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.

[CGTRWK]

If you don't feel you are getting adequate roads, streetlights, etc. for your tax dollars, then vote differently or run for local office yourself. But note, roads don't repair themselves, cops and firemen don't do their jobs as hobbies and power companies don't give away electricity for free.

Politicians always defend taxes by talking about services you actually use, like roads, police, and firefighters. But when it comes time to actually spend it, the great majority of that money is poured into the usual bottomless pits of welfare, corporate subsidies, and special education.

Once you reach a critical mass of tax recepients of one form or another, the productive taxpayer can be safely ignored and elections become a matter of competing handout packages to see who can build a bigger coalition of recepients. Yes I'm bitter.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"Actually, millions of us, -- and the NRA, - are demanding..." -- tpaine

I fight against majority rule

1,192 posted on 12/11/2006 11:11:25 AM EST by tpaine

So, you're both in favor of and against mob rule?

"Our constitutional social contract should indeed be secured by the rule of law."

And here's the rule of the law:

U.S. v. Cruikshank (1876)
The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed; but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress. This is one of the amendments that has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government,

The problem is that you don't LIKE that rule of law, so now you want new laws enacted to extend the restrictions created by the people to limit the ability of the government to abuse its power (the Bill of Rights), and LIMIT THE POWER OF THE PEOPLE OVER THEIR OWN PROPERTY!

Never mind that the Founders themselves wrote into the Preamble to the Bill of Rights that these were restrictions on government. You don't LIKE what the Founders said.

Lastly you proudly boast about the "millions" of NRA members demanding that mob rule reign, while claiming that you're fighting the majority.

How are you doing it?

You're demonizing private industry and private property holders.

It's a page straight out the Bolshevik play book.

Such a Marxist that you are.

[UpAllNight]

Please DO not copy me on the posts with Luis.

[UpAllNight]

Sorry. I didn't read it. When I saw the long post and some of the words (So, you're both in favor of and against mob rule?) I thought it was tpaine referring to both of us. Looking back I understand that you were referring to his favoring "both".

Thanks for giving me this opportunity to clarify. :-)

[tpaine]

upallnight spins:


"-- Please post where I agree with luis. --"

"I stated earlier that I have no idea what luis thinks nor have I asked him for his position."


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Luis posted:

Employer: Hello, I need you to open your trunk and so that I can search for guns before you access my parking lot, as you may recall allowing me to search your vehicle on the way and out of the property is a condition of employment.

You: No, you can't search my car.
Employer: Then you can't enter the property.

What are you going to do at that point?

611 posted on 01/28/2007 12:36:50 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez



To: Luis Gonzalez

--What are you going to do at that point?--

You have to ask after all the reponses on this thread?
Why of course, you pull out your SKS and shoot the minimum wage, 59 year old guard.

613 posted on 01/28/2007 12:38:55 PM PST by UpAllNight

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


tpaine
"Owning land doesn't give you godlike powers over your peers."

Luis:
But owning a gun does?
Absurd.

614 posted on 01/28/2007 12:40:01 PM PST by Luis Gonzalez


To: Luis Gonzalez
Yes. Particular if they are unarmed and you ambush them from behind your truck.

615 UpAllNight

[tpaine]

Luiz, it warms me old heart when you quote that old opinion the gungrabbers hold so dear:

U.S. v. Cruikshank (1876)

Keep up the good work; -- you really look foolish when you try to tar my pro-gun position as Marxist, and your anti-gun absolutism as conservative.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"Luis Gonzalez insists that ~his~ rules over his property trumps our rule of law about carrying arms in vehicles."

I agree with John Adams on the subject of property, your opinions of property are more along the lines of Karl Marx.

"The moment that idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the Laws of God and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence." -- John Adams

Adams calls likens property to the "laws of God".

By the way, I know that you're pushing the NRA's line, but stop lying about what I believe in...I don't care if you carry a cannon in your car, but when you start arguing that your cannon gives you the right to park your car on my property against my wishes...then I care.

Here's the simple solution...sell the parking lot to the employees, you can pay the taxes, upkeep and all other costs involved.

But you want to live off someone else's money.

[durasell]

Every by law every budget is open to the public. Check out your local budget sometime, I think you'd be surprised as to where the money actually goes.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Bolsheviks loved their guns too t.

