What I failed to say Jerry, I am moving to Myrtle, yes there is an HOA
but from what I found out from the neighbors and the real estate lady
(who also resides there) the HOA is not all that strong. Wait until they
find out i'm a ham. No, I have no intention of putting up a tower, just
a long wire from the back of my property to the house (1/2 acre). Yes,
my daughter does reside in a rather expensive area. And "NO", I don't
enjoy driving on I-77. It's bumper to bumper three lanes wide from exit
21 south to the state line at 60 MPH. Happy to see they are widening the
roadway, I might even give 495 west of I-77 a shot to the state line
when it's finished. Seems for what I understand they decided to build
the east part of 495 first to accommodate the rich folks in around Union
County area. One would think the area west of I-77 close to the airport
would have heavier traffic.

Back to stealth antennas and HOA's. I have been planning for several
months how I am going to put up an antenna. Ideas I have considered a
Slinky's in the rafters, gutters, yes the house I bought does have
gutters as compared to all the other homes, most do not. And finally
long wires. So far, the only people that know I am a ham is the real
estate lady and the guy next door.

I wouldn't stop in my driveway and start taking photos of my home if you
enjoy life as it is. Don't invade my privacy and I shall not invade
yours. I invite Russ to give it a try, and "I'm NOT playing". I enjoy my
privacy. What's mine is mine and what's yours is yours. Russ, just
because the U.S. Attorney General got a new law passed in the U.S.
Congress doesn't give you or the Feds to invade my privacy.

"God Bless America"



Jerry Oxendine wrote:

OOOPS! Sorry about that. I forgot about Huntersville,
Davidson, etc. Nice area and expensive! I remember when the area was still
country and all those houses right the shoreline weren't built. Could've
bought a house in
the '70's for a 3rd of what it is now. And, also, I wouldn't move in there
for nut'in'--not to mention the
traffic is HORRIFIC on the I-77 corridor. Bumper to
bumper morning and evening--least little fender scraper,
your commute is over!

Let me modify this by say that, yes, there are lots of HOA communities
everywhere. But if you do a little
snooping before moving, you can find older neighborhoods that dont have the
HOA nonsense. I am
just independent to let someone tell me what to do on/with my own property.
And if I catch some bird on
a scooter taking pictures, he better not be on my land!
He comes down my driveway snooping, he just might get
his (*censored*) kicked. Sorry, but that is the way I feel about it. But
I've been here for many years, all of us here
get along well, stand beside the proverbial fence and chat,
borrow/loan tools, and all is well! ...Without any cussed
HOA!

Jerry
K4KWH

www.qsl.net/k4kwh
wrote in message ...

Jerry, my daughter lives in Cornelius NC, (which is as you know just a
few miles north of you) they have an HOA but it apparently doesn't mean
a darn thing.

The neighbors are moving into $220,000 new homes, they put up metal
sheds chain link fences, etc. which both are against the HOA rules. NC
is no different than any other state, they all have the dreaded HOA's.
From what I see, the HOA rules are only enforced when some damn nosey
neighbor want's to put there nose into your business.

God Bless America for our Freedoms, where ever they may be.

Jerry Oxendine wrote:

Move to NC! While I am sure there are HOA communities as the population
grows, there are still plenty
of older neighborhoods with excellent homes without HOAs here in my
state.
And I have never had trouble finding a place to live without 'em. Once
checked out
a neighborhood in my town called YorkChester. Many
older homes of many styles and sizes. It had been desig-
nated an historic neighborhood and you couldn't even change the style of
your front door without dealing with
the old blue-haired lady with the peepovers. NOPE! I
ain't moving there. But I found a nice place on a dead end street where
such things had never been thought of.
Been here for 17 years.

Maybe it is more difficult in, say, California (the land of
fruits and nuts--dare I say it), but it is still possible to find
antenna-friendly places to live if one really wants to.

I have no sympathy for someone who moves into such a place where
restrictions exist KNOWING it. I am just
fiesty enough and ornery enough not to let someone else
tell me what I can do on my own property. One's property rights should
reign supreme; i.e., your rights end
at my property line, and mine end at yours. Most people
are sincerely enough for such rules not have to exist. The
neighborhood will conform by osmosis or "peer" pressure. If a
neighborhood
has junk cars in it, look at the
rest of the houses; they likely will too. If there are mostly
frame "shotgun" houses, the rest are likely to be, too. If
the neighborhood is nice, brick/frame, trimmed hedges, mown lawns,
*most*
all the others will be, too. Choose
your neighbors carefully and check for HOAs and coven-
ents FIRST.

