Subject: Re: [LPNY DISCUSS] Re: forest fires
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 09:43:37 -0500
To:        <lpny_discuss@yahoogroups.com>
From:     Bob Armstrong <bob@cosy.com>
On Fri, 12 Mar 2004 14:16:40 -0000, greghevia wrote:
>=A0--- In lpny_discuss@yahoogroups.com, Travis Pahl=
 <tpahl@u...>=A0wrote:
>=A0>>=A0Great. =A0now you are forgetting the whole idea of a buffer=
 zone.
>=A0>
>=A0>=A0here I will try explaining in a list format...
>=A0>
>=A0>=A01. houses built near forests should have an adequate buffer=
 zone.

 I can't believe you live in a wooded area . People live IN=
 forrests
 not just near them . You may have your Pollyanna views because=
 the
 NW is so wet . You are spouting total unreality with respect to
 CA , CO , WY and other vast areas .

>=A0>=A02. There is no need to suppress fires in neighboring=
 properties
> >=A0(whether=A0they be city or rural forest areas) if they have a=
 proper
> > buffer=A0zone.

 What the hell is a buffer zone in a city ?

>=A0>=A03. Government land has been mismanaged by suppressing small=
 fires.

 Small fires become big fires - which is why they started TRYing=
 to
 contain them . 

>=A0>=A04. Privately owned lands have not for the most part been=
 mismanaged.
> >
>=A0>=A0Travis
>
>=A0Repetition doesn't make you right. =A0That tactic might work when=
 the
>=A0Bushies want the American people to believe, but it won't work=
 on
>=A0me :). =A0What I'm saying is this: You, Travis, say that private=
 people
>=A0don't have to let firefighters on their property if their=
 property is
>=A0on fire. =A0I am saying that they do because a fire poses a=
 danger to
>=A0all surrounding properties. =A0Be that property in urban or=
 rural
>=A0areas. =A0AND if people have a right to not let firefighters on=
 their
>=A0land, then that right has to apply to all, including in urban=
 areas,
>=A0and to allow such a right in urban areas is to commit many to=
 death.

 The libertarian point is that anyone who refused to allow=
 firefighters
 to stop a fire from approaching the boundary of their property=
 would
 be staring at losing it in the criminal negligence suits=
 following .
 For that matter even if the fire was totally on the interior of=
 the
 property , they might lose the property just to suits based on=
 the
 pollution drifting from the property .

>=A0Even in rural areas, there should be no such right because
>=A0neighboring properties might not want their land to burn down.=
 =A0AND,
>=A0I will repoeat myself again: most firefighters are volunteers,=
 not
>=A0gov't workers(paid).

 Forest fire fighters are generally fairly well paid volunteers=
 .
 All too many fires have been started by individuals seeking to=
 create
 a job for themselves .

--=A0
=A0Bob Armstrong -- http://CoSy.com -- 212-285-1864
Libertarian Presidential Candidates =A0:=
 http://CoSy.com/Liberty.htm
Restore our Right to Relax :
=A0http://ny.lp.org/cgi-bin/petition.cgi?Against_the_Smoking_Ban
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A02004/03/12 9:26:06 AM