What are you when you love guns and hate industry and private property?

A Bolshevik.

What are you when you understand that property is the root of all liberty?

"One great object of Govt. is personal protection of the security of property." -- Alexander Hamilton

"Property must be secured or liberty cannot exist." -- John Adams

"The right of property, is the guardian of every other right, and to deprive a people of this, is in fact to deprive them of their liberty." -- Arthur Lee

"The moment that idea is admitted into society that property is not as sacred as the Laws of God and that there is not a force of law and public justice to protect it, anarchy and tyranny commence." -- John Adams

Property -- This term in its particular application means "that dominion which one man claims and exercises over the external things of the world, in exclusion of every other individual." -- James Madison

Even you should know the answer to that last question.

[metesky]

Who was Carl Drega

[tpaine]

Luis claims I lie about him 'believing' in banning guns from his property:

"-- By the way, I know that you're pushing the NRA's line, but stop lying about what I believe in...
I don't care if you carry a cannon in your car, but when you start arguing that your cannon gives you the right to park your car on my property against my wishes"..."-- then I care. --"


Luis, -- what would your position be about a sharecropper who lived on and farmed part of your your property?
Would you insist that he and his family had no right to firearms in their home, or in their vehicles as long as they were on your property?

Here's an interesting essay that mentions the sharecropping/gun dilemma after the civil war. -- Long read, but worth it..



Loaded
Address:http://billtotten.blogspot.com/2007/01/loaded.html

[CGTRWK]

My county's breakdown of local tax expenditures for FY2007:

Public safety, 14.4%
Public works and transportation, 5.1%.

Public schools, 50.7%
Community college, 5.3%
Health and human services, 6.5%
General government, 6.4%
Bond financing, 6.4%
Parks, libraries, recreation, etc 5.2%

Spending on police, firefighters, and roads doesn't account for even 20% of the budget.

[durasell]

That seems okay to me -- what would you eliminate, the schools?

[UpAllNight]

Nothing on your post shows that I agree with Luis. He asked some questions (probably toyou) and both of my posts were sarcasm.

If you want to debate my position which is the same position as yours on the GA bill, fine, but I don't understand why you want to do that.

[tpaine]

If you want to debate my position which is the same position as yours on the GA bill, fine, but I don't understand why you want to do that.

If you want to pretend that my position is the same position as yours on the GA bill, suit yourself, -- but I don't understand why you want to do that.
- Do you often live in a fantasy world, and deny your previous positions?

[Luis Gonzalez]

Once again you throw up red herrings.

We're not discussing tenant-landlord relationships here.

We are discussing the fact that you wish to enter other people's property against their wishes by using your gun as your excuse for violating their property rights.

We aren't discussing driving to and from anywhere either, we are discussing reaching your destination and parking...parking is not driving.

You want to claim title to other people's land with absolute impunity, without any financial burden, and without any liability for that land.

You're doing it by engaging the force of government and in the name of the mobs.

We are a Republic tpaine, not a rule-of-the-mob democracy.

[colorado tanker]

This is a really dumb article. The city wasn't "taking" this guy's property, they were simply using their easement to put in a new sewer line. That easement was almost certainly there when he bought the property and would have shown up in his title work. The only issue here is making the city restore the property to its former condition when the work is finished, which they are obligated to do.

[tpaine]

Luis, -- what would your position be about a sharecropper who lived on and farmed part of your your property? Would you insist that he and his family had no right to firearms in their home, or in their vehicles as long as they were on your property?

Once again you throw up red herrings. We're not discussing tenant-landlord relationships here.

We are discussing your insistence that people have no right to firearms in their vehicles as long as they are on your property luis. -- Your denial makes you look foolish.

We are discussing the fact that you wish to enter other people's property against their wishes by using your gun as your excuse for violating their property rights.

"Red herring" BS luis, and you know it. -- So does everyone else reading it. Be ashamed.

[CGTRWK]

The schools here are spending $12,500 per student without any notable success beyond what was being achieved two decades ago at half the price.

They are a bottomless pit and the teachers union on the receiving end is the strongest and best funded lobby in the county, arguably the strongest in the state.

[tpaine]

This is a really dumb article.

Skip to the last fifty posts or so.

You'll see it served its purpose in smoking out some die hard absolutists; --- who use property rights as an excuse to prohibit guns from parking lots..