His representative's office has already said that they and lawyers were involved in the situation. That should have superceeded any action that could have been and was ultimately taken until after the process was concluded. Should he have probably just moved the thing? In the grand scheme of things, yeah... that's what should have happened. But at the same time, he did was he was supposed to do, and the state felt it necessary to roll out bulldozers and workers to remove basketball hoops that ultimately didn't pose any danger to anyone.
I personally think it's awesome that the police have nothing better to do
- Thread starter retro
- Start date
His representative's office has already said that they and lawyers were involved in the situation. That should have superceeded any action that could have been and was ultimately taken until after the process was concluded. Should he have probably just moved the thing? In the grand scheme of things, yeah... that's what should have happened. But at the same time, he did was he was supposed to do, and the state felt it necessary to roll out bulldozers and workers to remove basketball hoops that ultimately didn't pose any danger to anyone.
You really think that the law would be amended to accommodate? Which I think is the only way around this issue. Were it a local ordinance they could have applied for a variance but the state is not going to get involved on something like this at a local level.
I don't see it happening in this day and age because of legal issues if somebody got hit or hurt by a car.
Back 50 years ago sure they would have rescinded or amended the law if there was enough uproar. Of course back 50 years they would not have dared to pass such an all inclusive law.
With a lot of laws like that, existing structures get grandfathered in. Let's say that he wanted to replace the pole with a new one, then he would have to move it to exist with the new standards that were set into place after the old one had been installed. My issue is the fact that due process wasn't followed, and that they threatened him with arrest if he didn't keep his mouth shut, then told him to go back into his house when he took exception to being blatantly lied to by the lady, whether she was law enforcement or some other official. The whole situation fucking stinks and leaves a very sour taste in my mouth.
I think you will find that in cases where public safety is involved there is no such thing as a grandfather clause.
He had all of fall and winter to get something done.
I don't agree with some of what transpired either. But with an attitude like his family had there was no way it was going to end nicely for them.
The fact the woman lied is irrelevant. That is getting away from the meat of the matter which is his having 6 months to resolve this. and then throwing a hissy fit when it did not go his way
He had all of fall and winter to get something done.
I don't agree with some of what transpired either. But with an attitude like his family had there was no way it was going to end nicely for them.
The fact the woman lied is irrelevant. That is getting away from the meat of the matter which is his having 6 months to resolve this. and then throwing a hissy fit when it did not go his way
I seriously give up... yes, he had 6 months. But he was working with his state fucking representative to resolve the damn issue. I'm willing to put money on the fact that the representative's office told him not to do anything until he heard from them on what was going on. I don't know how it works in Delaware, but I know from experience that's what people have been told in similar issues here in California.
I still can't understand why a fucking basketball hoop would be a public safety issue. What about mailboxes? Are they supposed to be 7' away from the curb as well? What does that mean for ones like this...
I have one of those for my complex, and that's what I had for my house in Texas. They're not 7' away from the curb. Do they cause a safety issue? If the basketball hoops/poles had been there for even close to as long as they're claiming, then the fact that they've stood the test of time tells me that it's not an issue of age. The poles looks structurally intact, and buried at a depth that looked perfectly safe to me.
Inch by inch, little by little......
:24::24::24:I seriously give up... yes, he had 6 months. But he was working with his state fucking representative to resolve the damn issue. I'm willing to put money on the fact that the representative's office told him not to do anything until he heard from them on what was going on. I don't know how it works in Delaware, but I know from experience that's what people have been told in similar issues here in California.
I still can't understand why a fucking basketball hoop would be a public safety issue. What about mailboxes? Are they supposed to be 7' away from the curb as well? What does that mean for ones like this...
I have one of those for my complex, and that's what I had for my house in Texas. They're not 7' away from the curb. Do they cause a safety issue? If the basketball hoops/poles had been there for even close to as long as they're claiming, then the fact that they've stood the test of time tells me that it's not an issue of age. The poles looks structurally intact, and buried at a depth that looked perfectly safe to me.
Inch by inch, little by little......
Now you know why I am a prick
It is not the pole that is a safety issue you dipstick.:willy_nilly:
It is the friggin kids in the street :nod:
:24::24::24:
Now you know why I am a prick
It is not the pole that is a safety issue you dipstick.:willy_nilly:
It is the friggin kids in the street :nod:
But that's what the state is saying. They're saying that the issue is the pole itself, not kids playing basketball with it. I grew up playing basketball and other sports in driveways or out on the street... we all survived without anyone getting injured. The only problems we would have were when we played baseball on the street and would lose tennis balls over people's houses. :24:
Well if that is the case then I think you will find the precedent is only certain things such as mail boxes allowed in the right of way. Those poles would pose a problem if somebody drove into one. And the only purpose of the pole is to allow one to play basketball in the street so it makes sense to remove the poles.
