If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(KMOV St. Louis)   A homeowner tired of pranksters driving on to his lawn decides to lay a trap consisting of a board with nails hammered through it buried along the street and painted black to make it harder to see. And of course someone has a problem with this   (kmov.com) divider line 138
    More: Obvious  
•       •       •

16194 clicks; posted to Main » on 20 Jul 2014 at 7:39 AM (18 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



138 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-07-20 09:26:22 AM  

Fredster: This guy needs to meet up with Repairman Jack.


I've tried to read that first book like 10 times. I just can't get into it. Does it get better after the first few chapters? Up through the part where the 'stereotypical racist indian guy caricature (short of having him own a farking 711) gets him to find the medallion, it was just boring as hell, and focused more on gradeschool level drama and 'I am so sneaky and awesome' writing.
 
2014-07-20 09:26:51 AM  

MasterAdkins: No matter how justified booby traps are illegal.  Large decorative boulders, however, are not.


I put in a nice split rail fence to solve that problem once. Turned out to be a double win.
 
2014-07-20 09:29:41 AM  
I like the "Repairman Jack" method of dealing with these people: Put up a row of plants/bushes/shrubberies/what have you, and in-between them you put a foot tall concrete post that's concealed by said foliage. They run into your yard, their car gets torn up, nobody can fall on the spikes and complain. Problem solved.
 
2014-07-20 09:36:34 AM  

jankyboy: Reminds me of when my grandfather used to toss thumbtacks onto a stretch of grass that was adjacent to his house. The grassy section did not belong to him, but he took care of it since the town ignored it.

He got tired of neighbors treating it like a dog park, walking their dogs there and not cleaning up afterward. Sucks that it was the dogs who paid the price.

/he was a grumpy man; he was a great man
//RIP grandpa


Your grandpa was not a great man. He was a busybody that tried to kill/wound dogs in what sounds like a city-owned public lot.
 
2014-07-20 09:39:16 AM  

lackadaisicalfreakshow: jankyboy: Reminds me of when my grandfather used to toss thumbtacks onto a stretch of grass that was adjacent to his house. The grassy section did not belong to him, but he took care of it since the town ignored it.

He got tired of neighbors treating it like a dog park, walking their dogs there and not cleaning up afterward. Sucks that it was the dogs who paid the price.

/he was a grumpy man; he was a great man
//RIP grandpa

Your grandpa was not a great man. He was a busybody that tried to kill/wound dogs in what sounds like a city-owned public lot.


It IS delightful when idiot dog owners meet idiot homeowners.
 
2014-07-20 09:43:26 AM  

Yogimus: It IS delightful when idiot dog owners meet idiot homeowners.


It's like a train wreck of inadequacy?
 
2014-07-20 09:43:52 AM  

kroonermanblack: I've tried to read that first book like 10 times. I just can't get into it. Does it get better after the first few chapters?


I liked it quite a bit, but I also like Titanic, Armageddon, top 40 songs and Stephen King books, so there's a good chance I have no taste.
 
2014-07-20 09:50:21 AM  

Fredster: I liked it quite a bit, but I also like Titanic, Armageddon, top 40 songs and Stephen King books, so there's a good chance I have no taste.


Counterpoint: I enjoy 19th Century French literature, Japanese heavy metal, neo-noir films, and Archer, so taste is not a part of it good sir!

The first book is a bit stuffy and not FPW's best work. The second book (which I started out on accidentally) has hints of works of Tesla, a conspiracy and a Japanese spy. Lil less focus on the supernatural and the like. After that the series slowly builds back into the supernatural instead of just "BAMN! DEMON CHILDRENS! EATING YOUR BRITAINS!".

His later work is much better in terms of pacing. I'd say start with book 2, Legacies and work your way up from there. The only few points you need to know of from book 1 are recapped at appropriate times (read: not every damn book).

Of course there is a bit of the good old fashioned Libertarian "fark you Government" that pops in from time to time, but I rather enjoy that bit myself.
 
2014-07-20 09:55:25 AM  

Laobaojun: Bathia_Mapes: Triumph: Tearing up someone's lawn with your truck is not a "prank."