Jerry

The media doesn't even photograph people without their permission. Who
the heck do you think you are, someone special? Don't invade the wrong
persons privacy, you could be surprised.

Basic rule of photography? Is NOT the law of the land.

Don Forsling wrote:

No, thank you! The BASIC rule of photography is this (and I make a living
at it):

If you are standing (or sitting for that matter) on public property, you can
legally photograph anything you can see from where you are standing. There
are, of course, exceptions for various national security considerations,
etc., but it is absolutely not against the law to stand on a public sidewalk
or in a public street and take a picture of somebody's house, their rose
bushes, their car, their ugly fence, their goofy-looking mailbox, their body
etc., etc. The fourth amendment has absolutely nothing to do with it. And
it's not at all like the case of a museum--a museum is, first of all, not
public property in the sense of the law as it applies to photography (or
just plain "seeing"). First of all, photography (flash) can damage museum
property and annoy the patrons and is often prohibited by _rule_ for that
reason. Also, and one does not have unrestricted access to a museum as one
does to a street. It is not _public_ in the sense that's pertinent here.
And by the way, you _can_ legally take a picture of, say, the side of a
house sporting an open window and capture, perhaps, some of what's inside
the house and visible. And that's the law.

On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 15:35:49 -0500, wrote:

What I failed to say Jerry, I am moving to Myrtle, yes there is an HOA
but from what I found out from the neighbors and the real estate lady
(who also resides there) the HOA is not all that strong. Wait until they
find out i'm a ham. No, I have no intention of putting up a tower, just
a long wire from the back of my property to the house (1/2 acre). Yes,
my daughter does reside in a rather expensive area. And "NO", I don't
enjoy driving on I-77. It's bumper to bumper three lanes wide from exit
21 south to the state line at 60 MPH. Happy to see they are widening the
roadway, I might even give 495 west of I-77 a shot to the state line
when it's finished. Seems for what I understand they decided to build
the east part of 495 first to accommodate the rich folks in around Union
County area. One would think the area west of I-77 close to the airport
would have heavier traffic.

Back to stealth antennas and HOA's. I have been planning for several
months how I am going to put up an antenna. Ideas I have considered a
Slinky's in the rafters, gutters, yes the house I bought does have
gutters as compared to all the other homes, most do not. And finally
long wires. So far, the only people that know I am a ham is the real
estate lady and the guy next door.

I wouldn't stop in my driveway and start taking photos of my home if you
enjoy life as it is. Don't invade my privacy and I shall not invade
yours. I invite Russ to give it a try, and "I'm NOT playing". I enjoy my
privacy. What's mine is mine and what's yours is yours. Russ, just
because the U.S. Attorney General got a new law passed in the U.S.
Congress doesn't give you or the Feds to invade my privacy.

"God Bless America"

Tell you what Jim, I'll stand in the public street all I want and take
pictures of anything I want to and you can't do squat about it. I
won't trespass on your property and I won't take pictures inside your
property without your permission. Your privacy ends at your front
door, and rightly so but what's in public view is just that...public.
Ask the people at Bay Hill CC in Orlando who lost the lawsuit against
the computer game company that used images of their houses in a golf
game. Ask the big-time Hollywood star who just lost the lawsuit
against the paparazzi taking pictures outside her house. Don't be
foolish enough to accost me on public property or threaten me. The
immediate and long-term repercussions will amaze you. You aren't big
enough to intimidate me and you don't have enough money to make the
legal problems go away. Grow up a little and consult a professional
instead of getting legal advice from television or here on the 'net.
In a bit of irony, we are almost on the same side in this. I am
currently looking for a home in an area without deed restrictions.
Even if I weren't a ham, I would not sign a contract for a house with
CCRs. I lived in Heathrow in Seminole County, FL and in another CCR
community here in NC and I've had enough. When you sign for a house
in a CCR community, you are signing an ordinary commercial contract
that is completely enforceable (from both sides!) no matter what you
think or how hard you stamp your feet.

Russ

On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 16:13:03 -0500, wrote:

The media doesn't even photograph people without their permission. Who
the heck do you think you are, someone special? Don't invade the wrong
persons privacy, you could be surprised.

Basic rule of photography? Is NOT the law of the land.

