He said, 'If you come on my land, I'll kill you'

http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/1000land.htm ^

[tpaine]

By Vin Suprynowicz

For years, Garry Watson, 49, of little Bunker, Mo., (population 390) had been squabbling with town officials over the sewage line easement which ran across his property to the adjoining, town-operated sewage lagoon.

Residents say officials grew dissatisfied with their existing easement, and announced they were going to excavate a new sewer line across the landowner's property. Capt. Chris Ricks of the Missouri Highway Patrol reports Watson's wife, Linda, was served with "easement right-of-way papers" on Sept. 6. She gave the papers to Watson when he got home at 5 a.m. the next morning from his job at a car battery recycling plant northeast of Bunker. Watson reportedly went to bed for a short time, but arose about 7 a.m. when the city work crew arrived.

"He told them 'If you come on my land, I'll kill you,' " Bunker resident Gregg Tivnan told me last week. "Then the three city workers showed up with a backhoe, plus a police officer. They'd sent along a cop in a cop car to guard the workers, because they were afraid there might be trouble. Watson had gone inside for a little while, but then he came out and pulled his SKS (semi-automatic rifle) out of his truck, steadied it against the truck, and he shot them."

Killed in the September 7 incident, from a range of about 85 yards, were Rocky B. Gordon, 34, a city maintenance man, and David Thompson, 44, an alderman who supervised public works. City maintenance worker Delmar Eugene Dunn, 51, remained in serious but stable condition the following weekend.

Bunker police Officer Steve Stoops, who drove away from the scene after being shot, was treated and released from a hospital for a bullet wound to his arm and a graze to the neck.

Watson thereupon kissed his wife goodbye, took his rifle, and disappeared into the woods, where his body was found two days later -- dead of an apparently self-inflicted gunshot wound.

Following such incidents, the local papers are inevitably filled with well-meaning but mawkish doggerel about the townsfolk "pulling together" and attempting to "heal" following the "tragedy." There are endless expressions of frustration, pretending to ask how such an otherwise peaceful member of the community could "just snap like that."

In fact, the supposedly elusive explanation is right before our eyes.

"He was pushed," Clarence Rosemann -- manager of the local Bunker convenience store, who'd done some excavation work for Watson -- told the big-city reporters from St. Louis. Another area resident, who didn't want to be identified, told the visiting newsmen, "Most people are understanding why Garry Watson was upset. They are wishing he didn't do it, but they are understanding why he did it."

You see, to most of the people who work in government and the media these days -- especially in our urban centers -- "private property" is a concept out of some dusty, 18th century history book. Oh, sure, "property owners" are allowed to live on their land, so long as they pay rent to the state in the form of "property taxes."

But an actual "right" to be let alone on our land to do whatever we please -- always providing we don't actually endanger the lives or health of our neighbors?

Heavens! If we allowed that, how would we enforce all our wonderful new "environmental protection" laws, or the "zoning codes," or the laws against growing hemp or tobacco or distilling whisky without a license, or any of the endless parade of other malum prohibitum decrees which have multiplied like swarms of flying ants in this nation over the past 87 years?

What does it mean to say we have any "rights" or "freedoms" at all, if we cannot peacefully enjoy that property which we buy with the fruits of our labors?

In his 1985 book "Takings," University of Chicago Law Professor Richard Epstein wrote that, "Private property gives the right to exclude others without the need for any justification.

Indeed, it is the ability to act at will and without need for justification within some domain which is the essence of freedom, be it of speech or of property."

"Unfortunately," replies James Bovard, author of the book "Freedom in Chains: The Rise of the State and the Demise of the Citizen," "federal law enforcement agents and prosecutors are making private property much less private. ...

Park Forest, Ill. in 1994 enacted an ordinance that authorizes warrantless searches of every single-family rental home by a city inspector or police officer, who are authorized to invade rental units 'at all reasonable times.' ... Federal Judge Joan Gottschall struck down the searches as unconstitutional in 1998, but her decision will have little or no effect on the numerous other localities that authorize similar invasions of privacy."

We are now involved in a war in this nation, a last-ditch struggle in which the other side contends only the king's men are allowed to use force or the threat of force to push their way in wherever they please, and that any peasant finally rendered so desperate as to employ the same kind of force routinely employed by our oppressors must surely be a "lone madman" who "snapped for no reason." No, we should not and do not endorse or approve the individual choices of folks like Garry Watson. But we are still obliged to honor their memories and the personal courage it takes to fight and die for a principle, even as we lament both their desperate, misguided actions ... and the systematic erosion of our liberties which gave them rise.

[Lancey Howard]

Picky picky. Anyone could have clicked the link and seen the publishing date. What's the big deal? -- When the incident happened has no bearing on the issues it raises.

Well, obviously, nobody cares much about this stuff.

/sarc

[durasell]

Yep. Americans by nature are suspicious of gubmint -- which is a good thing. But when it crosses a line, then it's a symptom of something else.

[DCPatriot]

The only real difference between this murderous kook who later killed himself and Mohammed Atta or Timothy McVeigh is that the latter two were more organized and efficient homicidal maniacs.

I completely but respectfully disagree.

For example, Barbara K. Olson on American 77 wasn't infringing on Mr. Atta's rights.

[UpAllNight]

--The Boy Scouts of America cannot exclude homosexuals from becoming Scout Troop leaders.--

Would you please call them and tell them. Thank you.

---

Applications for leadership and membership do not inquire into sexual orientation. However, an individual who declares himself to be a homosexual would not be permitted to join Scouting. All members in Scouting must affirm the values of the Scout Oath and Law, and all leaders must be able to model those values for youth.

[Luis Gonzalez]

tpaine has no respect for private property, or the rights of a property owner to control access to his property.