I agree, but that doesn't mean the homeowner can endanger others by booby trapping his property.

Cue the puzzled dog.
If people wouldn't use vehicles to vandalize the guy's lawn, they wouldn't even know or care about the nails.  The guys driving into other people's yard uninvited are the ones endangering people.


rzrwiresunrise: Bathia_Mapes: Triumph: Tearing up someone's lawn with your truck is not a "prank."

I agree, but that doesn't mean the homeowner can endanger others by booby trapping his property.

It's called the "right of self-defense." It's legit. Nations use it all the time.


Christ, this is hilarious. Just look at how f**king stupid these people are.
 
2014-07-20 10:00:02 AM  

MBrady: jankyboy: Reminds me of when my grandfather used to toss thumbtacks onto a stretch of grass that was adjacent to his house. The grassy section did not belong to him, but he took care of it since the town ignored it.

He got tired of neighbors treating it like a dog park, walking their dogs there and not cleaning up afterward. Sucks that it was the dogs who paid the price.

/he was a grumpy man; he was a great man
//RIP grandpa

Similar situation here.  No sidewalks.  Grass goes to the curb, but the easement is 10 feet from the curb (no trees there).  Some people walk their dogs and don't clean up.  Neighbor spread oatmeal on that area, and had warning signs, "grass has been fertilized, no animals!"   Seemed to stop them.


I used to have a neighbor who let their dog loose to crap on my lawn. I invested a few bucks on a bulk bag of cayenne pepper and spread it liberally along my side of the property line. The dog quickly learned to not come into my yard.
 
2014-07-20 10:03:47 AM  

jso2897: Christ, this is hilarious. Just look at how f**king stupid these people are.


I agree man, judging people as inadequate because they don't subscribe to your set of beliefs? It is farking hilarious. It's like when Hardcore Bible Thumpers tell other people they're evil because they don't believe what they believe.
 
2014-07-20 10:11:32 AM  

edmo: MasterAdkins: No matter how justified booby traps are illegal.  Large decorative boulders, however, are not.

I put in a nice split rail fence to solve that problem once. Turned out to be a double win.


Did the same thing at my grandmother's house, she lived on the corner and people would cut the corner and drive across her yard, the day after we put it in some drunk ran through it, the fence pierced his radiator and he ended up with a DUI.
 
2014-07-20 10:18:19 AM  

Capo Del Bandito: jso2897: Christ, this is hilarious. Just look at how f**king stupid these people are.

I agree man, judging people as inadequate because they don't subscribe to your set of beliefs? It is farking hilarious. It's like when Hardcore Bible Thumpers tell other people they're evil because they don't believe what they believe.


Some beliefs are just plain stupid. Deny it if you wiosh - it doen't change anything. Not that this is really a matter of "belief" - it's a simple matter of law and socially acceptable behavior.
And i don't think that stupid people are "evil" - I just think they're stupid.
 
2014-07-20 10:31:26 AM  
If he buried the board right next to the street, as it looks like in the photo, that isn't his property. The right of way of the street is usually 40-50 feet, or 20-25 feet from the center line of the road. That extends well into what you might think of as your yard.

/many years as a land surveyor who had to deal with irate homeowners upset that we were digging in "their yards" for the property corner markers.
 
2014-07-20 10:32:49 AM  

jso2897: Some beliefs are just plain stupid. Deny it if you wiosh - it doen't change anything. Not that this is really a matter of "belief" - it's a simple matter of law and socially acceptable behavior.
And i don't think that stupid people are "evil" - I just think they're stupid.


And your idea of 'socially acceptable behavior' is different from their own.

If you weren't so self centered you'd have figured out 'moral relativity'. Not everyone shares your beliefs or your ideas or even the same idea of a 'greater good'. Hence: your idea of 'your belief is stupid and mine is superior based on my own anecdotal evidence' falls flat.

Deny it all you want but 'a simple matter of socially acceptable behavior' fluctuates quite often. Remember when it was socially acceptable to lynch people with no evidence? Or women weren't allowed to public functions without men? Your short sightedness astounds me. Your belief that your idea of 'reasonable social norms' are quaint, but superficial.