Don Forsling wrote:

No, thank you! The BASIC rule of photography is this (and I make a living
at it):

If you are standing (or sitting for that matter) on public property, you can
legally photograph anything you can see from where you are standing. There
are, of course, exceptions for various national security considerations,
etc., but it is absolutely not against the law to stand on a public sidewalk
or in a public street and take a picture of somebody's house, their rose
bushes, their car, their ugly fence, their goofy-looking mailbox, their body
etc., etc. The fourth amendment has absolutely nothing to do with it. And
it's not at all like the case of a museum--a museum is, first of all, not
public property in the sense of the law as it applies to photography (or
just plain "seeing"). First of all, photography (flash) can damage museum
property and annoy the patrons and is often prohibited by _rule_ for that
reason. Also, and one does not have unrestricted access to a museum as one
does to a street. It is not _public_ in the sense that's pertinent here.
And by the way, you _can_ legally take a picture of, say, the side of a
house sporting an open window and capture, perhaps, some of what's inside
the house and visible. And that's the law.

Sorry Pappy, you're wrong. You have NO expectation of privacy in a
public place. How many photos have you had published? I have had
many and none of them required model releases. Why? You guessed it,
didn't you...there is no privacy in public. I cited examples in
another post but I'll repeat them here, just for your edification. A
big Hollywood star lost a lawsuit in the last couple of weeks against
the paparazzi taking pictures outside of her house from public
property. Some homeowners at the Bay Hill CC in Orlando, FL lost a
suit against a computer game compant that used images of their houses
in a game. As a matter of fact, the law protects ME from your
intrusion or interference when I'm in public no matter what I'm doing.

Russ

"Cecil Moore" wrote:

If one doesn't want those photons being
collected by a camera, one should keep
them at home.


Greetings, Cecil. Haven't heard from you in that other newsgroup (rrap)
for some time. Where have you been lately?


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

wrote:

The media doesn't even photograph people
without their permission. (snip)


It's done all the time, Pappy. Do you honestly think the media runs around
getting permission (a release) for all those people at a sports event,
demonstration, or some other news story? If you or your home is a news
story, or either is caught in a photograph of a news story, there are few
privacy protections involved. If you or your home is photographed from a
public place, there are few privacy protections involved.


Who the heck do you think you are, someone
special? Don't invade the wrong persons privacy,
you could be surprised.

Basic rule of photography? Is NOT the law of
the land.


The case law is clear on the matter, Pappy. And there are dozens of books
on the legal issues surrounding photography, most citing specific cases,
available to photographers. Any wise photographer has read several (I've
read perhaps all of them over the years).


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

Dwight Stewart wrote:
Greetings, Cecil. Haven't heard from you in that other newsgroup (rrap)
for some time.

The code testing issue was pretty much resolved.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

On Tue, 09 Dec 2003 02:27:21 GMT, Russ wrote:

On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 15:35:49 -0500, wrote:

What I failed to say Jerry, I am moving to Myrtle, yes there is an HOA
but from what I found out from the neighbors and the real estate lady
(who also resides there) the HOA is not all that strong. Wait until they
find out i'm a ham. No, I have no intention of putting up a tower, just
a long wire from the back of my property to the house (1/2 acre). Yes,
my daughter does reside in a rather expensive area. And "NO", I don't
enjoy driving on I-77. It's bumper to bumper three lanes wide from exit
21 south to the state line at 60 MPH. Happy to see they are widening the
roadway, I might even give 495 west of I-77 a shot to the state line
when it's finished. Seems for what I understand they decided to build
the east part of 495 first to accommodate the rich folks in around Union
County area. One would think the area west of I-77 close to the airport
would have heavier traffic.

Back to stealth antennas and HOA's. I have been planning for several
months how I am going to put up an antenna. Ideas I have considered a
Slinky's in the rafters, gutters, yes the house I bought does have
gutters as compared to all the other homes, most do not. And finally
long wires. So far, the only people that know I am a ham is the real
estate lady and the guy next door.

I wouldn't stop in my driveway and start taking photos of my home if you
enjoy life as it is. Don't invade my privacy and I shall not invade
yours. I invite Russ to give it a try, and "I'm NOT playing". I enjoy my
privacy. What's mine is mine and what's yours is yours. Russ, just
because the U.S. Attorney General got a new law passed in the U.S.
Congress doesn't give you or the Feds to invade my privacy.

"God Bless America"

Tell you what Jim, I'll stand in the public street all I want and take
pictures of anything I want to and you can't do squat about it. I

Actually there is. As a civil matter, if you have enough money you
can sue most any one for most any thing that you *think* affects you.

Now you might, win, or quite likely would win, but to do so is
expensive. For many just the prospect of being taken to court can be
a deterrent.

You could also sue for harassment... But we are looking at something
like 20 grand to file a suit unless it's small claims. A good lawyer
can draw it out to the point where it can run into 6 figures. The
only ones winning in that case are the lawyers. It *may* depend on
how much you can afford to protect your legal rights to do what some
one else doesn't like.