Yet, he demands that his rights be upheld.

On another thread, he posted a fictitious exercise where he was a contractor who came on to someone's property to bid on a job while carrying a gun in his truck; there were visible "No Guns, No Hunting" signs at the property's edge.

Here, in his own words, is what he thinks about your right as a property owner to set rules of access to your own property:

let's say the lady of the house noticed a shotgun in my trucks rack and told me to not bring a gun on her property from then on. I suspect I would smile, say yes mam, make a mental note that this woman was weird, -- and continue to carry my shotgun

[Trailerpark Badass]

We're talking about streetlights that were installed, at taxpayer expense by the municipality, and whose operations are paid for by the homeowners via a seperate electric utility bill. Above, and beyond, municipal property taxes and municipal income taxes.

Oh, I know all about that. 4/5 of my property tax bill goes to pay for the god-awful public schools that I wouldn't send my kids to on a bet.

If you think your taxes should pay for streetlights, bring it up to local commisioner. But then again, should someone across town pay for your streetlight? Hmmm...

[Luis Gonzalez]

I admire the Scouts for standing their ground, but municipality after municipality is cutting their access to public places.

[DCPatriot]

You know you should ping the person you're talking about.

That's thirty lashes around here.

[Boiling point]

Perhaps a freeper more knowledgeable than me on matters of property law can shed some light on this. I own a small farm and always worry about this sort of thing. I believe, that at the time the Constitution was written, If you bought property, you were the supreme authority over it. The constitution, via the 10th amendment, grants powers not specifically granted to congress, to the states and the people. Now, if I am supreme authority over my property, would they not have to have my signed power of attorney or something to even pass restrictions and such on my property. Which to me means, they have no more power to pass such restrictions than I have to pass a law stating that anyone driving passed my property must pay a toll. What am I missing here?

[Luis Gonzalez]

Not when it's t.

Trust me, he talks about you and directs the post to "Y'all"

I've been around here for quite sometime.

[volunbeer]

"""I don't think there is a valid comparison with McVeigh. Watson was in his own home and on his own property - - quite a different situation."""

It's the same sentiment Lancey and it's a slippery slope when outright hatred of government seems to condone behavior like McVeigh or this guy.

Most people in government are just citizens doing a job. I don't understand the logic of your comments on this thread. Do you revile government to the point where the welfare of a child is not as important as the right of an abusers privacy? Should someone run over a road crew making repairs since they are causing undue delay? Should the police not enter an apartment when they hear a woman being assaulted by a man?

Are these silly questions or simple leaps of logic from your sentiments?

Like others have stated there was likely a pre-existing easement on the property for a public sewer system. They were not tearing this mans house down by any indication so I find his actions illogical and inexcusable.

I would likely agree with much of your thoughts about freedoms from government tyranny but I could never associate with the sentiments you and others expressed on this thread. There are avenues to address issues like this short of murdering people.

[Thumper1960]

Thankfully, *I* don't have a streetlamp. It'd be pretty much useless out here.

As for public schools..............don't go there.

[rahbert]

Do you really think that?

If we can't afford counsel, we can just shoot the objects of my frustration?

Sorry, it doesn't work that way. Not even in Texas.

[philetus]

An honorable man would have fired warning shots, ran them off his land, and then tried to justify his action."

He gave them a warning. He told them "'If you come on my land, I'll kill you,'.

If he had fired a warning shot, I imagine he might have gotten incoming.

I believe he killed himself because he knew his life was over and he didn't want his wife bled dry by lawyers.

[philetus]

There's a good chance the jury would either nullify his actions "

Not for two "cold blooded murders"

[UpAllNight]

--I believe he killed himself because he knew his life was over and he didn't want his wife bled dry by lawyers.--

I am surprised that no one has posted that they thought it was really the cops that killed him and they covered it up.

[volunbeer]

I am no expert on property law however....

If there was a pre-existing easement for the sewer system on the property it seems logical at some point the local utility or municipality would need to enter the property and possibly dig to make repairs to it. I think the homeowner should have a reasonable expectation that those doing the work would take care to minimize any damage to his/her property.

The absolute authority idea as expressed by some on here does not take into account the rights and welfare of others.

Does private property give one the right to poach animals or have a meth lab? What if I want to abuse my kids on my property? What if I have 1000 cats on my property? These may seem like extreme examples but if I am doing all of those things on my own property does my authority outweigh the common good?

If I own both sides of the river and all the land around for miles does that give me a right to block the river and make a lake on my property? What about the rights of others downstream?

These arguments were rampant in the old west and they have only become more muddled today in a nation of 300 million people.

I am not a fan of the recent Supreme Court decision but there are issues of imminent domain where I could side with government (interstate connectors would be one example) or widening a road as long as fair compensation was given. I don't agree with tearing down someones property or reclassifying it for a shopping center.

I guess each person has to find their center on the issue.

[philetus]

I am surprised that no one has posted that they thought it was really the cops that killed him and they covered it up."

Possible, but doubtful. If a cop killed him, it would be "justified" and glory and citations would be in the works.

[Boiling point]

I understand easements, as there are some on my farm including a large gasoline and diesel pipeline. I also have had to sell road frontage for the widening of the road and increase of utility easement. What I don't understand is how they can forbid the cutting of trees, filling of sink holes, building of certain types of building or fences if they never had authority to pass such restrictions.

[SuziQ]

In my opinion, the whole reason we have the Second Amendment is that sometimes the King's Men need killing, and the people need to have the ability to do so.

He owned the property, all the while knowing that there was an easement. When the town decided to put a sewer line within easement, they notified him, as required by law. Those men had every right to be there, doing the work for the city, and since they were exercising the town's right to a sewer line on that easement, he had no right to shoot them.