Posted on 01/27/2007 1:36:11 PM PST by 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.
The path we've travelled finally landed us in the briar patch. Governments abused their power to take land by process, payment, and purpose. People abused the courts by holding up needed projects with frivolous lawsuits to can extort the system. Corrupt officials and citizens used the power of eminent domain for personal enrichment.
Now how do we fix it? I could tell you how to amend the US Constitution to mitigate the damage done by rogue courts, but I haven't got even a guess how to force governments to treat people with respect and pay them approprately for their land.
No, I don't think he did. I use my anger to fuel my political involvement, because I don't think violence is the answer - although like our Founding Fathers I think violence should continue to be a last resort against overbearing government.
While I agree that the guy running the backhoe likely was not an appropriate target (I don't know how closely he may have been involved in the decision-making - in some very small municipalities they all are), I also know that there are many paid staff on local government who do say things like "we are the township - we can do what we want". Those people view being in local government as a way to create a new kind of society, and I am not on board with that. They may be employees but they are calling the shots when they are advising the elected board members on what to do - and the 'do nothing' option is never mentioned.
I cried the day the Murrah Building was attacked, the same as on 9/11. I'm not 100% certain that Tim McVeigh acted alone as an anti-government US citizen, or if he was involved with foreign agents acting for other reason.s
Thanks, I am glad that somebody gave more information about this.
I live in the country, about 9 miles out. Something similar happened to my neighbors. A large lake was constructed about 40 years ago to furnish water for several small towns. I remember all the talk about how much my town needed the water. The lake is located about 60 miles away. The lake was built and several towns are using water from it. My town never hooked up to the lake.
About 25 years ago, people in our water department started talking about needing to build a local lake to furnish water for the town. Several different locations were suggested. One was proposed that was not populated and would not cause any problems. Several of the big money people owned property that would have lakeside access on another location and would have made a lot of money. There was a special election, nobody even mentioned the first lake, and the lake was to be built. The head of the local water department owned a construction business and his company did most of the work. Several of my neighbors lost most of their land. A couple lost their houses. The town offered to buy the land for well below its actual value. They refused and were informed that the county would condemn the land and pay the property owners less than was offered the first time.
One neighbor took the water commission to court and did get more money. Another neighbor threw the water department people off his land and told them that he would kill anybody that trespassed on his land. Some kind of deal was reached since he was able to build another house a hundred yards away.
--I'm on the shooter's side and kind of respect three for four with an SKS at 85+ yards.--
Please respect the FR guidelines.
It makes it hard to fix the problem when the guy shoots to kill when you go out there.
Uh...I just said that.
If the employer doesn't like the contents of the car, then the car doesn't get into the parking lot.
Don't bother t with reality.
-I have to wonder how many people could calmly accept having the neighborhood's raw sewage pumped into their yard.--
I wonder how many nuts are out there like you that condone shooting those that come to repair the problems.
Don't bother t with reality. I won't. I agree with the GA law, he agrees with it and you probably do also. Aren't we a happy group?
That's BS and you know it.
You have the right to decide what you want to carry in your car, and the employer has the right to make his decision on whether you get to park on his lot based on what you freely decided to carry in your car.
You also have the right to refuse to work for a company that does not allow your car on their lot based on the car's contents.
Freedom belongs to both the employee and the employer, not just to the employee.
--Read the story. The city was dissatisfied with the existing easement. They wanted a larger or wider easement or easement in a different location on the property. If he didn't want to grant the easement, the city should not be able to serve him (actually his wife) with notice the night before that they're coming in the morning to take it anyway, whether you like it or agree or not.--
The wife is as much the owner as he is, most probably, and thus they served it properly. Or don't you believe in the equality of women? The part about a larger, new easement was refuted about 250 posts ago.
--My own experiences with government reinforce my belief that most governments in this nation treat people as though they exist to make life convenient for the officials. I expect that the local planning board never even tried to talk to this guy, they just resolved what they wanted to do and did it.--
You presume wrong.
--I'm not changing my own response, but I wish I'd stayed out of it entirely. --
You can always notify the moderator to remove your post and that wasy less will see your support for this murderer.
--A jury might not have viewed it that way after hearing the evidence of harassment by the city and the way they went about taking part of his property for their own use.--
You are right. Anything can happen. I saw the OJ trial also.
"but killing these working men for "the principle" of the ability to act at will and without need for justification" is beyond rationality."
without speaking to him, would you say he was "beyond rationality", insane?
do you know all the circumstances that led up to the incident? do you know what the attitude of the "working men" was during and before the incident?
did all this happen in a vacuum, with no justification for his action?
it seems that he paid the ultimate price for his actions based upon principle.
to call the man insane is arrogant, callous and brutish at best.
The 'guy' worked nights. He got off work at 5 AM. The city crew showed up at 7 AM.
God only knows how many 'negotiations' were attempted while the man would normally have been sleeping.
Anyone else here have more than a passing familliarity with sleep deprivation?
What is not being said is what would be dug up, either, but the bottom line is that despite the warning, the city folks just went ahead and moved in. He only did what he said he would.
I wonder what, if any concessions were made to try to work with the guy?
--Maybe I missed something here but the article seems to indicate that they were installing a NEW line in a NEW route.--
On the existing easement.
--He only did what he said he would.--
Sad that so many here support murder.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.