Another option is for him to contact a couple neighbors and they
report you to the police as acting suspicious. You may get hauled
away and only have the opportunity to explain later.

In New England a group is suing the pilots flying out of a local
airport because they don't like the noise and there is nothing illegal
about what the pilots are doing. So, by harassing the pilots by
filing lawsuits they figure they can force them out. It may work and
it may backfire if the pilots counter sue for harassment.

Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair?)
www.rogerhalstead.com
Return address modified due to dumb virus checkers

"Cecil Moore" wrote:

The code testing issue was pretty
much resolved.


Ah, but you know that is never going to end the debate about it. Anyway,
just thought I'd say hello. :-)


Dwight Stewart (W5NET)

http://www.qsl.net/w5net/

Let's not get stupid here.

I don't make threats.

I as well as you and all reading this do know that there are HOA's that
run a decent and positive program.
I believe this thread was centered around the HOA that wants to try and
push their program to the limit with some people on the boards and some
neighborhood people who think they are cops, running around the
neighborhood harassing their fellow neighbors for the most stupid thing
they can find. That is what the majority of us are complaining about.
People who think they are real cops when in fact they are just the
neighborhood nuisance.

The new neighborhood I am moving into (159 homes), there are 9 "real"
cops, 3 still on the job and 5 retired, just like myself. I do believe
the neighborhood is well protected. Oh, I failed to mention that the
Chief of the County Police also resides there. Being private property we
do not have police patrols so the good neighbors as they are look out
for each other when it comes to strangers driving through. When I was
ask by two people when I stopped at a stop sign if they could help me
find someone I was looking for. I told them I was looking over the area
because I was buy a home there and gave them the address. We had a very
nice talk and I moved on about my business.

As I have said before as well as others: I respect your privacy rights,
you should be doing the same.

"God Bless America"

Russ wrote:

On Mon, 08 Dec 2003 15:35:49 -0500, wrote:

What I failed to say Jerry, I am moving to Myrtle, yes there is an HOA
but from what I found out from the neighbors and the real estate lady
(who also resides there) the HOA is not all that strong. Wait until they
find out i'm a ham. No, I have no intention of putting up a tower, just
a long wire from the back of my property to the house (1/2 acre). Yes,
my daughter does reside in a rather expensive area. And "NO", I don't
enjoy driving on I-77. It's bumper to bumper three lanes wide from exit
21 south to the state line at 60 MPH. Happy to see they are widening the
roadway, I might even give 495 west of I-77 a shot to the state line
when it's finished. Seems for what I understand they decided to build
the east part of 495 first to accommodate the rich folks in around Union
County area. One would think the area west of I-77 close to the airport
would have heavier traffic.

Back to stealth antennas and HOA's. I have been planning for several
months how I am going to put up an antenna. Ideas I have considered a
Slinky's in the rafters, gutters, yes the house I bought does have
gutters as compared to all the other homes, most do not. And finally
long wires. So far, the only people that know I am a ham is the real
estate lady and the guy next door.

I wouldn't stop in my driveway and start taking photos of my home if you
enjoy life as it is. Don't invade my privacy and I shall not invade
yours. I invite Russ to give it a try, and "I'm NOT playing". I enjoy my
privacy. What's mine is mine and what's yours is yours. Russ, just
because the U.S. Attorney General got a new law passed in the U.S.
Congress doesn't give you or the Feds to invade my privacy.

"God Bless America"

Tell you what Jim, I'll stand in the public street all I want and take
pictures of anything I want to and you can't do squat about it. I
won't trespass on your property and I won't take pictures inside your
property without your permission. Your privacy ends at your front
door, and rightly so but what's in public view is just that...public.
Ask the people at Bay Hill CC in Orlando who lost the lawsuit against
the computer game company that used images of their houses in a golf
game. Ask the big-time Hollywood star who just lost the lawsuit
against the paparazzi taking pictures outside her house. Don't be
foolish enough to accost me on public property or threaten me. The
immediate and long-term repercussions will amaze you. You aren't big
enough to intimidate me and you don't have enough money to make the
legal problems go away. Grow up a little and consult a professional
instead of getting legal advice from television or here on the 'net.
In a bit of irony, we are almost on the same side in this. I am
currently looking for a home in an area without deed restrictions.
Even if I weren't a ham, I would not sign a contract for a house with
CCRs. I lived in Heathrow in Seminole County, FL and in another CCR
community here in NC and I've had enough. When you sign for a house
in a CCR community, you are signing an ordinary commercial contract
that is completely enforceable (from both sides!) no matter what you
think or how hard you stamp your feet.

Russ