The preceding posting by Claudette was simply called "addenum" which may not catch everyones attention...but it was an interesting one since I would like to formalize it by starting a thread.

We moved into a small town in a rural area because we wanted to be out in an area where there were less people, most of them having their own wells and septics, cooking with propane, room to grow vegetables. The house we bought happened to have a fairly large parcel of land (large enough to hunt on, for example).

As I walked the perimeter once we had bought it, I noticed the signs with the names of the prior owners (sometimes dangling - somtimes fading - somtimes fallen). Sometimes the names of my neighbors were on the other sides of the same trees (a nice way to learn the names of your neighbors?).

On the day I looked at them, it was clear from the dog and man footprints in the snow that someone had recently come down along out side of the gully, probably taken in the stunning view of the lake and valley in the crispy snow.

The thought I had was that I would like to write my own signs:

YOU ARE NOW ENTERING PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNED BY XXX YYY

We kindly ask that visitors to this land do not hunt or make fires or campsites.

Please remember that we find this land beautiful, and if you stroll through it, please enjoy it, and help us keep in beautiful

*****

Well, somehow I could hear what lawyers would say about this, so I did nothing...and did not yet buy "my new signs" (standard).

Somehow, I hope that if we learn one thing from y2k it will be that we need a world that shares a bit more.

I believe their is law and there is conscience, and they are not always the same. A person who kills an unarmed trespasser has committed a grevious error. A local Sherrif is not the same as a judge and jury. The Sherrif (If he likes the owner/killer) may help to fabricate evidence to prove that the trespasser was acting in a dangerous manner requiring defense. I am sorry to say this, but Sherrif or no, this is not the type of person I want protecting my community, because he feels he has the right to justify killing. Both these men will suffer the results of their consciences.

Anyone who believes that they have the right to shoot at someone (even kill them) just because they are on private property should think again. Better to fire a warning shot in the air...if the person runs...let them run...if they pull out a weapon...well that makes it self defense by law because since you fired the first shot the trespasser is drawing his weapon in self defense.

Maybe it would be good to invest in a loud bullhorn...like the police do in the movies when they got the building surrounded...then you can at least yell out for the person to go away.

Thom

-- Thom Gilligan (thomgill@eznet.net), September 11, 1999

Answers

I like your sign. Don't see why it would be a problem.

From a legal standpoint, in most if not all states, you don't have a right to shoot someone just for trespassing. You can shoot when your life is threatened, that's about it. Warning shots are generally classed as use of lethal force, with rules just as tight as if you shot to kill. If your life is threatened, it doesn't matter whether you have "no trespass" signs up or not, you can shoot.

Having the signs up means that if someone trespasses, you can call police and press charges. It doesn't mean you can shoot people passing through. Specific laws vary by state.

-- Shimrod (shimrod@lycosmail.com), September 11, 1999.

Depends on where you are. Our laws on this subject date to the early 18th century. You can legally use force to restrain such a person. If they resist, you can shoot them. I do not intend to do this, but it is the law. You would be suprised at what is on the books from long ago.

Best wishes,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), September 11, 1999.

Note a typo. That should be early 19th century.

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), September 11, 1999.

Laws which are still on the books from old times but seem at odds with todays legal system stand the chance of being held invalid. I am no lawyer, but if the legal profession survives y2k intact, as well as the judicial system, then anyone who kills someone during y2k problems stands the chance of being tried and eventually punished.

Actually, the point of my post is rather one of owning your land but sharing it too.

A lot of people seem to be afraid of y2k. Afraid of all the criminals who will take advantage, afraid of starving refugees who will swamp their neighborhoods, afraid of jealous neighbors.

Some of these fears are prudent to heed, to consider. For example, I do not want to use a gun but I am foolish to assume that I will never be approached by a person with a gun. I have taken the precaution to add locks to shed doors (which is not really needed in good times). In my mind, I practice the level headed approach which I would use if someone pointed a gun at me. (It has happened to me before).

On the flip side. we can also consider y2k as an Olympic athlete would. For most Olympic athletes, they only have one chance in their entire lives to go to the games and usually in a single event. This is their one chance to give it their all and try for the metal. Y2k is a great unknown, it affects so many things that we never know which one of our precious necessities will be lost, which of our valued institutions will collapse. But right in the middle of that big unknown we are all going to be there. If we die we are out of the game. But alive, we always have the chance to be a great local hero in some big or small way.

