It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Virginia proposal would limit size of gatherings at private homes...more rights at stake...

page: 4
51
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 6 2014 @ 09:36 AM
link   
a reply to: butcherguy

Hey, I said in my first post that I thought there were existing laws to handle these types of situations. I also said that I agreed with stopping people who are disrupting my peace and quiet. Then you said I should move if I don't like it. And it went on from there. No, we don't need a new law. Yes, we should be able to stop large, frequent rowdy groups in private neighborhoods.




posted on May, 6 2014 @ 09:45 AM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv



No, we don't need a new law. Yes, we should be able to stop large, frequent rowdy groups in private neighborhoods.

Yay! Common ground!
I like you, and I would back you up if I were your neighbor and we had crappy neighbors that made noise and caused trouble!


edit on b000000312014-05-06T09:48:40-05:0009America/ChicagoTue, 06 May 2014 09:48:40 -0500900000014 by butcherguy because: spelling



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 09:50 AM
link   
Even though I agree we don't need a new law, having read the Fairfax County statements, I really don't think this is a nefarious attempt at curtailing our constitutional rights. It really is all about residents' complaints regarding noise, cars, etc.


Over the last several years, there have been complaints from residents regarding frequent large gatherings at neighborhood homes. These gatherings can create parking, noise, and other concerns for the neighborhood. Although occasional, large gatherings - such as private parties, house concerts, religious meetings and social clubs - are expected and permissible activities at a home, gatherings that occur on a regular basis involving numerous people can detract from the residential nature of a neighborhood because most residential structures and neighborhoods are not designed to accommodate such events.


www.fairfaxcounty.gov...
edit on 6-5-2014 by kaylaluv because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 10:41 AM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: butcherguy



No, I don't believe that's true. It's about not assembling in large masses in a private home/neighborhood. It doesn't say anything about large assemblies in other areas that can more easily accommodate.





DId you even read my post? Do you notice that this law would also affect me even when I don't bother anyone???



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 10:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: butcherguy



Hey, I said in my first post that I thought there were existing laws to handle these types of situations. I also said that I agreed with stopping people who are disrupting my peace and quiet. Then you said I should move if I don't like it. And it went on from there. No, we don't need a new law. Yes, we should be able to stop large, frequent rowdy groups in private neighborhoods.





This law is not limited to "private neighborhoods". It limits me on my 4.6 acre lot with nobody to even hear any noise.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 11:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

This is definitely an infringement on the right to assemble.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 11:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: butcherguy
a reply to: kaylaluv



No, we don't need a new law. Yes, we should be able to stop large, frequent rowdy groups in private neighborhoods.

Yay! Common ground!
I like you, and I would back you up if I were your neighbor and we had crappy neighbors that made noise and caused trouble!



This right here!
This is the point that should be understood by the rest..if we back each other up and do not cower and wait for the Govt mommies and daddies to save us we can solve our own problems as a community.

If someone wrongs you, it affects mainly you. Why call others to solve your problems for you? I can tell you right here and now.
Fear
Fear of consequence from the Govt mommies and daddies if we do something wrong while trying to do something right. This fear paralyzes us from taking action, exactly as it is designed to do..



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 12:33 PM
link   
a reply to: SilentKillah

Did you read why the county was doing this in the first place? Because of residential complaints. If your neighbors are not complaining about you, you think the cop cares whether you are having a party? They aren't doing this for any reason other than to shut up the complaining residents. It's total overkill, in my opinion, but I guess the squeaky wheel gets the oil. So, you and your neighbors and friends should complain loudly to the county, and maybe they'll drop it. Just be squeakier than the others.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 12:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
Because of residential complaints. If your neighbors are not complaining about you, you think the cop cares whether you are having a party? They aren't doing this for any reason other than to shut up the complaining residents.


If someone is having people over and they make too much noise after a certain time, leave their vehicles parked on the street between 2:00AM and 6:00AM (which is a common ordinance to prevent overnight partying), behave indecently, endanger others, etc., then there are laws already in place to deal with those situations.

If they are doing none of those things and they want to have people over every single day for the rest of their occupancy of that residence then it is none of anybody's business, particularly the government's.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 01:27 PM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Well, zoning ordinances and regulations are legal and valid, as long as they're reasonable and don't discriminate against a protected group. And they can be a very good thing to protect everyone's property values.


Courts have held that a zoning regulation is legal or valid if it is reasonable and not arbitrary and bears a reasonable and substantial relation to the public health, safety, comfort, morals, and general welfare and if the means employed are reasonably necessary for the accomplishment of its purpose. An ordinance is invalid if its enforcement will preclude use of the property for any purpose to which it is reasonably adapted.


legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...

