COL Barfoot -Threads Merged

[sfmedicw9]

I understand its about the pole in the yard - he's wrong by the letter of the law - given

I have never understood why people move into neighborhoods with a HA

Why would anyone subject themselves to little Nazi busybodies?? I mean these are people that actually think its important that their precious little grass i trimmed correctly, They think it actually matters that everything looks like Ward and June Cleavers House

Fuck I would just as soon rather these little twerps would just do the little lemming thing and jump off a cliff. If your worried how your precious little toys look to the point of it actually causes you to give a damn - your living a worthless life anyhow - you need to get a life

[AJG]

Originally Posted by Husker19D30

This is what it comes down to for me. There would seem to be a first amendment issue here.

There's not a First Amendment issue here. First, nobody is telling he can't do anything that he didn't agree to when he purchased the house. Second, the First Amendment prohibits state action which restricts freedom of speech, it has no bearing on what a homeowners' association which a person voluntarily joined can require of its members.

[AJG]

Originally Posted by Section8

So As I understand the general consensus here is that we should all bow down to a HOA because they are right and we are sheople. They are above the federal and state statues. Interesting!!!

No. The consensus is that you should follow rules that you voluntarily agreed to follow. Its called a contract.

[AJG]

Originally Posted by Greenhat

I think a good lawyer could make the HOA wish they had never denied that application.

The issue of the binding nature of HOA rules has been litigated to death in pretty much every state in the country. I think a good lawyer will tell this homeowner this and advise him as to how to go about displaying his flag within the rules.

[SOTB]

Originally Posted by sfmedicw9

I mean these are people that actually think its important that their precious little grass i trimmed correctly....If your worried how your precious little toys look to the point of it actually causes you to give a damn - your living a worthless life anyhow - you need to get a life

I suppose I live a worthless life, then....

[P38]

Originally Posted by sfmedicw9

Why would anyone subject themselves to little Nazi busybodies?? I mean these are people that actually think its important that their precious little grass i trimmed correctly, They think it actually matters that everything looks like Ward and June Cleavers House

Fuck I would just as soon rather these little twerps would just do the little lemming thing and jump off a cliff. If your worried how your precious little toys look to the point of it actually causes you to give a damn - your living a worthless life anyhow - you need to get a life

1. I like my home owners association, the "Nazi busybodies" don't control it, and I can fly the American flag on my property any day of the week.

2. As to "your living a worthless life anyhow", that's just such a stupid statement that I don't even know how to respond to it. What do you know about me?

[Longrifle]

Originally Posted by AJG

I think a good lawyer will tell this homeowner this and advise him as to how to go about displaying his flag within the rules.

And I think a better lawyer would consider the possibility that this "rule" is wrong in denying a property owner a commonly accepted way of displaying the flag, and would offer his services.

Suppose a HOA had a rule prohibiting invitation of certain minorities to sit on one's lawn. Clearly that wouldn't be an acceptable rule, so why is this one?

At one time "covenants" were enforced, too, until someone stepped up to the plate with a lawyer and got that changed.

I simply do not believe anyone, for any reason, should have the right to tell a property owner how they can display the US flag respectfully on their own land. Paying property taxes alone should provide that guarantee.

[The Fat Guy]

What a bunch of shithouse lawyers we all are.

Read the good Colonel's story again. Its not about the flagpole, its about the fight! Its about his ability to stay alive and fight for what he thinks is right. I would hate to say that he would probably get sick or worse if he were to win this case and then have nothing to fight for.

NOTE: This is the opinion of someone who never has and never will live under the fascist rule of a home owners association, which is really just a collection of uppity sheep that desperately wish they were born as sheep dogs or wolves. This is their next best thing for them, controlling lesser sheep.

[mdb23]

Originally Posted by The Fat Guy

What a bunch of shithouse lawyers we all are.

NOTE: This is the opinion of someone who never has and never will live under the fascist rule of a home owners association, which is really just a collection of uppity sheep that desperately wish they were born as sheep dogs or wolves. This is their next best thing for them, controlling lesser sheep.

I think at least one person in the thread is an actual lawyer of the non shithouse variety.

I don't live in a neighborhood with a HOA, but I think your description of those who do is, at best, unfair. Not every issue in the world is one of patriotism, sheep, sheepdogs, and wolves. Some things are just simple economics.

A lot of people save for years to buy the home of their dreams. Other people buy a home in the hopes of selling it, making a profit, and moving one step closer to the home that they dream of. In either case, I can understand the fear that someone will move in next door, let their grass grow waist high, and paint their fucking home purple, making your home an unsellable piece of shit...... for people in these situations, I can understand the appeal of a HOA.

I know of one neighborhood where a guy moved in and erected huge (car sized) models of the space shuttle, a rocket, and even built a brick tower in his back yard. The dude was a nutter...... now if you are the person next door, who wants to buy your house? Nobody.

The simple fact is that the Colonel signed a contract. If he didn't like the rules, then he shouldn't have signed it. I respect that man greatly for what he has done, but I respectfully think that he is in the wrong here.....

[AJG]

Originally Posted by Longrifle

And I think a better lawyer would consider the possibility that this "rule" is wrong in denying a property owner a commonly accepted way of displaying the flag, and would offer his services.

Fine, think what you want. Suffice to say, this issue has long been resolved by the courts in pretty near every case and it's my general rule not to take a client's money for litigating an issue where the long settled law is against him.

Originally Posted by Longrifle

Suppose a HOA had a rule prohibiting invitation of certain minorities to sit on one's lawn. Clearly that wouldn't be an acceptable rule, so why is this one?

Because that law would be violating federal laws and probably state laws also, depending on what state you are in.

Originally Posted by Longrifle

At one time "covenants" were enforced, too, until someone stepped up to the plate with a lawyer and got that changed.

A covenant is a restriction in a deed which in some way limits what can be done with the land by future owners. They are still enforced regularly unless they violate some law.

Originally Posted by Longrifle

I simply do not believe anyone, for any reason, should have the right to tell a property owner how they can display the US flag respectfully on their own land. Paying property taxes alone should provide that guarantee.

As a matter of principle, I agree. As a matter of law, it really doesn't matter what you or I believe, the law is to the contrary absent a statute such as the one someone here posted from Florida.

Frankly, I'm not sure the Florida statute would withstand a constitutional challenge under Article I, Section 10, which provides that "No State shall ... pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility. But that's just a quick thought off the top of my head, which I admit to not having researched.

[mdb23]

Originally Posted by Longrifle

Suppose a HOA had a rule prohibiting invitation of certain minorities to sit on one's lawn. Clearly that wouldn't be an acceptable rule, so why is this one?

The simple answer is that the prohibition against minorities in the community would violate federal discrimination laws, a prohibition against flagpoles does not.

[MakoZeroSix]

Read the good Colonel's story again. Its not about the flagpole, its about the fight! Its about his ability to stay alive and fight for what he thinks is right. I would hate to say that he would probably get sick or worse if he were to win this case and then have nothing to fight for.

NOTE: This is the opinion of someone who never has and never will live under the fascist rule of a home owners association, which is really just a collection of uppity sheep that desperately wish they were born as sheep dogs or wolves. This is their next best thing for them, controlling lesser sheep.

Hey, whoa, bro...Wouldn't Dale Carnegie opt to appease the homeowners association, in an attempt to win their friendship and influence them?

[Longrifle]

Originally Posted by AJG

Because that law would be violating federal laws and probably state laws also, depending on what state you are in.

Exactly my point. It's time for a law to protect one's right to fly the US flag on his/her own property.

A covenant is a restriction in a deed which in some way limits what can be done with the land by future owners. They are still enforced regularly unless they violate some law.

My fault for being vague. I was referring to covenants preventing future sale of a home to non-whites.

As a matter of principle, I agree. As a matter of law, it really doesn't matter what you or I believe, the law is to the contrary absent a statute such as the one someone here posted from Florida.

We keep beating around the bush. I think we need a law to allow a property owner to fly the US flag. If he can hang one he ought to be able to fly one, and a HOA can butt out when it comes to the US flag. If they want to restrict any other flag that's another matter for another thread, law, contract, argument, or discussion.

Frankly, I'm not sure the Florida statute would withstand a constitutional challenge under Article I, Section 10, which provides that "No State shall ... pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility. But that's just a quick thought off the top of my head, which I admit to not having researched.

I believe you. Thus the need for a federal law in this matter.

Originally Posted by mdb23

The simple answer is that the prohibition against minorities in the community would violate federal discrimination laws, a prohibition against flagpoles does not.

And the simple solution, since common sense is lacking in certain HOAs, is a federal law allowing a property owner to display the US flag on a flagpole.

Just as there is a clear need for laws to prevent racial discrimination in contracts, there obviously is a need for a law to prevent this kind of crap in contracts.

[sfmedicw9]

Originally Posted by SOTB

I suppose I live a worthless life, then....

No No No

Im talking about those that get upset over this stupid shit. Those that actually make it there business to get confrontational over someones elses lawn or how they choose to paint their own house

Or those that maintain that sterile suburbia neatly trimmed Ward Cleaver shit to the point they think that somehow it matters in the grand scheme of things.

No offence meant to anyone here

[Mother]

Some on this site that have commented about this issue may not have lived in a townhome type community with an HOA and are confused on the facts.

“Barfoot had sought permission to install the pole shortly after he moved into the community — a complex of townhouses where the grounds are community property — last June. The board denied his request in July.”

The key words there are “community property”. No one is saying he cannot fly the flag nor have a flag pole, they are saying he can’t do it on the piece of land that is considered an area that is used by the entire community. Granted, most townhome type communities do not have much private property aside from the living structure but as stated by others there are other ways of displaying the flag that would not violate any rules.

Maybe what I should be saying is; Read the whole story.