What are your thoughts on this article? ?

Question

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26417620/?GT1=43001

Evicted! One-horse town to be no-horse town On MSN.com

Just wanted to know what your thoughts on this and Would you give up your horse or just pay the fines?

Answer 1

ACLU might just have a field ad with this - that horse is GRANDFATHERED in.

Answer 2

Good God!  What did the horse ever do to hurt them, after all he's only 32.  Not to be mean or anything, but the horse is pretty old, he might be going soon, they just need to give it some time.  I don't know what I'd do, I'd tell someone about the age or the horse!

Answer 3

Somebody posted this a couple of weeks ago.  I think it's really sad, the poor guy's been there his entire life.  They basically did that here where I live but let my neighbor keep her old horse here until he passed away.

Answer 4

I think it's awfully sad.  That horse is old, it'll be gone soon anyway.  Enforce the law when he is dead.  Sounds like a town with nothing better to do.  

Answer 5

Someone else had a question like this posted earlier today.

I think that is livestock was allowed on the property when the property was purchased, new ordinances can only affect new real estate transactions.  In other words, the ordinance cannot act retrospectively.  The horse was allowed when the land was purchased and so the horse should still be allowed until such a time as the land is sold to another person.

It just sounds like the town grew up around the horse and not the other way around.

These people need to address real issues and leave this man and his old horse alone.  Talk about the government infringing on the rights of the citizens, this is a great example!  (Even though it isn't the national government, it is still a governing body.)

From my understanding from other articles, the horse's health is not conducive to moving.  He is too old to move off the property now.

I'd like to know where to send an email if you happen to know.  We could all join together and bombard their email server again!

Answer 6

I think it's just another example of how we Americans are unable to consider the plight of another person - to put ourselves in their shoes.

I mean, come on, at 32 how much longer can the critter live?  I bet he's been a buddy to that guy much longer than anyone else in town.

It also is questionable what information has been presented to the owner.  For example, the article says the land was annexed, it doesn't tell us what notification was given the horse owner regarding the situation - we also don't know how many times he's been told the action was coming.   I wouldn't be surprised to find our great American media has sensationalized an otherwise low-key situation that perhaps can be handled amicably were people left alone.

We have similar situations in our location.  a man with 20 acres (maybe 10, but I think it was 20) in our township, who's had farm animals there many, many years, is facing a change of ordinance that would require him to move his animals 200' from any property line.  Given that our properties are mostly narrow and long, this requirements is simply ludicrous.  Additionally, the people bringing down all the trouble moved there KNOWING he had these critters.  This tells me they care nothing for his plight, only their own delicate sensibilities.  I feel there should be laws written that if one purchases a home next to or in the vicinity of a known farm with the ability to have animals, they should not be allowed to change the laws without a vote of a certain percentage of the citizens within a certain radius of that property.  This c**p-ola about people moving into farm communities because they're "quiet, nice" places to live then changing the rules which change the type of place is what the problem is.  If I move into a community of rural heritage to get away from town life, I should expect some downsides and slow moving vehicles.  After all, isn't that why I moved out of the city in the first place?  I, for one, am sick and tired of people moving into my farming community because it's a nice quiet place to live - then blaring their music out their windows, allowing their dogs to run all over the countryside and driving 60 miles an hour down our gravel road.  This nice "country" is quickly turning into the city they're all trying to get away from.

So we are our own worst enemies.  Americans has less tolerance for their neighbors than most other countries.  

I would not give up my horse, I would get involved with every single meeting at the township or city this is taking place in.  I'd stand up for what I believe in.  In fact, this past year, I've been really trying to learn more about how to keep tabs on the political happenings in my local area and state - from there I'll understand more about US Government.  I hear over and over about lack of ethics, politicians who think only for themselves - well, if you don't do something about it, who will?  Has the guy gone before a gathering of the community and asked for a stay for this one horse?  Has he brought up the taxes he and his family have paid to support that community and fought yet for his personal rights?  Has he taken action to be involved to perhaps become the one guy with one old, last horse simply asking for a stay until that one horse is gone, then no more?

That's what I think he needs to do.  And I think we all need to put ourselves in both positions and think what would we do if our neighbors and community wanted to control anything about our lives?  What if the next guy wanted to control how and when you mow your lawn or plant your flowers?  Snicker now, but additional government does that - controls everything you do in your life - your life and your property are not yours.  They aren't now - if you don't pay your taxes, they can take it - if you don't follow their rules, they can fine you.  Getting involved is the only way to take control.

Answer 7

i wouldnt pay the fines or give up my horse, id move. there's no reason that man should pay for having his horse. at first id just ignore it and if they say i have to get rid of it, id try and help that lady get a petition and have a bunch of ppl sign it

then if nothing worked, id move

but i feel so bad for that guy, stupid government

EDIT:

i agree with Loves The Ponies.. if you havet their email, lets all bombard their email server!

Answer 8

This is just what the government is trying to do all over! They shouldn't be able to tell people what to put in their yard. Next, they should have a little respect for an elderly horse...Their kids would not just shove them in a nursing home or kick them out just because they are a little old. This is a public outrage!

Answer 9

Poor old guy has a horse he's raised on land he's owned forever and people are hasseling him to get rid of his companion which in turn is pushing him off of his property in the end. How sad. How sad that he would be forced to give up an OLD horse (which by the way no one will want to take at that age) after he's been (and just assuming here) a loyal tax payer and citizen of the state/province in which he lives and yet the government and town still have thr right to kick him off? Personally I think its horse s**t.  And its SAD.  I think they should just let him keep to himself as a 76 year old man does and his horse and leave them alone. Its rediculous.

As for what I would do? Well seeming as Iam not a 76 yr old retiree...I would make it a big deal nationally.  I would fight it. And no...I wouldnt give up my horse nor would I pay the fines. Worse comes to worse I would sell and move. But again..for a stable situated 76 yr old senior to have to be forced to do such a thing is outrageous and its selfish. Leave the man alone and his horse too.

EDIT**

Loves and Ponies - I  110% agree with you TEN FOLD! Well said! ! ! ! !!!!!!!