Again I hate the nanny state. I support leaving the poles but the law won't allow for that. I am sure if one could find the history on the law that one reason (out of many) is the legal liability of that.
Plus anything in a right of way is subject to removal without really any need to notify.
Part of our office is built in a right of way. We have a four lane highway. The master plan for the road developed back around 90 years ago included right of ways for an 8 lane boulevard. If the city wanted to they could take down part of our building. Even though the building has been here for about 70 years. It will never happen because of the rest of the buildings that are in the right of way and the road traffic would never warrant such an expansion. But they have the right to do so if it ever came to pass that the road was to be widened.
:24::24::24:
Now you know why I am a prick
It is not the pole that is a safety issue you dipstick.:willy_nilly:
It is the friggin kids in the street :nod:
theres more too it the just kids. its a zoning law that says, nothing can be with in 7 feet of the road. Trees, poles, shrubs ect. that deldot maintains.
if they would stick that pole in their drive way 7 feet 1 inch a way from the cul de sac then those officers/deldot could stick that pole up their ass.
they could use the street to play. as long as its more then 7 feet a way from the street
Law is the law tho. I for one would hate to circle that cul de sac and smack into the pole with my car.
Last edited by a moderator:
Actually I just went and read the Delaware state law pertaining to this and it has to do with the kids playing in the street, nothing about the pole.
17 Del. C. § 149(c).
(c)(1) Legislative findings. -- The General Assembly finds that the proliferation of sporting and recreational activity taking place in and adjacent to the State's public rights-of-way is growing along with the State's population, and further finds that such mixed-use activity threatens the safety of the recreants as well as members of the motoring public.
(2) In keeping with the General Assembly's legislative findings herein, and in order to promote safe neighborhood recreation, the Department shall make every effort to remove from public rights-of-way devices such as basketball hoops, hockey goals, shuffleboards and the like. The Department is further authorized and directed to establish such regulations as may be necessary and appropriate to enforce this activity. The regulations may include provisions for recreational use agreements with public agencies or other responsible entities for State property under Department control, that the Department may determine as suitable for these activities. Notwithstanding any other provision of state law to the contrary, any repeat offender found in violation of the regulations adopted pursuant to this subsection shall pay a fine of $25 per incident. (66 Del. Laws, c. 181, § 1; 72 Del. Laws, 1st Sp. Sess., c. 258, §§ 114, 115; 72 Del. Laws, c. 282, § 1; 75 Del. Laws, c. 98, § 110; 75 Del. Laws, c. 230, § 12.)
Last edited by a moderator:
Then the State should confiscate all baseball/softball bats and balls, soccer balls, jump ropes, and anything else that could possibly be used by kids to play in the street with.
Now you are sounding like someone that doesn't have a legitimate argument...
Have you ever read the zoning book for your neighborhood? Is that representative of "The Nanny State"? Because there are hundreds of pages of things you cannot do on your property. It doesn't have anything to do with the government flexing it's muscles or wanting to control your life. It's a collection of rules and regulations adopted by your community made up by members of your community. If you don't like one of the rules, then fight to change it, but it was most likely added because of some other concerned citizens complaint...
You make this sound like it's big government coming in and stepping on the rights of home owners, well it's not.
Okay, finally watched the video. He should've been locked up for DOC (Disorderly Conduct)/Obstruction. Also, she never said he couldn't keep the pole...she told him he would have to come get it. Big difference. She let him get away w/ a lot...she told him he could not stand there and taunt the workers and he never shut the fuck up, not even for a second. I don't know where they picked her up, but I only see 1 uniformed officer in the video and it damn sure ain't her.
.......................>:thumbup
watch it again and listen to the part around 2:20 carefully
She said "They will lay it in your drive way"
then once they got it out of the ground she said you will have to pick it up
*wonders why people get so anal over videos that really don't concern them* I could see if it happened to you...
That's correct...but never once did she say he couldn't have it.
It doesn't matter... she stated that x would happen, and then a minute later said that she never said that. Last I checked that was a blatant lie.
But hey, law enforcement (or whatever agency she was representing) can do whatever the fuck they feel like with impunity.
Because it's the fucking principle of it Dana... but apparently that simple concept is beyond you.
yup, like I said... law enforcement, or government in general can just do whatever the fuck they want. There are apparently a whole lot of people who view law enforcement as damn near infallible. It's also appropriate and within their rights to lie to people, on camera.
I still maintain that time and money could be better spent on something far more important than ripping up basketball hoops. This goes a ways towards explaining why Delaware has the 6th (I believe) highest debt for a state in this country.
edit: if she wasn't law enforcement, as you seem to think. How exactly did she, "let him get away with a lot"?
Last edited by a moderator: