Land of the Free, My Ass

[Alaska Darin]

Town Attempts to Deny Occupancy to Family because They Aren't Married

[VABills]

Mannassas in VA had a similar law that was recently repealed. It was meant to prevent these large ethnic families from moving into homes with 4 generations from both sides (20+) people living in a home meant for 4-7 people. A similar type situation forced them to repeal the law. It's a piss poor law based on a good idea to keep home values in an area up. Not sure the right/best way to create such a law or even if you can, maybe HOA rules, who knows.

[Pine Barrens Mafia]

Understandable. Wrong, but understandable.

 

I lived in a neighborhood where four houses were owned by multi-generational Mexican families. Them men typically worked in NYC or some other place, so they were rarely home. The women didn't really take care of the houses too well. The lawns were overgrown and the houses looked like crap.

 

There is most definitely a racist element to these kinds of laws.

[UConn James]

The town where my brother and s-i-l built their house wouldn't give them an occupancy permit until they planted a row of 4' hedges along their driveway. Which turned into a Saturday killed by yours truly digging holes (I have a PhD in shoveling from my construction days).

 

What do hedges have to do with occupancy of a building? Flipping bureaucrats who get their jollies by telling people where they can and can not plant their rhodedendrons and what square footage they need to build their homes in such-and-such a residential area. By what ^%$&ing authority does a town deny someone the right to live in a house that has been paid for by a private person? And people shrug, and say, What can you do?

 

You know what? I'd put up yellow tape and a "Occupancy Denied" sign on the town hall. All of those people working together and they're not all married to each one of the others. I would make it my mission in life to $%^& over these people's work lives, if only as a deterant to other said bureaucrats.

 

Too many good, hard-working people are at the mercy of town halls.

[UConn James]

Understandable. Wrong, but understandable.

 

I lived in a neighborhood where four houses were owned by multi-generational Mexican families. Them men typically worked in NYC or some other place, so they were rarely home. The women didn't really take care of the houses too well. The lawns were overgrown and the houses looked like crap.

 

There is most definitely a racist element to these kinds of laws.

608486[/snapback]

 

As long as a dwelling is sturdily constructed and safe to inhabit, and YOURS, what damn right does anyone else have to say how it looks?

 

Land of the Free (as long as you have a Green Lawn© (or, it's your ass. Because your land doesn't belong to you. The government just lets you inhabit it for a while.))

 

And yes, I'm not one who uses this term loosely, but this kind of stuff smacks of racism.

[VABills]

As long as a dwelling is sturdily constructed and safe to inhabit, and YOURS, what damn right does anyone else have to say how it looks?

 

Land of the Free (as long as you have a Green Lawn© (or, it's your ass. Because your land doesn't belong to you. The government just lets you inhabit it for a while.))

608497[/snapback]

Higher property value = higher taxes = higher spending , which is good for the majority.

[UConn James]

Higher property value = higher taxes = higher spending , which is good for the majority.

608499[/snapback]

 

That's exactly the type of rationale the city used to take people's homes in New London, Conn. in order to sell the land to build a shopping mall.

 

Which you (and most everyone else in this country) regularly bemoan.

[Crap Throwing Monkey]

That's exactly the type of rationale the city used to take people's homes in New London, Conn. in order to sell the land to build a shopping mall.

 

Which you (and most everyone else in this country) regularly bemoan.

608503[/snapback]

 

But in VA's defense, his memory's about as short as his stature...

[VABills]

That's exactly the type of rationale the city used to take people's homes in New London, Conn. in order to sell the land to build a shopping mall.

 

Which you (and most everyone else in this country) regularly bemoan.

608503[/snapback]

I wasn't saying it was right, just stating the party line. Your the liberal remember? You're the one who likes to raise taxes and spend more money, of other folks. I;m the conservative. I'd just as soon live in a log cabin, shooting anything that hits my property, well as long as I have DTV and the NFL package that is.

[VABills]

BTW these folks may not have much power when it comes to appealling to HUD. The only law that I see in reference to Single Family home occupancy seems to state local/state laws can do this restriction, note the paragraph that says family status can be dictated by law:

 

That neither he, nor anyone authorized

to act for him, will refuse to

sell or rent, after the making of a

bonafide offer, or refuse to negotiate

for the sale or rental of, or otherwise

make unavailable or deny the dwelling

or property covered by the mortgage to

any person because of race, color, religion,

national origin, familial status

(except as provided by law), or handicap.

[Bill from NYC]

That's exactly the type of rationale the city used to take people's homes in New London, Conn. in order to sell the land to build a shopping mall.

 

Which you (and most everyone else in this country) regularly bemoan.

608503[/snapback]

 

And right you are. It is also the rationale that led to this sort of facism.

 

It is sad to watch those that pose as liberals or conservatives cheer as our rights vanish.

Then again remember, VABills is a good guy, but as I recall, he supported a smoking ban in the homes of citizens if they live in public housing projects.

