Corrupt Government
See other Corrupt Government Articles
Title: Man Harassed and Fined for Planting Vegetables in His Own Yard
Source:
Activist Post
URL Source: http://www.activistpost.com/2016/04 ... anting-vegetables-in-yard.html
Published: Apr 2, 2016
Author: Lily Dane
Post Date: 2016-04-04 10:49:15 by Deckard
Keywords: None
Views: 6283
Comments: 38
By Lily Dane A family in Sugar Creek, Missouri grew the beautiful vegetable garden in the photo above. They’ve been given four days to tear out the entire garden or face a fine. Why? Because it is in their front yard, and city officials and a few neighbors don’t like it. Nathan Athans said he planted the garden in his front yard because it gets optimal sunlight. His backyard only gets sunshine for about two hours per day, and only in certain areas. Athans told KSHB that he grows several different types of vegetables on his lawn and loves tending to his garden. I’d probably say about 300 hours [so far this year], I spend all my free time out here. I want my family to know where their food is coming from, I don’t want to have to go to the grocery store and worry about what was done to that food. But now, the city has passed a shiny new ordinance – one that Athans believes is part of a witch hunt against him. The family started an online petition, which explains why they feel targeted: The city of Sugar Creek, Missouri passed an ordinance two days ago on March 28th, forbidding front yard gardens to grow food, within the first 30 feet of front yard space from the street. Mayor Matt Mallinson both passed and approved this ordinance. They gave us until April 1st to comply. We are the only house in the city with a front yard garden, and just happen to be exactly within those first 30 feet. They have been targeting us since we moved in last year, because we grew a garden in the front yard. The city’s building official, Paul Loving, told KSHB that city received many complaints and that the ordinance is their solution. The petition goes on to explain the reasons the garden is so important to Athans and his family: We believe in sustainability, growing our food locally without pesticides and excessive fertilizer use, reducing our need for fossil fuels to import produce from other countries, countries that have little or no regulations on pesticide use. Sugar Creek is also prone to flooding, as it is located next to the Missouri River, so using our yard for growing plants instead of grass is beneficial because our garden takes in water as well as holding the soil together to prevent erosion, all while filtering out pollutants. It has helped our basement not flood during storms, prevented storm water runoff pollution, reduced fossil fuel use, helped us eat healthier, and prevented us from consuming pesticides and GMOs. Unfortunately, Athans isn’t the first to be subjected to harassment over growing his own food. People have been charged with crimes, threatened with jail time, and had their property destroyed for growing gardens in their own yards. Remember, in the US, you never truly own anything. 
Last summer, the city cited Athans for weeds in his garden, and he complied with the order to clean things up, and paid the fine.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 38.
#2. To: Deckard (#0)
Nathan Athans should buy a piece of property in the country, and move the hell out of Sugar Creek, Missouri. Sell the property in Sugar Creek, then tell them to piss off.
Sugar Creek still wins and its tyranny prevails. The old saw comes to mind, You can run but you can't hide. Eventually the tyrants will find you if you have something they want.
So, what do you suggest? I guess you think everyone and this guy should just bow down and take it.
So, what do you suggest? I guess you think everyone and this guy should just bow down and take it. Do you not understand that there is a multiplicity of valid competing interest that are at play in these type of things? I don't know about you but I don't want my next door neighbors engaging in activities that will negatively impact on the value of my home or the safety and health of the neighborhood. So yes, I do believe that there is a public interest in having standards and restrictions and having them enforced. The issue is, and always has been, that of proper balance of the valid competing interests. No, you can't yell fire in a crowded theater and not be subject to account. What don't you understand?
You're wrong again. You don't believe in or understand the concept of private property.
No, you don't. There a many, many things that one cannot legally do with, in or on private property. If you doubt that try some yourself.
Color of law tyranny is what you support.
Color of law tyranny is what you support. Really. Then try building a crack lab in your basement or conduct research on biological toxins or merely filling your front law with trash or even just putting a outhouse on your front lawn or running around naked on your front lawn. What would the color of those apples be to your neighbors, the city, the county?
What's the color of common sense in SOSOland where {Cracklab,Outhouse,Research in Biological Toxin} = {Growing a Vegetable Garden} ?
Do you and AKA have the corner on the market on stupidity? I never claimed such thing. But you knee jerk morons can't take your heads out of you asses long enough to see any colors of the world. So for the last time, all I stated was that in an civil society there is no absolute right for one to do as one pleases with his private property when an activity has a negative impact on his neighbors and gave some examples. AND I clearly said that the question of where the line should be is on of rational balance. Did I include growing vegetables in these examples? No I didn't. Did I including anything that should not reasonably and rationally be restricted? Yes I did. If you can't understand that or don't believe it then piss off. I have had it with these mindless knee jerk moronic ad hominems.
How exactly does growing vegetables have a negative impact upon his neighbors -- let alone one that's comparable to a Cracklab, an Outhouse, or doing research in Biological Toxins?
There are no replies to Comment # 38. End Trace Mode for Comment # 38.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#5. To: Stoner (#2)
Nathan Athans should buy a piece of property in the country, and move the hell out of Sugar Creek, Missouri. Sell the property in Sugar Creek, then tell them to piss off.
#12. To: SOSO (#5)
" Sugar Creek still wins and its tyranny prevails. "
#14. To: Stoner (#12)
" Sugar Creek still wins and its tyranny prevails. "
#24. To: SOSO (#14)
#25. To: A K A Stone (#24)
You don't believe in or understand the concept of private property.
#26. To: SOSO (#25)
No, you don't. There a many, many things that one cannot legally do with, in or on private property. If you doubt that try some yourself.
#28. To: A K A Stone (#26)
No, you don't. There a many, many things that one cannot legally do with, in or on private property. If you doubt that try some yourself.
#35. To: SOSO (#28)
What would the color of those apples be to your neighbors, the city, the county?
#37. To: VxH, A K A Stone (#35)
What's the color of common sense in SOSOland where {Cracklab,Outhouse,Research in Biological Toxin} = {Growing a Vegetable Garden} ?
#38. To: SOSO (#37)
when an activity has a negative impact on his neighbors
Replies to Comment # 38.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]