Women Gets 93 Days In Jail For Planting A Garden!

[squealpiggy]

It is needless because those are petty, perhaps even vindictive complaints. Laws should serve the common good, not the common taste.

Bylaws exist to facilitate the resolution of petty disputes though. They are an ugly necessity because people take these things very seriously. Without a legal recourse to have their petty disputes resolved people would take matters into their own hands and when that happens the results aren't often pretty, they tend to end violently.

If I elect to wear plaid with spots, I'll be goddamned if someone is going to stop me because it is unsightly.

Wearing bad clothes tends not to be such a bugbear for people (although there have been cases of laws being passed in - where else? - America in respect to how low someone can wear their pants) while messing up their neighbourhood with unsightly paint, decorations, vehicles, fences, architectural decisions, landscaping decisions etc causes huge issues.

The issue of jail time is a red herring. These female wants to make a meal of this instead of doing the reasonable thing and saying "OK, I'll put down some grass seed and leave the carrots at the back."

[Spartacus Sully]

It'll be awesome when the woman wins this.

as the Ambiguity of the word suitable will allow the decision to weigh in favor of the woman.

[iPhoneKiller]

Can the TS change the title to American woman please

America seems to suck

[squealpiggy]

I'll be honest I don't think her garden looks bad and I think her neighbour is being a bit of a dick, but she's an idiot if she thinks that the court case will have anything to do with whether or not her garden looks nice.

[AKATheMack]

Are we saying people are now forced to buy food if they wish to eat? Thats ridiculous, the government has no place in telling people how to feed themselves. Its much cheaper to grow your own vegetables than it is to buy them yet politicians want food stamp benefits cut, they want to limit access to guns and now you cant grow your own food either.

[Jim Jeffries]

Are we saying people are now forced to buy food if they wish to eat? Thats ridiculous, the government has no place in telling people how to feed themselves. Its much cheaper to grow your own vegetables than it is to buy them yet politicians want food stamp benefits cut, they want to limit access to guns and now you cant grow your own food either.

Homegrown tomatoes FTW. Looks like she could've planted a garden in her back yard and gotten away with it, she just did it in the front because it had been torn up replacing a sewer line. Neighbors can be dicks and I do believe we have too many laws in this country, tacky and otherwise, which is a large part of the reason we have 2.2 million people in prison.

Anyhow, another neighborhood "cleanup:"

[AKATheMack]

Homegrown tomatoes FTW. Looks like she could've planted a garden in her back yard and gotten away with it, she just did it in the front because it had been torn up replacing a sewer line. Neighbors can be dicks and I do believe we have too many laws in this country, tacky and otherwise, which is a large part of the reason we have 2.2 million people in prison.

Anyhow, another neighborhood "cleanup:"

Americans arent allowed to play sports or grow vegetables and then we cant figure out why we're fat.

[Nuurzhaelan]

Bylaws exist to facilitate the resolution of petty disputes though. They are an ugly necessity because people take these things very seriously. Without a legal recourse to have their petty disputes resolved people would take matters into their own hands and when that happens the results aren't often pretty, they tend to end violently.

Excellent points. Still, we have laws to protect against such violence, but I see your point. I wonder if lawmakers had the prescience to write the law with a mind toward thwarting such violence or if its genesis was merely some bureaucrat desperate to get his/her name and law 'on the books'. Pardon my cynicism, but I don't think that humanitarian order was causal to the ordinance. But you made excellent points.

Wearing bad clothes tends not to be such a bugbear for people (although there have been cases of laws being passed in - where else? - America in respect to how low someone can wear their pants) while messing up their neighbourhood with unsightly paint, decorations, vehicles, fences, architectural decisions, landscaping decisions etc causes huge issues.

The issue of jail time is a red herring. These female wants to make a meal of this instead of doing the reasonable thing and saying "OK, I'll put down some grass seed and leave the carrots at the back."

I still think she should fight it but, what you suggested is reasonable as well.

[Spray_resistant]

It's not really "needless" as her garden has produced complaints. If people in the neighbourhood do not want vegetable gardens in front gardens then a bylaw prohibiting vegetable gardens in front gardens is not needless.

It's like parking. Parking cars in areas where they don't cause a hazard is annoying to some people, hence there are parking bylaws.

PPl complain about alot of things, doesn't mean local government should have laws about them or even if they do even act if its frivolous which this is.

I hope she wins for the reason that they shouldn't be wasting time with this when I am sure there are more important things local officials could be doing.

[squealpiggy]

Are we saying people are now forced to buy food if they wish to eat? Thats ridiculous, the government has no place in telling people how to feed themselves. Its much cheaper to grow your own vegetables than it is to buy them yet politicians want food stamp benefits cut, they want to limit access to guns and now you cant grow your own food either.

This is precisely the conclusion it is unreasonable to leap to. A woman got a citation from the council asking her to move her vegetable garden to the back yard as per building code and you've extrapolated that to "the government" restricting peoples' right to grow their own food!

This is a petty local bylaw case and she has decided to be wacky and assert her right to a jury trial (for some baffling reason) which is going to cost everyone more time and more money and is going to take twelve people away from their jobs and families to sit in a court room listening to something trivial.

This case is tremendously unimportant and only conspiracy theorists could make it seem relevant to human freedom

Has Alex Jones got a hold of this yet?