When I was a boy scout we once had a training in CPR. A couple days later 4 boys were on a hike and came upon a man who had suffered a heart attack moments before. 3 of them gave him CPR for the six hours it took to get a helicopter in with CPR machine. Later, the doctor told the scoutmaster that they guy had such a massive heart attack that he probably died immediately but that he and his crew were amazed that his body temperature (and other clinical signs) were as if he were alive. These kids were heros to us. The grueling ordeal and stamina required to keep that guys body pumping, not even knowing he was dead. The surgeon amazed that 3 kids just 14 years old (or so) did this.

Even in our y2k failures we are offered the chances to be heros, to look into our hearts in some moment and let the will of the universe, the mind of our creator, be done.

-- Thom Gilligan (thomgill@eznet.net), September 11, 1999.

Olympians try for medals not metals. Probably a Freudean slip from reading those posts at www.gold.com

-- Thom Gilligan (thomgill@eznet.net), September 11, 1999.

There was a nuclear holocaust movie called "The Day After" (I think) and the scenen that affected me the most was one where a roving band of marauders killed a farmer for trying to protect his own land. What struck me was that here the whole human race had pretty much destroyed the world, and they still hadn't learned anything. They were still willing to fight and kill just because they could.

Sometimes disasters bring out the best in people, sometimes the worst. It will be interesting to see how many people learn tollerance and generosity from possile disruptions, and how many try to take since they didn't bother to prepare for themselves.

I am also reminded of a story told to me by a friend of mine. His father lives in Utah, and as he was buying more supplies one day he saw a man from one of the local survivalist groups. He ased the man how he was preparing for Y2K. The survivalist said, "We have lots of guns and ammunition, and a list of where all the Mormons in the area live." His group was not even trying to prepare for them selves, they were already planning who to take from.

I hate the idea of having to use violence, and I live in a subburb so in normal times I would rather not have a gun in the house, (statistically more likely to be used against me than otherwise in the city) but I am wondering whether borrowing one from my more warrior-minded friends in late December might not be a bad idea.

-- Tania Baildon (tbaildon@yahoo.com), September 13, 1999.

Thom:

On old laws: you may be right but I have no intention of testing it. People are reasonable. Talk through it.

Best wishes,

-- Z1X4Y7 (Z1X4Y7@aol.com), September 16, 1999.

Thom,

The way I would choose to share my land (if I had any) is to post all of it and share it only with that subset of those that come to me and ask to use it that I choose to allow to use it.

To get another perspective on your way, consider how you would feel if a total stranger and his girl firend got into your parked car and made themselves at home for a while, maybe leaving cigarette buts and other trash around before they left.

George

-- George Valentine (GeorgeValentine@usa.net), September 16, 1999.

Yes George

I suppose I could post a sign that says people should come down to my house and ask permission to use my land....In reality, sometimes people are just out for a stroll with a nice dog, catching some cold winter air and they cross your property line.

The comparison with a car is a good one...but remember that a car is a man made object which I use every day...my land (and the beauty in it that I love) is man altered (partially agricultured) but to a large extend made by the hand of god and our earth mother. I also may go weeks without ever going out to the back line of our wooded parcel.

My dream is that we may one day grow into a society which has respect for the beauty of land and that land owners can trust their land to others who visit it.

The actual reason for my post was that my "feeling" about land ownership was exactly opposite to the "feeling" that some people have that they are legally allowed to shoot trespassers. I am not a pacifist, but I believe that life is sacred. I would consider letting people hunt on my land but I also believe that animals should feel safe there.

-- Thom Gilligan (thomgill@eznet.net), September 16, 1999.

This is something that you really have to be careful with! In my case, I have 30 acres in Northwest Arkansas. For what it is worth, here is the way that it appears to work where I am: If you post signs but have no fencing, they are ignored; if you have fencing and post signs, you are despised; if you have fencing, your property boundaries are respected.

I sure didn't make these "rules", but feel that it is important to know them, especially for the tough times ahead.

-- Jack (jsprat@eld.net), September 16, 1999.

People run stop signs all the time. People ignore "do not litter," signs all the time. People ignore signs and do whatever they want to do because they think "it does not mean them." We have signs posted all over our property and that does not stop people from entering. ITSHTF, I plan to take all the "no trespassing" signs down to avoid drawing attention to our property. People already know they don't belong on your property so they'll find out the hard way.

-- no trespassing (no trespassing@notrespassingg.com), September 17, 1999.

Tania Baildon,I'd question the veracity of those statistics,they were most likely produced to favor anti gun arguments.

-- zoobie (zoobiezoob@yahoo.com), September 17, 1999.