[VABills]

And right you are. It is also the rationale that led to this sort of facism.

 

It is sad to watch those that pose as liberals or conservatives cheer as our rights vanish.

Then again remember, VABills is a good guy, but as I recall, he supported a smoking ban in the homes of citizens if they live in public housing projects.

608514[/snapback]

They are not the citizens homes. They belong to either the state or federal authorities or managed by PBCA's, etc... Therefore the governement is within their right to restrict activities that occur there. In fact, the law already covers in in that you are not permitted to smoke in a federal buildings. However this law is not enforced. But continue on with your ignorance.

[Bill from NYC]

They are not the citizens homes.  They belong to either the state or federal authorities or managed by PBCA's, etc...  Therefore the governement is within their right to restrict activities that occur there.  In fact, the law already covers in in that you are not permitted to smoke in a federal buildings.  However this law is not enforced.  But continue on with your ignorance.

608516[/snapback]

 

Never mind. I am not looking for a fight with you. In my other post, I stated how I feel about you.

Maybe we can hire several thousand "smoking inspectors" to burst into the homes of the NYC poor in late night raids, and possibly evict them into the street for cigarette smoking.

Nah, let the cops do it, right?

[VABills]

Never mind. I am not looking for a fight with you. In my other post, I stated how I feel about you. 

Maybe we can hire several thousand "smoking inspectors" to burst into the homes of the NYC poor in late night raids, and possibly evict them into the street for cigarette smoking. 

Nah, let the cops do it, right?

608523[/snapback]

I am all for shoot first, evict later. Your way seems kind of costly.

[OGTEleven]

You know what? I'd put up yellow tape and a "Occupancy Denied" sign on the town hall. All of those people working together and they're not all married to each one of the others. I would make it my mission in life to $%^& over these people's work lives, if only as a deterant to other said bureaucrats.

 

608492[/snapback]

Good luck with that. BTW....don't drop the soap.

[bills_fan]

They are not the citizens homes. They belong to either the state or federal authorities or managed by PBCA's, etc... Therefore the governement is within their right to restrict activities that occur there. In fact, the law already covers in in that you are not permitted to smoke in a federal buildings. However this law is not enforced. But continue on with your ignorance.

 

You've got to be kidding me??? So, now the gov't should be restricting legal activities in housing projects? The gov't is mych too intrusive and invasive as it is and you want it to become moreso?

[VABills]

You've got to be kidding me???  So, now the gov't should be restricting legal activities in housing projects?  The gov't is mych too intrusive and invasive as it is and you want it to become moreso?

608554[/snapback]

Then don't apply for "FEDERAL HOUSING" allowances and subsidies. If you want to smoke, go pay for the rent yourself. Pretty friggen simple.

 

Oh and that will be enforced in the future. Wait until you get a more liberal administration, and I can pretty much ensure that will be enforced.

 

BTW, it is not LEGAL to smoke in federal buildings.

[UConn James]

I wasn't saying it was right, just stating the party line.  Your the liberal remember?  You're the one who likes to raise taxes and spend more money, of other folks.  I;m the conservative.  I'd just as soon live in a log cabin, shooting anything that hits my property, well as long as I have DTV and the NFL package that is. 

608508[/snapback]

 

I'm NOT "the liberal." Far from it. And yet you insist on deeming me as such.

 

Good luck with that.  BTW....don't drop the soap.

608533[/snapback]

 

I didn't imply doing anything illegal. Just be every bit an officious bastard as the beauracrats are being. Go over every bit of their decision-making, note their mistakes be they small or grievous and publicly air them loudly and often. Attend every town/city council meeting and raise your voice, call the newspaper, etc. Be the squeaky wheel. Sh--ty ordinances like these only get rectified when enough people say, 'Hey, that's BS!!' This and stories like it are a true example of where the media does its best work.

 

From one standpoint, I could understand a town/city not wanting Joe Blow to send his kids to live with his friend Guy Bastard b/c that town has better schools. But it's in the making of the law that doesn't account for 5 million unmarried couples who live with each other that is the stink of it.

[RkFast]

You guys take this as a personal affront to our "freedom", but if 40 illegal aliens jammed themselves into a house next to yours, like is happening all over Long Island, Id guarantee youd ALL be singing a different tune.

[RuntheDamnBall]

You guys take this as a personal affront to our "freedom", but if 40 illegal aliens jammed themselves into a house next to yours, like is happening all over Long Island, Id guarantee youd ALL be singing a different tune.

608722[/snapback]

How about letting immigration solve that issue?

 

It is pretty appalling that some of the board's conservatives are sticking up for this one. Let the bureau of the government that is supposed to deal with illegals deal with them. Give them more teeth, whatever. But using this law as a means instead of finding a solution grounded in reality and pre-existing laws is no better than the endless amounts or regulations on guns are to most conservatives.