If you think a zoning ordinance is unreasonable, I guess you petition the zoning board, or committee, or whatever it's called, but I'm not sure they are going to have much sympathy for someone who wants to have lots of large rowdy parties every week.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 01:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: angelchemuel
un-blooming-believable!!!
So what happens if you want to marry in your own home and have a marquee for the reception?

Rainbows
Jane


Obama has already spun this type of law under the auspices that it is economic stimulation not regulation.

Now such events would be required to be held at a properly licensed businesses spurring economic spending! It's not regulation it's stimulation!

Sigh. We're doomed.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 01:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
Well, zoning ordinances and regulations are legal and valid, as long as they're reasonable and don't discriminate against a protected group. And they can be a very good thing to protect everyone's property values.


I am not disputing that. They also cannot impede or impinge anyone's Constitutional rights however

If you think a zoning ordinance is unreasonable, I guess you petition the zoning board, or committee, or whatever it's called, but I'm not sure they are going to have much sympathy for someone who wants to have lots of large rowdy parties every week.


This ordinance is proposed so the process would be to have it reviewed before the town and have all legal questions answered at that point by the Town Attorney.

There are already ordinances on the books that deal with 'large and rowdy parties'. If someone wants to have 50 people over everyday on the property they pay taxes on and they are not breaking any laws it is none of anyone's business.







posted on May, 6 2014 @ 01:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Unity_99

...but they need to fire the people writing these assinine unlawful ordinances.




I think we should set them on fire and invite a minimum of 50 people to attend. These events should take place regularly until we are out of fuel.


Amazingly just although skimming against the 5th I fear.
None the less, and as they have advanced first the effront,
"So let it be chiseled... so let it be so." Was that to be an affront?
As a pedestrian for half my working life, there are a lot of
hydrocarbon credits I have saved up for so deserving a cause.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 02:26 PM
link   
It really doesn't matter if there are a bunch of obnoxious neighbors or a town that is too squished together to accommodate large gatherings. Creating a law to make things more convenient for the police is a breach of the right to assemble peacefully. I am thinking on a larger scale than just one towns inconveniences because this could potentially open doors to make this constitutional right even more limited.

There are towns at this time that have laws over what public properties large groups can assemble. One has to have a permit in many others so the government can approve and plan in advance for the gathering. Enough already. I promise if that same government official wanted to have a big wedding with 500 guests for an extended weekend this law would not apply. I would be really careful on what we endorse folks - and not be short sighted in anything one approves the government to pass.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 03:19 PM
link   
a reply to: Vasa Croe

Virginai seems to be doing everything it can to try to get the state to go to the GOP next Presidential election, from limiting voter rights, to unconstitutional voter ID laws, to this now, (if it's true). This law would be designed to stop people from communicationg with each other, from organizing. In my opinin, states with legislatures that think like VA will keep pushing and pushing until the Fedral governement has no choice but to step in to protect the voter rights we all have, (are you listening Ohio, Sounth Carolina?). These kinds of restictions effect all of us, not just one side.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 05:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
I don't want frequent large gatherings next door to me either. My neighborhood is usually quiet and peaceful, and I want it to stay that way. There are public places where one could have large gatherings - like parks and beaches. You could also rent facilities, like a community club house, or even use a church for your gathering. Those are all public places, and I believe this law only affects gatherings in homes/residential neighborhoods. So, you are not prevented from gathering -- you are just prevented from gathering in a home/neighborhood.


Yeah. Well its not right for you, who enjoys your neighborhood for your own reasons to infringe upon the rights of those who want to enjoy their lives how they want to enjoy it. Your ideal neighborhood isn't necessarily parallel to another's. The world doesn't revolve around you.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 06:02 PM
link   
a reply to: smithjustinb

And I'd like to enjoy my life by shooting the next guy who cuts me off in traffic. After all, the world doesn't revolve around him, and it would be very enjoyable for me.



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 06:51 PM
link   
a reply to: kaylaluv

I just have to ask - how does a neighbor who is loud because they are having a big celebration analogous to shooting someone because they cut you off in traffic?



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 06:52 PM
link   
Double post my accident so will say if neighbors are that bad, one needs to go through the appropriate channels and have the civil servants we all pay come to put an end to it. Many people have all had difficult neighbors but do not seek to endorse a law that infringes upon basic rights to have whom we want at our personal residences. That is just selfish and sets into place a permanent decision for all within that community for now and future generations.
edit on 6-5-2014 by Dianec because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 6 2014 @ 07:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: smithjustinb

And I'd like to enjoy my life by shooting the next guy who cuts me off in traffic. After all, the world doesn't revolve around him, and it would be very enjoyable for me.


Unfortunately, for you, murder is not supported by the constitution of the U.S. The right to assembly, however, is.



new topics

top topics



 
51
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join