Apparently, California requires you to have a pretty yard by law.

Most stupid laws have a good intention behind them, and occasionally even a valid concern. In this case: Property values. Well, you can't make minorities and ugly people stay out of your neighborhood, but you CAN make sure their houses don't look poor.

This sort of thing is why miniature pseudogovernments like homeowner's associations are a modern plague.

Ezri Dax wrote:

I call it an infringement on peoples rights to have their garden how they want it.

Well tough fuck, because it isn't all about you. Your right to pour concrete all over your front lawn, stick a dead tree festooned with giblets in the middle and encourage crows to nest in it is secondary to your neighbours' rights to not have a fucking eyesore across the road from them.

This isn't something draconian and unworkable. 40% of the garden has to be covered with living plants. This couple had two years to do that and they either didn't do it or didn't submit the proper documents proving they'd done it.

Quote :

This sort of thing is why miniature pseudogovernments like homeowner's associations are a modern plague.

This is a city ordinance. They're dealing with the proper local authority, not a "miniature pseudogovernment".

Cyberwulf wrote:

This is a city ordinance. They're dealing with the proper local authority, not a "miniature pseudogovernment".

I am aware of this. HOAs are what happens when busybodies can't get the same deals from the local legitimate government.

Quote :

40%

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Ezri Dax wrote:

The question is, what kind of idiot would make up such a ridiculous (and unnecessary) law in the first place? Even more scary is how did said idiot get other people to vote in this bill? I call it an infringement on peoples rights to have their garden how they want it. Many people work long hours and juggle that with a family life, and therefore simply don't have the necessary time to do gardening, not to mention the elderly and disabled who would be physically unable anyway. If their home isn't a listed building that has conditions attached in the deeds, then there is no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to have their garden the way they like and is most convenient for them.

Holy shit. I actually agree with the troll.

Cyberwulf wrote:

Ezri Dax wrote:

I call it an infringement on peoples rights to have their garden how they want it.

Well tough fuck, because it isn't all about you. Your right to pour concrete all over your front lawn, stick a dead tree festooned with giblets in the middle and encourage crows to nest in it is secondary to your neighbours' rights to not have a fucking eyesore across the road from them.

That depends on how you define an eyesore, since everyones opinion on an 'eyesore' is different it would be nearly impossible to define in law (and to say that 'eyesore = over 60% paved' is just ridiculously simplistic). I find severely overgrown grass an eyesore but I wouldn't dream of telling my neighbors how often to mow the lawn on their own properties, because that isn't any of my business.

There are plenty of styles of paving that actually look pretty nice. If you don't like paving, that's okay, you don't have to have it in your garden. But what gives you the right to say that somebody else is not allowed to have it? Wouldn't that be the equivalent of somebody else telling you that you MUST have it?

Quote :

This isn't something draconian and unworkable. 40% of the garden has to be covered with living plants. This couple had two years to do that and they either didn't do it or didn't submit the proper documents proving they'd done it.

This still doesn't change the fact that this law is unnecessary and shouldn't be on the books in the first place. I'd bet a ludicrous amount of taxpayers money has been spent on prosecuting this poor couple for what amounts to a completely victimless crime. If I was in their shoes I'd be fighting this law.

who fucking cares

Ezri Dax wrote:

What part of "property values" don't you get? The aesthetics keep up a certain standard of living. So do politics, resident statistics, etc. The city gets their tax dollars from these people, and the squeaky wheel (namely, the complainers) get the grease (namely, this lawn thing handled). They don't want a peice of their community keeping up to standard. There are laws like this anywhere, and for some it's just understandings because they want to keep up the level of the neighborhood and keep it A Nice Place To Live (tm).

Seriously, have none of you people heard of a gated community?

HEY

I THINK CITIES SHOULD MAKE IT ILLEGAL FOR NIGGERS AND SPICS TO MOVE IN

THEY ALWAYS LOWER PROPERTY VALUES WHEN THEY MOVE IN

FUCKING UP OUR RESALE MAN WHITEYS STICK TOGETHER

Seriously when did property values become a human right?

Cyberwulf wrote:

stick a dead tree festooned with giblets in the middle and encourage crows to nest in it

Holy shit, now I want to try that. You think I could get vultures? I bet I could get vultures! Oh man, I am going to the butcher's right now fuck yeah man

You're all arguing about grass here. Grass. I just... Thought you should know.

Verandering wrote:

You're all arguing about grass here. Grass. I just... Thought you should know.

