Re: Freedom
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No. Let's say person X steals Item A from person Y, and gives/sells it to person Z. Depending on the ease and efficiecy, I can see two options (a) person X reimburses person Y or (b) person Z loses item A and it's given back to person Y.
[/ QUOTE ]
This is where you start having problems. Is there some time after which this is no longer the case? Or must everything be reimbursed at some point?
[/ QUOTE ]
Once both person Y dies (assuming person X or someone associated with him didn't off him) and a party that wasn't an insider of person X owns the property seems to be a good statute.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Well I'd see your tree as violating my property and my freedom to grow plants on my own property. You don't have a right to trees that hinder my property.
[/ QUOTE ]
Your plants smell bad to me. Are you allowed to grow them?
[/ QUOTE ]
If you on your property (or someone else on theirs) can smell them and object to it then no. Hopefully though you don't think that in Shake's defintion of freedom land everyone is a prick that will sue if a tree is taking up to much shade or if a plant has a mild odor. General human relationships and if that doesn't work voluntary contracts work just fine.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It's up to whoever owns the natural resource or the rights to them.
[/ QUOTE ]Nobody owns them for now.
[/ QUOTE ]
Who owns the land you found them on?
|