Scott Weiser wrote:
A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

Weiser says:
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
It's not the "rugged individualists" who are
selfish, it is you, who demands unfettered and unobstructed access
to
whatever recreational venues you prefer, no matter that they may
belong
to
someone else. You're like a two year old coveting your brother's
toys.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D

Which begs the question -- a public policy question: is it morally
right for certain venues to be private?

Of course, if they are private. There's nothing at all immoral about
owning
something that someone else, or the general public want or covet.
What's
immoral is when the public decides that it "needs" the thing more
than the
owner and decides to take it away from him without either asking or
paying
for the right to do so.

Or, would it be more
appropriate to keep some venues in the public domain, in
perpetuity?
[BTW, the answer to that is very clearly "YES"]

Indeed, but the key word is "some." Too many paddlers want it all,
and won't
be satisfied with "some."

And, all you have to do to obtain a particular venue that you
treasure and
place it in the public domain in perpetuity is to PAY FOR IT. That is
what
the Constitution requires. You don't get to use it without paying for
it if
somebody else already owns it.


Then there is the further question which pertains to "How" these
venues
got into private hands.

By grants of Congress and devolvement of title according to law.

The only way to interfere with that title is according to law. You
don't get
to use it or take it just because you want it.

And yet another question: Is the public good or public interest
being
served by having these venues in private hands?

When it comes to private property, private rights trump public
interest
unless and until the public comes up with the cumshaw (and the legal
justification of "public use") to purchase that which it wants to put
to
public use.

Private property is private only so long as the state deems it to
be
private.

Maybe in Canada. Down here, private property is private until the
state
lawfully exercises its powers of eminent domain and provides just
compensating for the taking.

If you want to use it, or open it to public use, all you have to do
is pay
for it. Pretty simple, actually. Unfortunately, most
liberal-socialists are
parsimonious in the extreme and think they ought to be given
everything for
free.

Sorry, but that's not the way it works down here.

--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

=A9 2005 Scott Weiser

Scott, I must not have made myself clear, and riverman missed my point.
I would like to meet the real Scott Weiser. Will the real Scott Weiser
please stand up? I have trouble believing all the bad things they say
about you as being true. I have not had opportunity to go back and read
all the archives, and would really appreciate the opportunity to form
my own opinion. So is it possible to meet? TnT