Yeesh and I thought it was just the Tea party types that were this focused on their own morality being superior to others.
 
2014-07-20 10:34:13 AM  
Our old homestead was out in the middle of the boonies nearest town was ten miles away and all dirt roads. Our problem was the fact that the land we owned people liked to come out and hunt, whether it was the season or not and not ask permission(there was only a couple of folks my parents allowed) The sheriff's office said while we had every right to keep trespassers of the land they couldn't be bothered with putting a patrol out there. So we went out on the land and cut down trees across the atv paths they were using to get in and out. And just to make sure they wouldn't just drive around the trees we dug holes with nail boards and even some spots buried boards with big nails in random places. Took fishing line and strung it between the trees. There was actually one person that we knew of that flattened his tires amd had the balls to say he was going to press charges. He changed his tune when the sheriff reminded him his tires would still be fine if he hadn't been trespassing.(This is southeastern Oklahoma and pretty much the mentality of the populace) but I would say it is frustrating as a landowner to see someone coming out of your woods dragging a deer in the middle of July and when confronted, basically tell you there was nothing you could do(as they were unshouldering their rifle)
 
2014-07-20 10:51:38 AM  

Capo Del Bandito: jso2897: Some beliefs are just plain stupid. Deny it if you wiosh - it doen't change anything. Not that this is really a matter of "belief" - it's a simple matter of law and socially acceptable behavior.
And i don't think that stupid people are "evil" - I just think they're stupid.

And your idea of 'socially acceptable behavior' is different from their own.

If you weren't so self centered you'd have figured out 'moral relativity'. Not everyone shares your beliefs or your ideas or even the same idea of a 'greater good'. Hence: your idea of 'your belief is stupid and mine is superior based on my own anecdotal evidence' falls flat.

Deny it all you want but 'a simple matter of socially acceptable behavior' fluctuates quite often. Remember when it was socially acceptable to lynch people with no evidence? Or women weren't allowed to public functions without men? Your short sightedness astounds me. Your belief that your idea of 'reasonable social norms' are quaint, but superficial.

Yeesh and I thought it was just the Tea party types that were this focused on their own morality being superior to others.


Believing booby trapping isn't settled law in the US is farking retarded and has nothing to do with moral relativity.

I don't know if you are trolling here or just need your morning coffee.
 
2014-07-20 10:55:06 AM  

Smackledorfer: Believing booby trapping isn't settled law in the US is farking retarded and has nothing to do with moral relativity.

I don't know if you are trolling here or just need your morning coffee.


Sigh...way to miss the point there big guy.

They're saying their individual rights supersede the law. You're saying "The law is the be all end all!" and calling them stupid for not siding with you. If you want I can break it down further so someone like yourself can comprehend, but to do that would require going over the basics of Kant and Decartes.
 
2014-07-20 10:57:09 AM  

Fredster: This guy needs to meet up with Repairman Jack.


Yeah, Repairman Jack's solution to this kind of problem was way more hardcore.
 
2014-07-20 11:14:22 AM  

MBrady: Similar situation here.  No sidewalks.  Grass goes to the curb, but the easement is 10 feet from the curb (no trees there).  Some people walk their dogs and don't clean up.  Neighbor spread oatmeal on that area, and had warning signs, "grass has been fertilized, no animals!"   Seemed to stop them.


Oatmeal?  I'm intrigued.
 
2014-07-20 11:14:53 AM  

Capo Del Bandito: jso2897: Some beliefs are just plain stupid. Deny it if you wiosh - it doen't change anything. Not that this is really a matter of "belief" - it's a simple matter of law and socially acceptable behavior.
And i don't think that stupid people are "evil" - I just think they're stupid.

And your idea of 'socially acceptable behavior' is different from their own.

If you weren't so self centered you'd have figured out 'moral relativity'. Not everyone shares your beliefs or your ideas or even the same idea of a 'greater good'. Hence: your idea of 'your belief is stupid and mine is superior based on my own anecdotal evidence' falls flat.

Deny it all you want but 'a simple matter of socially acceptable behavior' fluctuates quite often. Remember when it was socially acceptable to lynch people with no evidence? Or women weren't allowed to public functions without men? Your short sightedness astounds me. Your belief that your idea of 'reasonable social norms' are quaint, but superficial.

Yeesh and I thought it was just the Tea party types that were this focused on their own morality being superior to others.


The discussion is absurd. Setting booby traps is both criminally and civilly sanctioned everywhere in the civilized world.
It is not behavior that can be seriously defended. Relativism can only be stretched so far outside of a middle school debate club.
It has nothing to do with me being "self-centered", or pronouncing judgment on anybody - it's just the basic standard of a civilized society - and yes, those standards do improve and evolve over time. That's why we no longer condone things like lynching, or setting booby traps on ones property.
Not everything is a matter of opinion, man.
 
2014-07-20 11:19:11 AM  
Set guns and mines are booby traps. This, not so much.

Now if he had done the "tire damage" sign & painted them white, he'd be pretty much in the clear. Visible deterrents work a little better.

/btw, 1/2 buried cinder blocks set in the ground also work. however, after they get hit be sure to place them back quickly or they will get stolen.
//why no, I don't mind if you turn your car & camper around in our grass. why should you drive a whole 1/4 mile further to where there's a nice wide side street.
 
2014-07-20 11:42:51 AM  

doczoidberg: I have all of my widow sills equipped with boards that have nails sticking out of them. They're all covered with doilies.

My hope is that anyone who breaks in here will wind up with some nasty puncture wounds from when they climbed in.

How's that for a booby trap?


Illegal.  You're almost certainly liable for any injury those cause, and depending on the local law enforcement mentality probably likely to get charged criminally.

It's not illegal per se to put in something that can cause injury.  But concealing it is setting a trap, you don't get to do that.  Take the doilies off, make the hazard obvious, and you're probably ok.

Or if you happen to be in the room at the time, in most states you could shoot them as soon as they break the glass.  Breaking into an occupied dwelling tends to generate a presumption that you have a reasonable fear for your life, and therefore a right to use deadly force.
 
2014-07-20 12:04:36 PM  

CBob: Set guns and mines are booby traps. This, not so much.

Now if he had done the "tire damage" sign & painted them white, he'd be pretty much in the clear. Visible deterrents work a little better.

/btw, 1/2 buried cinder blocks set in the ground also work. however, after they get hit be sure to place them back quickly or they will get stolen.
//why no, I don't mind if you turn your car & camper around in our grass. why should you drive a whole 1/4 mile further to where there's a nice wide side street.


The law is clear.  His method is a hidden means that can cause harm to an innocent trespasser and is therefore illegal.
 
2014-07-20 12:06:00 PM  

NorthernMT: BenJammin: What year did this happen, was this after the invention of the fence?

Many localities will not allow a person to build a fence along the front edge of your property. At least not a privacy fence. Doubt I could build any fence where I live.


You don't need a privacy fence.

A low, white-picket fence backed up by sunken I-beams would do the job pretty nicely.

There is a guy who lives about a mile from me who got sick of people not making the turn and ending up in his lawn and he made a decorative barrier of I-beams set in concrete to protect his house.  Since then, he hasn't had anyone end up in his lawn.
 
2014-07-20 12:06:49 PM  
i.imgur.com

Also handy for discouraging pesky imperialist forces from continuing their invasion of your sovereign nation!
 
2014-07-20 12:18:48 PM  

TheGreatGazoo: Just get some landscaping rocks about a foot in diameter and put them along the edge. If someone tries to drive over them they will have a bad time.


My old neighbor's solution was nine-foot lengths of old telephone poles.  Six feet buried in the dirt, three feet up top.

People stopped taking the curve quite so wide.

/still stops the odd drunk driver cold
//the important thing is his bushes are safe
///seriously...if you can't keep it between the lines, no biatching about whatever you hit
 
2014-07-20 12:23:51 PM  
Had same problem of some jack-ass driving over hedges. Put large rock behind them. One morning found rock moved and lots of oil on the ground. Never had problem again.
 
2014-07-20 12:37:05 PM  
Stay off his lawn.  He's serious.
 
2014-07-20 12:43:31 PM  

feckingmorons: Bathia_Mapes: feckingmorons: Journalism is in the toilet.

How was he fined if the city doesn't have the proper ordinance yet. Did that not occur to anyone when they were making this 'news' story.

Idiots.

Perhaps they fined him under an existing city ordinance.

At any rate I do understand this man's frustration, but he was opening himself for a lawsuit. What if someone minding their own business was walking by & stumbled and fell onto the concealed board and was badly injured? What if a child riding by on his bike hit a rock and was thrown from his bike onto the board? I'm sure he wouldn't want either of those scenarios to happen, but they easily could.

I don't disagree that it is unwise, but if they fined him under an existing ordinance why do they need a new one. The article lacks important details.

In Mexico lots of people top their garden walls with broken glass, pieces of broken bottles mostly. It sure does deter people from climbing their walls. In Mexico it is not illegal, and they have fewer lawyers. Here that would never fly.


Can we try that on our border fence?
 
2014-07-20 12:58:17 PM  

Gary-L: His method is a hidden means that can cause harm to an innocent trespasser and is therefore illegal.


And their driving across his lawn is....??

I say fight fire with fire. The only ones affected by his 'booby trap' (if having something in plain sight can be considered such) are those who already breaking the law by being on his property without permission. So screw them. (This assumes the 'trap' is on his property, per se.)

As for the "innocent trespassers"- is that like 'innocent murderer' or 'innocent thief'?? If you're trespassing, you are, by definition, guilty.
 
2014-07-20 12:58:28 PM  
Booby traps are illegal because some politician or cops son was probably injured while tryin to commit a rape or burglary.

If the booby trap is on someones private property do you really care? The victim would be committing a crime by entering the property without permission.
 
2014-07-20 12:59:25 PM  

Gary-L: CBob: Set guns and mines are booby traps. This, not so much.

Now if he had done the "tire damage" sign & painted them white, he'd be pretty much in the clear. Visible deterrents work a little better.


/btw, 1/2 buried cinder blocks set in the ground also work. however, after they get hit be sure to place them back quickly or they will get stolen.

//why no, I don't mind if you turn your car & camper around in our grass. why should you drive a whole 1/4 mile further to where there's a nice wide side street.


The law is clear.  His method is a hidden means that can cause harm to an innocent trespasser and is therefore illegal.


www.roadshark.com


The law is not really clear as many places use tire deflators on road ways.
 
2014-07-20 01:05:04 PM  
Oh, look, it's that thread where a bunch of tiny-dicked rageaholics justify attempted murder in retribution for vandalism again.
 
2014-07-20 01:05:59 PM  

TedCruz'sCrazyDad: Gary-L: CBob: Set guns and mines are booby traps. This, not so much.Now if he had done the "tire damage" sign & painted them white, he'd be pretty much in the clear. Visible deterrents work a little better.
/btw, 1/2 buried cinder blocks set in the ground also work. however, after they get hit be sure to place them back quickly or they will get stolen.//why no, I don't mind if you turn your car & camper around in our grass. why should you drive a whole 1/4 mile further to where there's a nice wide side street.
The law is clear.  His method is a hidden means that can cause harm to an innocent trespasser and is therefore illegal.
[www.roadshark.com image 500x375]
The law is not really clear as many places use tire deflators on road ways.


Yeah, when I want to hide something, I paint it black and yellow too.
 
2014-07-20 01:07:59 PM  

fredklein: Gary-L: His method is a hidden means that can cause harm to an innocent trespasser and is therefore illegal.

And their driving across his lawn is....??

I say fight fire with fire. The only ones affected by his 'booby trap' (if having something in plain sight can be considered such) are those who already breaking the law by being on his property without permission. So screw them. (This assumes the 'trap' is on his property, per se.)

As for the "innocent trespassers"- is that like 'innocent murderer' or 'innocent thief'?? If you're trespassing, you are, by definition, guilty.


You have to wonder what types of
People some farkers hang out with and what type of person they themselves are when they make excuses for criminals.


Innocent trespassers indeed.

This is probably a byproduct of telling People they arent responsible for their own actions
 
2014-07-20 01:09:56 PM  

OliverK: Technically, most property lines don't meet the road. There's usually an easement. The municipality would have some rights in terms of what one can do with it.

If he put some decorative armor stones on the problem area, people wouldn't cut the curve so short. I doubt it's "pranksters".


This. Line the spot with rocks about the size of your head. You kick one of those up, and even if it doesn't dent the fark out of your truck you'll do damage to something that you can charge them with breaking.

\though I fully assume the "pranksters" also blow coal and have truck nutz and/or a gun rack
 
2014-07-20 01:11:09 PM  

LoneWolf343: Oh, look, it's that thread where a bunch of tiny-dicked rageaholics justify attempted murder in retribution for vandalism again.


I thought it was the thread where bleeding hearts defend criminals and tell people they are bad humans for not rolling over for said criminals.

Precious snowflakes indeed.

Free mumia!
 
2014-07-20 01:15:12 PM  

Capo Del Bandito: Smackledorfer: Believing booby trapping isn't settled law in the US is farking retarded and has nothing to do with moral relativity.

I don't know if you are trolling here or just need your morning coffee.

Sigh...way to miss the point there big guy.

They're saying their individual rights supersede the law. You're saying "The law is the be all end all!" and calling them stupid for not siding with you. If you want I can break it down further so someone like yourself can comprehend, but to do that would require going over the basics of Kant and Decartes.


I'm not saying "the law is the be all end all" nor have I said a damn thing with an !-point.

The problem here is that jso said one thing, and you tried to twist it into another and here we are.

He said X is the law, and it is stupid to claim otherwise.
You are saying X shouldn't be the law so therefor his statement is somehow wrong. Now you've gone yet another step towards full retard by saying that anyone agreeing with his statement believes that "the law is the be all end all derpa derpa doo".

I'm going to stick with my first instinct and say you are just trolling.  Nobody is this stupid.
 
2014-07-20 01:17:02 PM  
Giltric:Free mumia!*

*With the purchase of a murderer of equal or lesser value.
 
2014-07-20 01:18:09 PM  

fredklein: Gary-L: His method is a hidden means that can cause harm to an innocent trespasser and is therefore illegal.

And their driving across his lawn is....??

I say fight fire with fire. The only ones affected by his 'booby trap' (if having something in plain sight can be considered such) are those who already breaking the law by being on his property without permission. So screw them. (This assumes the 'trap' is on his property, per se.)

As for the "innocent trespassers"- is that like 'innocent murderer' or 'innocent thief'?? If you're trespassing, you are, by definition, guilty.


Read up on trespassing laws and then get back to us on that.
 
2014-07-20 01:21:10 PM  

fredklein: Gary-L: His method is a hidden means that can cause harm to an innocent trespasser and is therefore illegal.

And their driving across his lawn is....??

I say fight fire with fire. The only ones affected by his 'booby trap' (if having something in plain sight can be considered such) are those who already breaking the law by being on his property without permission. So screw them. (This assumes the 'trap' is on his property, per se.)

As for the "innocent trespassers"- is that like 'innocent murderer' or 'innocent thief'?? If you're trespassing, you are, by definition, guilty.


I had no idea you were such a black and white authoritarian.  Odd for someone I recall being anti-cop.

And yes, there are plenty of forms of innocent trespass.  Most forms of trespass do meet the bar of criminal behavior, and even a tort, while allowed, would not be successful without showing damages.

The person driving across his lawn may not even be at the level of causing damage.  The person who jumps onto his lawn when someone runs him off the road while taking a nighttime walk certainly doesn't warrant spikes going into his feet.
 
