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

a reply to: Logarock

How about "encouraging feedback". Does that ease your paranoia a little better?

a reply to: kaylaluv


Who is talking about FEMA camps? This is a constitutional issue and any approach to this right, to inhibit the right, must be answered by a "people jealous for their rights".

The cracked pots are the types that get defensive for the position of the government here.

This reminds me of monkey island game they banned pirates in that where in groups of more than 3.
Also reminds me of the Australian bikie laws in Queensland.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
[pWhat I'm saying is, they aren't being lawless, unconstitutional monsters, hell-bent on taking away all of our rights. They are following the rules, are they not?

Regardless of whether a county governmental agency holds hearings on a proposed ordinance and is 'following the rules', if that ordinance in unconstitutional in nature, which this is, they are not in actuality following the ultimate rule, the Constitution of the United States.

This is reflected by the county representative quoted in the Original Post who felt this ordinance would create a flood of lawsuits. There is obviously some recognition at the county level that this law would curtail freedom of assembly.

a reply to: Logarock

Then go to the meetings and tell them that. That's what they're set up for. Unless you going to tell me that it's all a ruse, and they don't plan on really listening to what anybody says at the meetings because they're evil.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: kaylaluv
[pWhat I'm saying is, they aren't being lawless, unconstitutional monsters, hell-bent on taking away all of our rights. They are following the rules, are they not?

Regardless of whether a county governmental agency holds hearings on a proposed ordinance and is 'following the rules', if that ordinance in unconstitutional in nature, which this is, they are not in actuality following the ultimate rule, the Constitution of the United States.

This is reflected by the county representative quoted in the Original Post who felt this ordinance would create a flood of lawsuits. There is obviously some recognition at the county level that this law would curtail freedom of assembly.

I think once my new house is finished up I will throw a gathering of friends in the new hood....inviting all neighbors of course. This proposal is ridiculous to me....I can't think of much that is more fun to do than have a neighborhood block party with the kids and everyone enjoying the company of neighbors.

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
I think once my new house is finished up I will throw a gathering of friends in the new hood....inviting all neighbors of course. This proposal is ridiculous to me....I can't think of much that is more fun to do than have a neighborhood block party with the kids and everyone enjoying the company of neighbors.

I bought a Victorian awhile back and when my wife and I finished restoring the exterior and downstairs we invited 150 of our closest friends and neighbors, put a tent in the front yard, hired a DJ and got married on the front porch.

Everyone says it was one of the best parties they went to.

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: Vasa Croe
I think once my new house is finished up I will throw a gathering of friends in the new hood....inviting all neighbors of course. This proposal is ridiculous to me....I can't think of much that is more fun to do than have a neighborhood block party with the kids and everyone enjoying the company of neighbors.

I bought a Victorian awhile back and when my wife and I finished restoring the exterior and downstairs we invited 150 of our closest friends and neighbors, put a tent in the front yard, hired a DJ and got married on the front porch.

Everyone says it was one of the best parties the went to.

That is what I am talking about! Get togethers like that are what makes a community whole. We are renovating a single story ranch to a 2 story and doing the entire guts of the house along with it. Walking distance to wife's work and farmers market. Walking distance to new city hall/city center, great area and large neighborhood pool 4 houses down where we hang out every summer with the kids. Love communities like this.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: smithjustinb

Just pointing out a fallacy in your argument. You cannot peaceably assemble anywhere you want, any time you want. There are limits. That's all.

As long as they don't violate the constitution, I don't care what they do.

Assembly is limited to public property anytime anywhere, and private property at the property owner's discretion anytime anywhere. This is the right protected by the constitution. Use that statement for further interpretation of what I meant by "Anytime. Anywhere."

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Logarock

Then go to the meetings and tell them that. That's what they're set up for. Unless you going to tell me that it's all a ruse, and they don't plan on really listening to what anybody says at the meetings because they're evil.

it is well known that public meetings, open house with officials, whatever, are often held after a decision has already been made. These meetings are held to give the public the impression that they were heard and their opinions were taken into consideration in the final decision.

How about these town meeting a few year ago and all over the place. They mostly featured some blow hard beating down any opposition in the room.

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Logarock

How about "encouraging feedback". Does that ease your paranoia a little better?

I see it not as paranoia but a big ol fashioned waste of time. Citizens are going to go down and complain to the local narcissistic power trip about plans to curtail the constitutional right to assemble? Whats there to say to a dumbazz like this? Whos got to be paranoid? I would rather my neighbor catch me talking to a block of wood than be seen engaged in the dammed foolishness of talking to a gaggle of constitutional idiots.

a reply to: Vasa Croe

I don't have to research to know this is safety related. Fire codes and such. ever see those "Balcony Collapse" stories? Plus fire? Apart from people's lives at risk, what about noise or parking...was this specifically aimed at "political" assemblies?
It seems a reasonable precaution IMO.

originally posted by: Indigo5
I don't have to research to know this is safety related. Fire codes and such.

Then you should have done some research because it is for every residential property, including ones with plenty of acreage and no balconies.

This is not a safety ordinance, this is about limiting the number of people you can have on your property.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

If what you say is accurate then it should not survive a legal challenge on constitutional grounds.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

And right you are...Anyone citing Mainstream media in an Op...specifically Fox or MSNBC et al. should cite the original material.

That said the ordinance and text can be found here.

It's a local Ordinance...and I think that differs from laws?...It is also a proposal, not passed yet? I think this ordinance is dumb and poorly structured and likely to get slammed in court if it ever passes, which also seems unlikely.