3 ms·
Counterpoint: the people who are observing your boundaries currently are precisely the ones who wouldn't make a mess of it and do stupid stuff. And there's prob
by mauvehaus 2y ago
Counterpoint: the people who are observing your boundaries currently are precisely the ones who wouldn't make a mess of it and do stupid stuff. And there's probably a set of people using it who aren't being dipshits who you don't know about.
The idiots are already doing the things you don't want them to do and allowing them to roam isn't going to change that. The problematic behaviors are the ones the laws should target (and perhaps already do, e.g. having a blind up without landowner permission is illegal where I live). Merely being on another's property shouldn't be cause to involve law enforcement.
I have supported the right to roam (and generally treated posted property as "open to respectful and responsible use") for years, and that has not changed since becoming a home and landowner. Our land is wooded, not agricultural, and I have no issue with kindly use by all.
- balderdash 2y agoI agree that most will use the land kindly, as you put it, but you can’t convince me that increased traffic/volume will not result in increased damage (though the per capita damage rate will likely go down).