2014-07-20 01:22:08 PM  
Had a neighbor on a corner lot who had to deal with somebody who had a grudge against at least one of the residents of his house (I'm suspecting the kids.)  The perp would pull up onto the lawn beside the house, start spinning their tires and trench the lawn around the house to the front yard.  This happened 3 or 4 times before the neighbor hammered some rebar at an angle pointing in the direction that it was obvious the car was coming from.  One day I saw that the rebar was mangled, and the lawn was never driven on again.
 
2014-07-20 01:31:43 PM  
The "hidden" part is where he went wrong.  You need to put up some decorative edging fence like this
thumbs1.ebaystatic.com
Then add the tire-puncturing spikes immediately behind it.
I had an a$$hole Jeep driver who was driving down my street during winter nights intentionally running into snow piles at the edge of driveways to scatter the piles in front of the driveways.  I wet down my snow pile during the day and let it freeze into a block of ice then threw a couple more shovel-fuls of powdery snow on top.  He hit it pretty hard and I imagine that Jeep probably needed an alignment job after that.  And he seemed to get the message, as there were no repeats of the behaviour.
 
2014-07-20 01:32:51 PM  
I can understand his frustration.

Prior to the roads being paved in my rural area, a house on a corner lot had people making turns onto the side street gradually eating away the lawn there. The corner angle gradually became a huge crescent of dirt.

Polite signs didn't stop this. Nor did marker sticks painted bright colors to indicate the property line. So, the owner put some stones there, around half the size of a soccer ball and that seemed to work.

Until guys in these enormous pickup trucks pounded them into the ground.

So, the stones were replaced with boulders. Each about the size of a beach ball. Each big enough to do serious damage to any of those enormous pickup trucks trying to plow over them.

That worked.

The 'hidden' nail studded board, however, would not have gone over very well, because here, 5 feet of your yard is actually not yours. It's the right of way for the county road. Placing a serious trap there would get you in trouble because you would be on county property.

Also, because of reasons pointed out by several FARK-ers, the potential for injury to bike riders and kids walking along the edge would be too high.

We had two incidents that kind of illustrated this. One was where a home owner installed an arch over his driveway entrance from a side street, but one edge fell one inch onto the county property from the main road. The county wanted him to take the arch down and naturally, he got all litigious about it.

The county pointed out that if a car ran off the road and hit his arch, because it was one inch on their land, they could be sued and not the home owner. It made no difference that if a car did that, it would wind up going to their front door anyhow.

Lawyers agreed, so a compromise was reached. The home owner had to carry a million dollars insurance to cover the arch in case of such an occurrence and he agreed.

Must have really loved that arch. It lasted over 20 years and when the guy died, a year or so afterwards his son, helping his Mom move backed his truck into the arch, bringing it down.

One a main road, a school was being built so a sidewalk was being installed and the road widened and the county took the right of way. All of it. Which wound up ending right at the back wall of a house. Seems the contractor, years ago, had made a slight miscalculation.

Naturally, lawyers were called in and there was much squabbling to stop the sidewalk from going directly under this guys bedroom window and right up to the sill of his back door. He lost. The county installed the sidewalk.

Naturally, the increasing load of kids walking by over the next few years contained those who just had to pester him by yelling in his window or knocking on his door. So, he bricked up the window and the door.

After 25 years or so, the place is still there -- but apparently empty. Even when he moved out and the place became a rental, tenants had a problem with folks walking right next to the back wall.

So, remember, in most areas, that section of property you own next to a road more than likely is the county or state right of way. They'll tolerate a mailbox on it, even some large, obvious boulders used to stop cutting the corner -- but not anything sharp which can injure a walker.

It's best if you paint those boulders white also.
 
2014-07-20 01:33:21 PM  

Four Horsemen of the Domestic Dispute: I'm sure Mr. Greenjeans violated the Easement.  Your property ends several feet before the roadway.


It seems there is a misunderstanding about what an easement is. The homeowner owns the land (or trees, or lake or whatever) comprises the easement, he is responsible for care of the easement, mowing the lawn and the like. The easement appurtenant in this instance (if one indeed exists) seems to be a utility easement which would allow utilities to erect or bury poles, wires, cables, pipelines, ect in the space adjoining the roadway. These are generally of minimal concern to a property owner.

