keeping out idiots

[The Dougster]

Initially, the shade of color was overlooked but that has since been rectified. As stated, every paint store knows exactly what color purple works.... I was one of the many skeptics when this law was proposed and passed, but after giving it some thought, it makes a lot of sense. Posted and No Trespassing sings can be stolen or destroyed. Stripes of purple paint are inexpensive for the landowner and much more difficult for those intent on defying the law to avoid.
Trespassing laws were altered to allow for more severe prosecution, i.e., if a gun is involved in the trespass, or if damage is caused, then "criminal trespass" charges can then be filed. That constitutes a felony offense.
Be it right or wrong, that's just ho wit is and it seems to be working.

 

[Redneck in training]

I am originally from central Europe. In Europe land owning is a privilege as opposed to right (as in USA). Landowner is a steward of the land with responsibilities to landless population to keep the land healthy for future generations. In the old feudal times all the land was own by local noble but since there were many people living in his land they were allowed to travel across the land, pick dry wood, berries, herbs and mushrooms. After the land reform when some of the noble land was given to the peasants they also allowed other people use their land as the nobles did. So today (Today it is a law) if you own land outside of village or the city you have to let other people access it. There are rules of behavior though. No motor vehicles, no hunting or camping, no screaming, making fire, cut wood or do any sort of damage in example to crop. People can pick berries and mushrooms. No fences without special permission are allowed (in example seedlings for reforestation have to be fenced to protect them from animals so fence will be permitted but has to be removed after the seedlings are gone).
This arrangement works quite well because even though you own the land you can't build a house on it unless it is in residential zone (within city or village limits) therefore (because you don't live there) people crossing your land don't invade your privacy.
Once population density reaches certain level land has to be protected against development or it will be gone.
I am not saying that the European model is better or worse. It is different; it is proven to work because it is based on thousand years old custom. So in Europe, once you are outside of city limits there is not such thing as trespassing.

 

[have_blue]

So in Europe, once you are outside of city limits there is not such thing as trespassing.

Thanks for the informative and interesting primer on European land ownership and rights.

As Americans, we have a constitutional right to own and control land as we please. Most of us feel that when government regulations creep in, we are no longer truly free. There is a false stereotype that accuses us of abusing our land. That's a bunch of hooey. I would hazard a guess that in fact, very few people abuse their own land. Why on earth would we want to harm our own land? I think most land abuse is done by criminal trespassers and by the government.

 

[Redneck in training]

I would like to clarify it. Not all European countries might be like Czech republic I am from. Slovak republic is like that. I think also Austria, Germany, Poland, Hungary and all the countries separated from old USSR and Russia have similar way of land use. I am not sure about the rest.

I didn't say that Americans abuse the land but they can if they wish to. When I bought my land it was overgrazed and is greatly damaged by consequent erosion. I see similar issues on many places around where we live. Another example is clear-cutting all trees and selling the wood. In Czech republic, you would need a permit to do so even though the trees are yours. Most likely you will get a permit to cut patches or selected mature tress only and you would have to reforest the same season. I used to own a cottage back in CR. One time I asked for permision to cut a big pine that was touching edge of the roof. I had to wait for the local forester to come and look at it. After I got the permit I had to plant three oaks near by and make sure they were alive five years alter.
I think some common sense regulation are not necessarily bad. The problem is the "common sense" issue though.

 

[MikeD74T]

Thanks for the informative and interesting primer on European land ownership and rights.

As Americans, we have a constitutional right to own and control land as we please. Most of us feel that when government regulations creep in, we are no longer truly free. There is a false stereotype that accuses us of abusing our land. That's a bunch of hooey. I would hazard a guess that in fact, very few people abuse their own land. Why on earth would we want to harm our own land? I think most land abuse is done by criminal trespassers and by the government.

