the rules?

That's pretty twisted.

Something you are missing here, as you usually do....the slaves didnt(sic) sign contracts.

When I first purchased my condo in Lancaster, the restrictive deeds and covenants were something that only a socialist would love. I could not fly the American Flag, nor could I post a for sale sign in the yard. I sold that hole for ten grand more than I paid for it.
Servants or slaves, yes, some did have to sign a contract.
Wrong again.
www.crf-usa.org...

“The South Carolina code included a contract form for black “servants” who agreed to work for white “masters.” The form required that the wages and the term of service be in writing.”

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
There does not have to be complaints. There are many ways of proving loss of property value. It would be as simple as providing a shill prospective buyer that would testify to the fact that he wouldnt(sic) buy because of the pole.

That law, as I have said so many times in this thread, has a specific provision, section 4, which allows for HOA's to do just this. To define what they feel is reasonable.

Will you please provide a link to this section 4 law.
Wow.
Majorliealots, you would stoop so low as having someone purger themselves in a court of law!
You call that simple!
Then having the audacity to continue with quoting the section 4 law!
Law really means nothing to you does it?

Originally posted by Violater1

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by Violater1

Originally posted by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by Whereweheaded
Just love how these elite corporations infringe on the American, much less the pride that some have! I'm glad to see this guy stand up for what he believes in.

Also good to see that the Flag Act of 2005, supersedes the HOA bylaws. Hope it goes to court, so the HOA in question will be seen as the asses they are!

www.chron.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

edit on 7-1-2011 by Whereweheaded because: (no reason given)

I am not a fan of homeowners associations, but he chose to live in one, and therefore to follow the rules of it.

There was a time when people lived in the south and had slaves. Some of those people openly protested slavery and ended up in jail! And your saying, for those objecting Southerners, they are wrong? Because they weren't following the rules?

That's pretty twisted.

Something you are missing here, as you usually do....the slaves didnt(sic) sign contracts.

When I first purchased my condo in Lancaster, the restrictive deeds and covenants were something that only a socialist would love. I could not fly the American Flag, nor could I post a for sale sign in the yard. I sold that hole for ten grand more than I paid for it.
Servants or slaves, yes, some did have to sign a contract.
Wrong again.
www.crf-usa.org...

“The South Carolina code included a contract form for black “servants” who agreed to work for white “masters.” The form required that the wages and the term of service be in writing.”

Doesnt get much more sensationalistic than this. Because the man signed a contract, willfully, and with no benefit, he is just like a slave. Do you even read what you write? Or the sources you quote? Like the one you just did, that speaks about former slaves?

Do you troll everyone who kills one of your threads?

Originally posted by Violater1

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
There does not have to be complaints. There are many ways of proving loss of property value. It would be as simple as providing a shill prospective buyer that would testify to the fact that he wouldnt(sic) buy because of the pole.

That law, as I have said so many times in this thread, has a specific provision, section 4, which allows for HOA's to do just this. To define what they feel is reasonable.

Will you please provide a link to this section 4 law.
Wow.
Majorliealots, you would stoop so low as having someone purger themselves in a court of law!

You call that simple!

Then having the audacity to continue with quoting the section 4 law!

Law really means nothing to you does it?

Done it multiple times already in this thread. Please read the thread before you troll it.

And please stop with the ad homs, the accusations, and the lies. You can try and twist my words any way you like, anyone with an IQ can simply go back through the thread and see that you are trolling.

i try to avoid taking these things to the mods, but I will if I must.

reply to post by Whereweheaded


What does being Patriotic mean?
Does it mean you agree with what the Government or Military are doing.
Does it mean you agree with what all Corporations / Banks are doing to the People and Country.

How can someone be Patriotic and Love their Country when the Country is basically screwing everybody in the Country, unless you agree with what is going on.

I knew quite a few years ago, Americans only had to look at a Flag and started Saluting it. Just wonder if that still happens in the USofA Today.

reply to post by Whereweheaded
I can see both sides of this argument and they both have good arguements. But the fact is, he moved into this area and put his signature on all the paperwork involved. If the HOA's contract specifically states how the flag pole must be erected and the size of it, he's probably not going to win his case. Maybe he should watch a few episodes of "Judge Judy" when she gets to talking about contracts.

As a veteran, I can understand his pride in displaying the flag of our country and one day hope we will be able to get over argueing about how it can be displayed.

Originally posted by mydarkpassenger
The 2005 flag law null and voids HOA contracts on this specific issue.

...no... the law you're referring to is a code, not a law applicable to civilians, nor does it have penalities attached... its a guide, a reference for those who VOLUNTARILY want to follow the flag code...

Originally posted by mydarkpassenger
The HOA ruling is unlawful

...no... they are not preventing anyone from flying a flag... the whiner just has to abide by the height and placement rules that he agreed to when he signed the hoa agreement...

Originally posted by mydarkpassenger
This Marine flys that flag to honor those he served with, and those past, present and future who have, are, and will serve in all US military services.

...if you mean the whiner and he really said that - then, no, he's disrespectful of those who have served because he's using them to promote himself... cant get much lower than that...

Originally posted by Violater1

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
There does not have to be complaints. There are many ways of proving loss of property value. It would be as simple as providing a shill prospective buyer that would testify to the fact that he wouldnt(sic) buy because of the pole.

That law, as I have said so many times in this thread, has a specific provision, section 4, which allows for HOA's to do just this. To define what they feel is reasonable.

Will you please provide a link to this section 4 law.
Wow.
Majorliealots, you would stoop so low as having someone purger themselves in a court of law!

You call that simple!

Then having the audacity to continue with quoting the section 4 law!

Law really means nothing to you does it?

Here you go. Read it and weep.

www.govtrack.us...

Then return here and apologize.

We need to get rid of homeowner's associations. Every time I turn around, I hear about another one that's causing trouble for somebody.

Originally posted by gnosticquasar
We need to get rid of homeowner's associations. Every time I turn around, I hear about another one that's causing trouble for somebody.

How is the HOA causing trouble for somebody?