Subdivision paints target on itself.

Post by **GORDON** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 12:14 pm

From here.

Edited By GORDON on 1183573033

Paul · Post by **Paul** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 1:16 pm

Despite that rule, I'd still keep guns in the house. In fact, it'd make me more likely to keep a gun because I'd be afraid that criminals would try to exploit the no gun rule.

Granted, I wouldn't talk to the neighbor about my guns, but since I keep them in a gun safe anyway it's not as if anybody will ever see them.

I wonder if the rule applies to antique guns or other display pieces?

I think the home owner's association should mandate a religion, force residents to quarter security guards, perform random search & seizures, etc. Why not hit all the rights?

Edited By Paul on 1174411319

Post by **TheCatt** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 3:32 pm

I'd totally love to see them say a property dispute in which the value is only $25 can't be settled by a trial by jury.

Fuckers.

Post by **Vince** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 7:00 pm

They tried that in a small town in Illinois once. They got around the whole Constitutional issue by saying people could have them, but had to keep them in a safety deposit box, or some such (not sure how you can get the gun into the bank, though). B&E's doubled over the next couple of years. They reversed the law soon after that.

DoctorChaos · Post by **DoctorChaos** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 6:42 am

Gordon, I agree that people make a choice to live there, but what about the poor saps living there before the rule was passed. I always thought homeowners associations were a pile of shit to begin with.

Post by **TheCatt** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 8:48 am

DoctorChaos wrote:Gordon, I agree that people make a choice to live there, but what about the poor saps living there before the rule was passed. I always thought homeowners associations were a pile of shit to begin with.

They are, but generaaly the HA exists before anyone moves in.

unkbill · Post by **unkbill** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 9:54 am

The HA a half mile north of here had rules such as no outside antennes, dishes, unconnected out building, cloths lines, RV and pickups in the driveways after 6 at night. Last I heard the HA was raided and overturned in an election and things have lightened up some.
Doesn't really bother me. But how is a home association going to take my guns away when I have them and they don't? Say please.

Post by **GORDON** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 10:50 am

DoctorChaos wrote:Gordon, I agree that people make a choice to live there, but what about the poor saps living there before the rule was passed. I always thought homeowners associations were a pile of shit to begin with.

I've HEARD that even if your neighborhood forms a HA after you live there, you still need to voluntarily join it. The power of the HA comes from the fact that it typically gets written into the mortgage agreement when you buy the property. If you wont join it, they wont sell to you.

Mommy Dearest · Post by **Mommy Dearest** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 6:57 pm

unkbill wrote:The HA a half mile north of here had rules such as no outside antennes, dishes, unconnected out building, cloths lines, RV and pickups in the driveways after 6 at night. Last I heard the HA was raided and overturned in an election and things have lightened up some.
Doesn't really bother me. But how is a home association going to take my guns away when I have them and they don't? Say please.

Where is that?

Wildflower?

unkbill · Post by **unkbill** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 9:41 am

Mommy Dearest wrote:
unkbill wrote:The HA a half mile north of here had rules such as no outside antennes, dishes, unconnected out building, cloths lines, RV and pickups in the driveways after 6 at night. Last I heard the HA was raided and overturned in an election and things have lightened up some.
Doesn't really bother me. But how is a home association going to take my guns away when I have them and they don't? Say please.
Where is that?

Wildflower?

Sorry South, Leopardville.

Post by **thibodeaux** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 12:31 pm

Even better:
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/16/1664.asp

City to Seize Homes Over a $5 Parking Ticket

Post by **GORDON** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 12:47 pm

thibodeaux wrote:Even better:
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/16/1664.asp
City to Seize Homes Over a $5 Parking Ticket

Any motorist who believes a parking ticket may have been improperly issued must first pay a $250 "appeal fee" within seven days to have the case heard by a contract employee of the city.

But remember: it isn't about revenue generation.