And here I thought it was basically legal in California

Delcat wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

stick a dead tree festooned with giblets in the middle and encourage crows to nest in it

Holy shit, now I want to try that. You think I could get vultures? I bet I could get vultures! Oh man, I am going to the butcher's right now fuck yeah man

We have turkey vultures around here. Would that work for you? They tend to congregate around the auto parts yards, fyi. Bring your own cages. Be warned though: those suckers are freaking huge.

lemmingwriter wrote:

We have turkey vultures around here. Would that work for you? They tend to congregate around the auto parts yards, fyi. Bring your own cages. Be warned though: those suckers are freaking huge.

Psssht, what could possibly go OH GOD MY PRECIOUS LADYGIBLETS

(We actually have turkey vultures around here too, they're awesome :D)

Delcat wrote:

lemmingwriter wrote:

We have turkey vultures around here. Would that work for you? They tend to congregate around the auto parts yards, fyi. Bring your own cages. Be warned though: those suckers are freaking huge.

Psssht, what could possibly go OH GOD MY PRECIOUS LADYGIBLETS

(We actually have turkey vultures around here too, they're awesome :D)

Delly, hon, you realize this isn't the unerotic euphemism thread, right?

Delcat wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

stick a dead tree festooned with giblets in the middle and encourage crows to nest in it

Holy shit, now I want to try that. You think I could get vultures? I bet I could get vultures! Oh man, I am going to the butcher's right now fuck yeah man

I wouldn't have to worry about getting vultures, since we don't have those in the UK. However, If I had a dead tree with meat hung on it I might be able to attract smaller birds of prey such as Kestrels or Owls. That said, a dead tree with meat hung on it isn't exactly what I'd call a nice garden... However if any of my neighbours decided to help out the local wildlife in that way I'd have absolutely no objections.

Ezri Dax wrote:

However, If I had a dead tree with meat hung on it I might be able to attract smaller birds of prey such as Kestrels or Owls.

And raccoons. And dogs. And bears.

Ezri Dax wrote:

However if any of my neighbours decided to help out the local wildlife in that way I'd have absolutely no objections.

Raccoons. And dogs. And bears.

Seriously, motherfucking bears.

TheHedonist wrote:

Verandering wrote:

You're all arguing about grass here. Grass. I just... Thought you should know.

And here I thought it was basically legal in California

well sweetie, you were wrong

Delcat wrote:

Ezri Dax wrote:

However, If I had a dead tree with meat hung on it I might be able to attract smaller birds of prey such as Kestrels or Owls.

And raccoons. And dogs. And bears.

No raccoons in the UK (foxes, yes), most gardens can be sealed against dogs, and certainly no bears. The most vicious things we have are boar, and they're hidden in one of the forests. And also vegetarian.

You could attract birds of prey indirectly by putting out food for the things they eat, although I think I'd prefer the house sparrows that hang out in the back garden.

i saw a massive fucking eagle yesterday

it was eating either a very very large rat or a small cat

shit was so majestic

Delcat wrote:

lemmingwriter wrote:

We have turkey vultures around here. Would that work for you? They tend to congregate around the auto parts yards, fyi. Bring your own cages. Be warned though: those suckers are freaking huge.

Psssht, what could possibly go OH GOD MY PRECIOUS LADYGIBLETS

(We actually have turkey vultures around here too, they're awesome :D)

Between the parts yards, the freeways, and the reservoirs/collection basins, we have almost any kind of bird of prey you could want. Turkey vultures, a couple of kinds of owls, red-tail hawks, and kestrels. Then there are the large waterbirds--egrets, herons, pelicans--so if you want imposing birds, we have imposing birds.

Ezri Dax wrote:

Quote :

This isn't something draconian and unworkable. 40% of the garden has to be covered with living plants. This couple had two years to do that and they either didn't do it or didn't submit the proper documents proving they'd done it.

This still doesn't change the fact that this law is unnecessary

It isn't unnecessary.

Quote :

I'd bet a ludicrous amount of taxpayers money has been spent on prosecuting this poor couple

Who were given two years to comply with the rules and didn't bother.

Quote :

If I was in their shoes I'd be fighting this law.

Because you're a fucking dumbass.

Penguin wrote:

HEY

I'M A STUPID FUCKHEAD WHO THINKS THIS IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS RACISM

BRB HUFFING AIRPLANE FUEL AND THEN LIGHTING MATCHES

Ezri Dax wrote:

That said, a dead tree with meat hung on it isn't exactly what I'd call a nice garden...

In your ideal world, there'd be plenty of things you wouldn't call "a nice garden". And you'd get to deal with all the vermin, stink, and general nastiness with absolutely no recourse.

