You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Fuck Donald Trump but....... Can He save Democracy?
One recent high profile case involves Hermine Ricketts and Tom Carroll, a couple in Miami Shores Village, Florida, who was told the front yard vegetable garden they’d tended to for 17 years was prohibited according to a new zoning code that banned front yard vegetable gardens. They had to dig up their plants, which supplied half the food they ate, or face $50-per-day fines.
Florida’s Third District Court of Appeals has sided with the local officials and their attorney, who proclaimed, “There certainly is not [a] fundamental right to grow vegetables in your front yard.”
Yup, local zoning ordinances do restrict how you can use your property, it's false that any state bans growing your own food. If they wanted to grow vegetables in their front yard they should have considered that before they bought property in a municipality that disallows it. Or they could garden indoors or in the backyard, like normal people. If they wanted a farm they should have bought land zoned for agriculture. Is your argument that the federal government and the USA is bad because in some communities they have decided to protect residential property values and tax revenues by establishing rules about lawns and other zoning laws?
This is an old argument, and maybe you should read more about this particular case and numerous others. The ordinances changed and the fines were forced upon them. In my opinion it should never be illegal to produce your own food, and therefore see this as what I originally called it and you called into question. Forcible rule of one man over another. Show me how gardening has ever negatively affected home values please. I'll show you home after home where the values have gone up as a result. You're just defending rule of law for defending it's sake.
You seriously think the condition of the lawns and other houses in your neighborhood does not affect your homes value?
do you really need me to explain some of the ways to you?
It's not "illegal for them to produce their own food", it was apparently illegal for them to do so in their residential front yard in the municipality they owned property in.
"I'll show you home after home where the values have gone up as a result."
If you have actual evidence of people planting vegetables in their front yards and that actually being the cause of their neighbors property values rising then that is great please show me and I will forward it to whatever municipalities ban front yard vegetable jungles. They are not banned here, I have seen a couple, they look fucking terrible.
Let's say your neighbor puts a cattle feed lot in his front yard of the residential neighborhood where you are a homeowner, because he has a right to grow his own food and he likes beef, you don't think that might offput potential buyers when you go to put your house on the market?
There are plenty of places they could grow food in Florida and even in that city, like the backyard, right?
good try with the ridiculous example and again asking me to disprove your words. I've offered evidence again and again. You have offered semantics and misrepresentation of my words. I'm starting to think you're not as smart as you think you are....
The point was never all the places people are allowed to grow food, it is the fact that anywhere they are not means one man is ruling another by force. My original point which you have forgotten in your ridiculous quest to be right in spite of the facts laid before you.
But good try...
the evidence you offered proved me right and you wrong. your claim was false just like I said. you got all bent out of shape and mad at me and still can't admit your claim was false.
way to fail to answer any of the questions, again.
Why is it a ridiculous example?
It's funny when people call something ridiculous because they are stumped by it.
It's funny that you don't see how the people making a mess in their front yard are the ones harming their neighbors the whole neighborhood and the whole town.
Here is a common example, people leaving junk cars on their lawns, many if not all cities have ordinances about that, if your neighbors put a bunch of junk cars on their front lawn you don't think that might turn some people off of buying your house if you were to sell it?
Who is the "one man" who was ruling another in this case? Did one man make the city ordinance, is that how city ordinances are made? You define "force" as a small civil fine?
Again, your arguments are weak and you have to resort to semantics. Maybe you misread the claim. Maybe you should go back and reread thus thread and check up your arrogance.
Maybe you should try asking questions instead of just saying false again and again.
But that would be a sign of wisdom. All your signs are pointing to a need to be right (even with your astounding lack of evidence, just half assed opinions and twisted words so far) and think you're smarter than others. It's actually quite entertaining.
I read a few of your posts weeks ago and actually defended you as a satirist. But you actually believe the garbage you preach!!! It's terrifying and hilarious at the same time.
I only hope you're not a lawmaker or a cop anywhere. You might be though based on what you've said so far.
And yeah. A fine for growing a garden is force. One penny is too much. But I wouldn't expect you to understand principles.
Excellent, that is a perfect example of a state not doing anything like banning people from growing their own food. They were required to maintain grass in their front yard because of a city zoning ordinance. A very reasonable ordinance because people growing gardens in their front lawn looks terrible and lowers everyone's property values in the area and thus lowers the local municipal tax base so many communities have established such ordinances in their localities, if you want a preview of what local control looks like, that's it.
What you have clearly failed to do is prove your claim that state government bans people from growing their own food. Note also that they were only subject to civil fines and not arrest.
You're twisting words and facts as usual. I said in some states I'm not allowed to grow food. And I gave you an instance in Florida where a court of Appeals upheld the city fine even after they changed the zoning. This is merely one case and again your lazy ass needs help with Google.
Exactly, you proved yourself wrong with that example, in fact no state disallows you from growing food! You proved that in one state there are municipalities that won't let you grow vegetables in your front yard. If you want to make a true statement then don't say "in some states I'm not allowed to grow food." because that is false. A true statement would be: in some states some cities don't let you grow vegetables in your front yard.
But the truth is not as hyperbolic and fearmongering right?
That wouldn't have the effect you were going for with the lie right?
I don't use google, I love you used google to prove me right and your own claim false. I also love the suggestion that your use of google is not lazy and more profanity, to prove how smart you are.
Resorting to semantics is hilarious. You have misquoted me from the start and now you have to backpedal with third grade semantics. Not my fault you read it wrong. Maybe ask for clarification when you misunderstand things instead of just saying "false" over and over.
It's not semantics, your claim, that you keep reiterating, is false. I didn't read it wrong. You said something false, why is it so hard for you to just admit it? There is no state where you are not allowed to grow food.
In Florida and many other states it is illegal to grow food. Even if it is regulated by counties and municipalities.
You're intentionally getting off base dude. You asked where one man ruled another. I answered again and again with limited examples. Reread this thread homie. Your arguments are weak and becoming less and less relevant with each new flail of your proverbial arms.