If the utility wished to locate a pole in the middle of his yard they would, unless such an easement already existed and that is quite rare, have to negotiate an easement with the property owner and pay for that easement. This easement would transfer with the property when it was sold, obviously the power company can't come out and dig up its pole when the house sell. (Unless of course they were induced to do so by the new property owner who would perhaps pay the cost of moving the pole and wires).

An easement is a right to use some specific thing (usually land) by a non-owner for a specific purpose. It doesn't mean the owner can't grow corn over some sewer pipes or plant apple trees under high tension wires, or absent some other law put spiked boards on his lawn. An easement doesn't prevent the owner for enjoying his property. The property ends where the property ends according to the plat maps and surveys, not where an easement is present.
Easements are complex, however this is a general explanation that should clarify that the guy that owns the house owns the land to the end of the property line, not some three foot DMZ.
 
2014-07-20 01:38:55 PM  

TedCruz'sCrazyDad: Gary-L: CBob: Set guns and mines are booby traps. This, not so much.Now if he had done the "tire damage" sign & painted them white, he'd be pretty much in the clear. Visible deterrents work a little better.
/btw, 1/2 buried cinder blocks set in the ground also work. however, after they get hit be sure to place them back quickly or they will get stolen.//why no, I don't mind if you turn your car & camper around in our grass. why should you drive a whole 1/4 mile further to where there's a nice wide side street.
The law is clear.  His method is a hidden means that can cause harm to an innocent trespasser and is therefore illegal.
[www.roadshark.com image 500x375]
The law is not really clear as many places use tire deflators on road ways.


They have signs.
 
2014-07-20 01:42:32 PM  

LoneWolf343: TedCruz'sCrazyDad: Gary-L: CBob: Set guns and mines are booby traps. This, not so much.Now if he had done the "tire damage" sign & painted them white, he'd be pretty much in the clear. Visible deterrents work a little better.
/btw, 1/2 buried cinder blocks set in the ground also work. however, after they get hit be sure to place them back quickly or they will get stolen.//why no, I don't mind if you turn your car & camper around in our grass. why should you drive a whole 1/4 mile further to where there's a nice wide side street.
The law is clear.  His method is a hidden means that can cause harm to an innocent trespasser and is therefore illegal.
[www.roadshark.com image 500x375]
The law is not really clear as many places use tire deflators on road ways.

Yeah, when I want to hide something, I paint it black and yellow too.




Still be very hard to see at night.
 
2014-07-20 01:44:34 PM  

ReverendJynxed: TedCruz'sCrazyDad: Gary-L: CBob: Set guns and mines are booby traps. This, not so much.Now if he had done the "tire damage" sign & painted them white, he'd be pretty much in the clear. Visible deterrents work a little better. /btw, 1/2 buried cinder blocks set in the ground also work. however, after they get hit be sure to place them back quickly or they will get stolen.//why no, I don't mind if you turn your car & camper around in our grass. why should you drive a whole 1/4 mile further to where there's a nice wide side street. The law is clear.  His method is a hidden means that can cause harm to an innocent trespasser and is therefore illegal. [www.roadshark.com image 500x375] The law is not really clear as many places use tire deflators on road ways. They have signs.


Yes, signs make everything legal.
 
2014-07-20 01:47:14 PM  

Yogimus: lackadaisicalfreakshow: jankyboy: Reminds me of when my grandfather used to toss thumbtacks onto a stretch of grass that was adjacent to his house. The grassy section did not belong to him, but he took care of it since the town ignored it.

He got tired of neighbors treating it like a dog park, walking their dogs there and not cleaning up afterward. Sucks that it was the dogs who paid the price.

/he was a grumpy man; he was a great man
//RIP grandpa

Your grandpa was not a great man. He was a busybody that tried to kill/wound dogs in what sounds like a city-owned public lot.

It IS delightful when idiot dog owners meet idiot homeowners.


I disagree. He took care of the problem with ease and ingenuity. A trait that used to be respected and admired. He didn't get into a physical altercation or have to argue with the offenders or go to court.
 
Displayed 50 of 138 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report