"As Americans, we have a constitutional right to own and control land as we please" as long as we continue to pay taxes on said land and follow all the land use regulations. Anything to the contrary will be seen as a "criminal action" and loss of land "ownership" will follow. The definition of "abuse" is, and will likely always be, determined by government. MikeD74T

 

[Greenmountain Farmer]

I THINK that in VT, land that isn't posted is open to hunting to anyone. Basically like a public hunting area. I still can't wrap my mind around such a foolish thing, but that's the way it works.

You are supposed to ask land owner first

Tom in Vermont

 

[The Dougster]

<"land that isn't posted is open to hunting"

This concept is completely foreign to Texans... we have developed a system where land is leased for hunting/fishing... I know that hunting is my cash crop and the only one I can depend on year after year. I know I have read where in some states, many landowners willingly allow hunting on their property without charge... Strange... very strange.. lol

 

[Renze]

Over here, i really dont know if it is allowed to trespass. You cant just sue trespassers, unless you put up a deep blue sign with white letters, "access prohibited, conform art. 461 law book of criminal law"
Trespassing is allowed when you put up a green sign "put open" with a clarification in smaller letters underneath with general rules, open from dusk till dawn, dogs need to be lined, no fire, etcetera.

So there are prohibitive signs and declared open signs, i have no idea if trespassing is allowed on land which is not declared open, but no files can be charged when you havent put up the sign that points to article 461 of lawbook of criminal law.

It is certainly not allowed to just go offroad anywhere, either with or without motorised vehicles.

 

[RPW]

One reason the purple paint works so well is that when you have trespassers you call the game warden not the county sheriff. The game wardens are more quick to respond. I personally would call both and let whom ever wants to take jurisdiction figure it out. Another thing with the game warden is that depending on the situation the county has to get owners permission or warrant to enter private property the game warden doesn't.

 

[have_blue]

"As Americans, we have a constitutional right to own and control land as we please" as long as we continue to pay taxes on said land and follow all the land use regulations. Anything to the contrary will be seen as a "criminal action" and loss of land "ownership" will follow. The definition of "abuse" is, and will likely always be, determined by government. MikeD74T

I wouldn't advise you try me.

 

[G.P.S.Investments]

I have sign that reads "THIS PROPERTY IS PROTECTED BY (PICTURE OF SHOTGUN)THREE NIGHTS A WEEK.YOU GUESS WHICH THREE.
That also helps with rumour & the law.But seems come right down the line people who wreak,steal,stab,shoot,kill,land owners have more RIGHTS. : than the the owner.Thanks Lawyers

 

[MikeD74T]

I wouldn't advise you try me.

Please explain ????????? MikeD74T

 

[mtncharlie]

Things are different, in Texas, but traps are still verboten. Even with what most of us would consider adequate warning, booby traps are not permitted, because they are indiscriminate.

However, between sunset and sunrise, in Texas, I know better than to trespass, because lethal force is not only permitted, but, in some counties, recommended!

Pretty much the same here in Oklahoma, we have what are known as "Castle Doctrine" laws "or as some have referred to them "Make my Day" laws. to wit: if someone comes in your house uninvited , they are bought and payed for. If someone is on your property and threatens you with a weapon of any kind(also known as "assault") you have the right to use deadly force. If, as in the case of the meth heads attacking the man and his brother, there are more than one of them, even if they are unarmed, you have the right to use deadly force until there is only one assailant per attackee left. Of course, if they are armed, all bets are off.

To put it nicely, don't come messin' around my place after dark unless you know me, or you have a death wish. I am normally the nicest guy you would ever meet, but when my life or the lives of my family are at stake, even Rambo better watch out.
As far as some of the other postings on here, lawyers have turned this country into a haven for criminals, of course, they are who keep them in big houses and Mercedes. The biggest mistake the American People ever made, was in allowing lawyers to be lawmakers, because they have tilted the playing field 90 degrees in their favor.
MC

 

[Renze]

Pretty much the same here in Oklahoma, we have what are known as "Castle Doctrine" laws "or as some have referred to them "Make my Day" laws. to wit: if someone comes in your house uninvited , they are bought and payed for. If someone is on your property and threatens you with a weapon of any kind(also known as "assault") you have the right to use deadly force. If, as in the case of the meth heads attacking the man and his brother, there are more than one of them, even if they are unarmed, you have the right to use deadly force until there is only one assailant per attackee left. Of course, if they are armed, all bets are off.

