woodguru

And I put that nicely...these people's freedoms seem to come at the expense of other people's rights and expectations of being left alone. Freedoms must be exercised or you might as well not have them, if you have the right to do something, by god you better use them lest someone be confused into thinking you aren't exercising your rights.

A friend of ours had a nice little house on a side cul de sac in a rural region of this county. She got a new neighbor who got into exercising his rights right off the bat. They had a shared property line that wasn't fenced or anything, it had an open common area she kept neatly trimmed, she'd had her gardening handyman cover into the other side for the other people that lived there, and when she got the new neighbor she asked if he wanted her to continue keeping it cared for the same way.

His response was to put six or seven dead cars on the property line, he just kept moving dead cars in, "so that she knew where it was". This is where conservatives get really really liberal, the dead broncos, trucks, and trailers were easily four feet over onto her side, he must have figured she wasn't using it for anything so he might as well put it to good use.

She of course, being like the little pitbull she is, told him he had his cars on the wrong side of the property line, not to mention he was making the neighborhood look like a bad redneck junkyard. She asked him why he couldn't put the cars behind his house where they were more out of sight? His answer was the "this is my property and I'll do whatever I want with it, and screw the property line, prove it".

Full on pitbull kicked into gear, she got the sheriff out, who started out saying it was a civil matter. When she pointed out the established property corners and how far over the line the guys cars were he responded that she could take him to court. The sheriff advised her to call the county ordinance dept and get them out enforcing compliance of the dead car ordinances, which the country had been death on rednecks with junk cars that could be seen from the road, in fact they had come down on ones that couldn't be seen from a road.

So her freedom loving neighbor was cited and told to remove all of the cars that didn't run, and now she has a seriously pissed off MAGA moron living next door, who's mission in life would be to make her life a living hell.

Well she wasn't going to play that crap, she got a real estate broker friend out, and told him to list the house well under market, at least $50k, and she was going to go with the buyer that would most piss her MAGA neighbor off the most. We were laughing our butts off hearing her say she was looking for a black or hispanic family with the most kids.

Her house was paid for free and clear, she had put tens of thousands into high end remodeling, and she was moving into a property her dad owned in Sacramento in a really ritzy neighborhood called the fabulous 40's, Her father was a multi millionaire real estate broker, and she was fully aware of what she was doing to this guy's property value by selling close to a hundred grand under market, not to mention the demographics of racial profiling the new owner.

The moral of the story is that over doing the freedom and rights thing may make your life hell...it sure as hell can make other's lives hell.

woodguru

And rather than making your retarded BS calls, focus on how this is how property disputes happen, we all know that is true.

Liberty Tree

It has been a little while since you spun one of your fables to try and make a point so I guess it is time.

nwtk2007 Loc: Texas

You think he represents conservatives everywhere? Think again. He represents a$$ holes everywhere.

Blade_Runner Loc: DARK SIDE OF THE MOON

There is nothing moral about this story. It is purely anecdotal, and is based on your assumption that this obnoxious neighbor is a "MAGA patriot" and therefore assumes that all Trump supporters are bad neighbors.

A hasty generalization is a fallacy in which a conclusion that is reached is not logically justified by sufficient or unbiased evidence. It's also called an insufficient sample, a converse accident, a faulty generalization, a biased generalization, jumping to a conclusion, secundum quid, and a neglect of qualifications. It is basically making a claim based on evidence that it just too small. Essentially, you can’t make a claim and say that something is true if you have only an example or two as evidence.

Why are you so opposed to making America great again?

4430 Loc: Little Egypt ** Southern Illinory

moldy has to have copied and pasted this because he isn't smart enough to write anything like that what's it call when someone uses someone's speech and claims it was their own

woodguru

Another bad neighbor thing that this profile I'm talking about is prone to is the right to shoot any dog that goes on their property, and yes, there are people we have to worry about exercising that right, not because the dog is causing any problems, but simply because they have the right to.

I made sure that all the 11 neighbors on my road knew what my dogs look like so that if they were to get on their property during their "training" stages they would know who's dogs they were. There were two neighbors I would have worried about, one told me if my dog got on his property he would shoot it, the other never would have said that openly, but I'd have worried about it. On the flip side, there were a few times neighbor's dogs got in the yard, I called them and told them as long as they were not chasing and hurting goats they were okay...tackling a goat would be a different story.

My tenant had a big labrador that liked to go down the road and join a neighbor's dog for breakfast. I told him that he needed to break that habit, that there were at least two neighbors that would shoot him.

Here's the thing that goes to my point, these guys wouldn't shoot a dog because it was hurting anything, they would do it because it was their right...and they probably wouldn't shoot a dog that belonged to someone they liked, it would be different for someone they didn't.

And once again we know this is the truth.

woodguru

Actually it was based on the fact that the guy flew an obnoxious number of Gadsden, confederate, and MAGA flags, there was no assumption going on here.

woodguru

I will agree with that right there, I have several conservative neighbors that I get along very well with...

Hence the reason I said "may"

Milosia2 Loc: Cleveland Ohio

I had a red hat neighbor who couldn’t keep his Goats on his own property.
One day his goats didn’t come home. He called the police and said I did something with his Goats. When the police showed up , I had 4 big roasts cooking in the oven.
Of course they smelled it and had to check.”What is that”the cop said,
“Meat , I said.”
Meanwhile, my red hat neighbor is jumping up and down hysterically.
The cops wrote me a ticket to appear in Court.
3 Days later , all the Goats came home.
The meat in the oven was illegal venison. That I had hit with my truck 3days prior.
At 1:00 in the morning. Threw it into the back of my truck and didn’t report it .
I just had to smirk every time I looked at him.

Big Bass

Talking of “retarded BS calls”, this one takes the cake.

Big Bass

LogicallyRight Loc: Chicago

***Why Freedom Loving MAGA Patriots May Not Make The Best Neighbors
>>>Do you realize how stupid that sounds and your whole rant makes you look?

4430 Loc: Little Egypt ** Southern Illinory

Why didn't you say that in your post to start with ?

If nwtk hadnt said what he did you'd have never made this post .

4430 Loc: Little Egypt ** Southern Illinory

You write a good story but I doubt there'll be very few that'll believe it