Cyberwulf wrote:

Everything flies over my head because I'm the world's shortest mental midget

Oh, okay. Here, let me make this absolutely clear: "Property values" are not an excuse to make a law about anything. Much of the other stuff that people keep bringing up, because they have a ridiculous idea of how these laws work, don't apply here. If someone is going to "stink up a neighborhood" by leaving chunks of meat in the trees or dump toxic waste in their own yard, they'd be subject to other environmental protection/public health laws.

The amount of grass or plants or whatever in your yard is strictly relevant to making it look pretty, which only has to do with property values. And oh by the way that's why neighborhoods don't like incoming poor people (who are often minorities) moving in. Not only do they lower property values by their sheer presence due to potential buyers' xenophobia, working long hours for crap wages often means they don't have nearly the time and energy to deal with this shit.

So, in reality, it often really does come down to racism.

Penguin wrote:

Cyberwulf wrote:

Everything flies over my head because I'm the world's shortest mental midget

Oh, okay. Here, let me make this absolutely clear: "Property values" are not an excuse to make a law about anything. Much of the other stuff that people keep bringing up, because they have a ridiculous idea of how these laws work, don't apply here. If someone is going to "stink up a neighborhood" by leaving chunks of meat in the trees or dump toxic waste in their own yard, they'd be subject to other environmental protection/public health laws.

Exactly, which means there is no requirement for an additional law. Since we're talking about people being allowed to pave over their own gardens in peace, public health doesn't even apply to this case. As for property values, I just don't understand why paving would necessarily reduce the value of a house anyway. Surely a low maintainence garden, for some, would actually be a selling point? Gardens, like anything else, are not a one type fits all.

Quote :

The amount of grass or plants or whatever in your yard is strictly relevant to making it look pretty, which only has to do with property values. And oh by the way that's why neighborhoods don't like incoming poor people (who are often minorities) moving in. Not only do they lower property values by their sheer presence due to potential buyers' xenophobia, working long hours for crap wages often means they don't have nearly the time and energy to deal with this shit.

So, in reality, it often really does come down to racism.

How exactly are poor people a race? Here in the UK there are poor people of EVERY race, and rich people of every race too. In honesty even if I didn't fall into the 'poor' category, I wouldn't want to live in a rich neighbourhood anyway, I have no time for snobs. Not all rich people are snobs, of course, but enough are that I wouldn't want to live in a rich area. There is much more important things to worry about in life than glaring at what your neighbour is doing with his own property. To be honest if anyone IS worried about how others in their neighbourhood have their gardens then sorry but that means they have really really sad lives.

It has a lot to do with snobbery but nothing to do with racism.

Ezri Dax wrote:

Exactly, which means there is no requirement for an additional law. Since we're talking about people being allowed to pave over their own gardens in peace, public health doesn't even apply to this case. As for property values, I just don't understand why paving would necessarily reduce the value of a house anyway. Surely a low maintainence garden, for some, would actually be a selling point? Gardens, like anything else, are not a one type fits all.

Pretty, well-manicured lawns give off the impression that the neighborhood is full of conscientious people who don't break into your house. A dead, paved lawn combined with other architectural blemishes give the place a more rough and tumble, make sure you lock your doors at night atmosphere. That's just the way it is. People feel more secure about moving in with the pretty.

Ezri Dax wrote:

How exactly are poor people a race?

They're not, and that's not my point. But particularly in the US, the poor are most likely to be comprised of a demographic that one could describe, "usually not white." Yes, there are millions of poor white people, but:

Quote :

It has a lot to do with snobbery but nothing to do with racism.

Wrong. Well, racism is another form of snobbery, but let me explain why this sort of thing happens. Take the US in the 1960s and 70s, for example. Black people stuck in inner-city apartments started moving out into the suburbs, heavily white-dominated neighborhoods. Ever wonder where "there goes the neighborhood" comes from? Yeah. Black people moved into the neighborhood, property values started going down because people with money (who were still more often white than black) didn't want to buy houses there anymore. On one hand, this drove down the prices of new houses, making them more affordable. On the other hand, the racists started cooking up all sorts of ideas to keep their neighborhoods homogenized. One of them was cooking up ordinances to make sure that white suburbanites had the upper hand. Meanwhile, if you've been stuck in an apartment your whole life, as has the rest of your family, and suddenly have a chance to move out into the suburbs... are you really going to be all that up to speed on maintaining a house with a yard? Even if you have the time and ability, house repairs and lawn work can get ahead of you fast. So you start getting ticketed by local busybody ordinances because you don't have the ability to do it yourself or the money to pay someone... you see where this leads?

California's always had a problem with this in particular. It's not an issue that goes away if you slap your hands over your ears and say LA LA LA THERE ARE RICH PEOPLE OF OTHER COLORS TOO LA LA LA