Over here, a thief sued a house father (model citizen) for beating him up after finding him in his living room at night. guy used enough force to master the thief and hand him over to the police, (policemen dont even dare to take action anymore, let alone use their gun, too much risk of loosing jobs or getting bashed by the left wing politicians) but the judge ruled that it wasnt necessary to beat the thief and cause a flesh wound in his eyebrow...

I wish some people stand up who love the country and appreciate the result of hard work, instead of fools that make a living out of state subsidized political activism, and the scum they protect. I am in no way a national socialist nor one of them skin-heads with ******** tattoos, but political correctness of the democratic showbizz, has gone too far these days.

A 60 year old father (fine christian, visits church every week) of a 19 year old girl who disappeared 7 years ago and was found raped and murdered a week later, said in a TV program that if he found the responsibles, he would not hesitate to execute the punishment they deserved, if he was 100% sure this was the guy, and he had the chance. The TV host was shocked and asked how this man could justify this, based on the bible: The man said that the government carries the sword, to maintain justice. If the government failed so miserably to maintain justice, he felt he could justify this.



When as you say, an intruder has already signed its fate by trespassing, you could simply invite your enemy to your house, beatin him up or kiling him, stuff a gun in his hand and then let the police take care of it... the more rights you give to a citizen, the more risk of abuse by foul people.

Allthough i do wish it was legal to beat up a home intruder, it would double the busting rate if you can protect whats yours, without taking the risk of getting sued by the low-lifes. If someone hurts my young sister, beats my mother, a week in jail or a 1000 euro fine, will be more than worth that. I will risk a criminal record for that, i dont want to work for this government anyway....

 

[KennyV]

If you or your society tolerate nonsense that is what you should expect.

If you do nothing to stop it, because you are not allowed , then again that is what you should expect.

I try to do the right thing not because I am allowed to, but I feel I have a bit of an obligation to do what is right.
If everyone waited until their legal adviser clears an action... nothing would ever be done to prevent wrong doers from doing wrong.
If you are so uncertain what should be done... you have not really prepared yourself for actual possibilities.
And if you are not able to determine what is right... then there is a very good possibility you spend too much time in the wrong doers group...

life is only as complex or simple as you allow it...

 

[Renze]

I try to do the right thing not because I am allowed to, but I feel I have a bit of an obligation to do what is right.

amen to that

 

[Iplayfarmer]

I wonder what proportion of crooks who met with defensive occupants actually have won a tort case. I'm hoping this is one of those situations where the exception gets the press attention. We've all heard about the ones who won a suit for excessive force, but I wonder how many out there had thier case thrown out or lost the fight.

Me, I'll risk it. If I have to defend my place, my person, or my family; I'm going to defend it. I'll take my chances with a bleeding heart judge and some hot head lawyer. If I do ever have to exhort to forceful defense I'll have the words in my head from an ex-cop that I worked with once, "Make sure there's only one story." Rare is it that a dead man wins a lawsuit.

As for vandals tresspassing, I've had good luck spreading rumors about my place. I had some neighboor kids that kept getting in with the horses. I told them that the sorrel mare put a girl in the hospital for a week (it was a coincidence, but I didn't tell that part to the neighboor kids). I never saw them on my side of the fence again.

 

[Guywire]

Speaking of signs, I can remember reading of a complaint against a landowner who had posted a sign which read:

NO TRESPASSING - RADIATION HAZARD - PERSONNEL WITHOUT PROTECTIVE CLOTHING MAY RECEIVE RADIATION BURNS.

The neighbors were concerned and took the landowner to court. His defense:
"Your Honor, all I did was post a sign warning folk that if they run around naked on my property, they will receive a sunburn."

If memory serves, it was in Canada and I don't remember how the court ruled.

Roy