|[AMRadio] ARRL initiative|
ne1s at neandertech.com
Tue Jul 15 12:19:39 EDT 2008
My buddy Todd wrote:
> I have to agree with Walter in that many folks move to such places
> exactly for the reasons stated: they don't want to deal with
> 'unsightly' antennae or whatever else, they want their neighborhood
> just so, etc. Anyone who freely moves there agrees to abide by these
> rules when they sign the contract.
This is true, but there is a deeper issue, as well, and that is the
concept of property rights. If you own the property, darn it, you should
be free to do anything you want to it up to the point where your actions
cross over the boundary onto your neighbor's property (for example,
dumping hazardous waste). It is not, IMHO, one's responsibility to
preserve one's neighbor's pretty view. That said, I would never consider
buying a piece of property where the contract so restricted my rights.
> Different story if they change the rules once you already live
> somewhere. History dictates that your previously-lawful use should be
> grandfathered. If not, then you have a gripe.
Yep, that's even worse.
> Trying to impose one's views on another by force is no different if
> the HOA / zoning board does it or the ARRL.
Right on, 'bro.
> And you always have the
> freedom (and responsibility, IMO) not to go there if you think it's
> going to be a problem for you.
How about just on principle?
> No different than moving into a
> residentially-zoned area and trying to set up an industrial site. You
> can hope for a variance, but to expect it would be foolish. They're
> even good enough to let you know that in advance.
Zoning laws violate property rights too, IMHO.
More information about the AMRadio mailing list
This page last updated 18 Oct 2017.