T1B

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT2F2oDDo/

Kids fishing in winter.
Dude tells them to get off his property.
Kids tell him they're in the river, not on his property.
Dude tells them he owns that section of the river.
Kids tell him no, he can't legally own the river itself. They're not on his property, they're in the river.
Dude tells them he's calling the cops.
Kids tell him the cops okayed them to be there.


Commentator 1 says you can own ponds, but rivers are public easements and can't be owned.

Commentator 2 says Indiana law is different, states he doesn't own the river water but he owns the land over which the river flows. The kids should be in a boat.

Commentator 3 says Indiana is weird, due to the nature of boats and anchoring, you can usually own the property on either side of a river but never the river itself.

Me, I'm just grateful cell phone cameras and go-pros exist with as-it-happens uploading in many areas. Because before cameras these kids would have been shot and their bodies hidden, never to be seen again.


So.... who is right in this confrontation?

I saw that video. No idea what the actual law is, although the comments about walking on the bottom being different from being in a boat makes sense. If a person does not have rights to the river bottom, how could he have a private dock that sits in the river?

Punk kids should get a boat or GTFO.

https://www.in.gov/nrc/files/IB56.pdf

If the waterway was navigable at the time of statehood (no clue if it was), the kid is right.

Laws probably vary from state to state. In the People's Republic of Washington, it is public access to the 'high-water' mark of the river. That can be widely interpreted-like the visible high water mark or is the high water mark of the '96 flood that practically inundated the valley floor near here. Sensible people interpret it as the former, of course. The local band of natives believe their land extends to the other bank of the river, i.e. white man's land, which had caused some fisticuffs and near shootings as I've heard it. I've had conflict a couple of times fishing creeks, actually had a rather well known area farmer come flying out on his horse to mf me for being on his 'land,' but we had a conversation and we reached an agreement as to where I could be and to be wary of getting cattle started running. Most people are reasonable and it makes sense to ask permission first-even if there is public access along the water way. I like to fish, but I'm not going to get shot over a damn fish.

Beaches here in the PRC are all public access, up to the mean high tide line. And development must not interfere with public access, to the point where property owners *may* be required to provide easements for public walkways. This is all supposed to be enforced by the Coastal Commission, and (surprise?) is not always equally applied. Wealthy property owners and communities have come up with all sorts of ways to keep the undesirables from setting beach towels and coolers down on their private sand. The recent fires in Malibu, which destroyed multiple homes worth $10s of millions, may go a long way toward ameliorating some of that problem. Or not.

Mikey wrote: ↑Mon Jan 27, 2025 4:14 pm Beaches here in the PRC are all public access, up to the mean high tide line. And development must not interfere with public access, to the point where property owners *may* be required to provide easements for public walkways. This is all supposed to be enforced by the Coastal Commission, and (surprise?) is not always equally applied. Wealthy property owners and communities have come up with all sorts of ways to keep the undesirables from setting beach towels and coolers down on their private sand. The recent fires in Malibu, which destroyed multiple homes worth $10s of millions, may go a long way toward ameliorating some of that problem. Or not.

We need a huge fire like the Pacific Palisades area to scorch the RPV area, taking the Lunada Bay Boys with it.

When Mikey says that the property owners take efforts to keep the "undesirables" out, yes, it means the non-whites. And at times with the tacit approval of local LE.

Diego in Seattle wrote: ↑Mon Jan 27, 2025 5:38 pm

Mikey wrote: ↑Mon Jan 27, 2025 4:14 pm Beaches here in the PRC are all public access, up to the mean high tide line. And development must not interfere with public access, to the point where property owners *may* be required to provide easements for public walkways. This is all supposed to be enforced by the Coastal Commission, and (surprise?) is not always equally applied. Wealthy property owners and communities have come up with all sorts of ways to keep the undesirables from setting beach towels and coolers down on their private sand. The recent fires in Malibu, which destroyed multiple homes worth $10s of millions, may go a long way toward ameliorating some of that problem. Or not.

We need a huge fire like the Pacific Palisades area to scorch the RPV area, taking the Lunada Bay Boys with it.

When Mikey says that the property owners take efforts to keep the "undesirables" out, yes, it means the non-whites. And at times with the tacit approval of local LE.

Not non-whites. The poors. Who are the Lunada Bay Boys?

Innocent Bystander wrote: ↑Tue Jan 28, 2025 2:45 am

Diego in Seattle wrote: ↑Mon Jan 27, 2025 5:38 pm

Mikey wrote: ↑Mon Jan 27, 2025 4:14 pm Beaches here in the PRC are all public access, up to the mean high tide line. And development must not interfere with public access, to the point where property owners *may* be required to provide easements for public walkways. This is all supposed to be enforced by the Coastal Commission, and (surprise?) is not always equally applied. Wealthy property owners and communities have come up with all sorts of ways to keep the undesirables from setting beach towels and coolers down on their private sand. The recent fires in Malibu, which destroyed multiple homes worth $10s of millions, may go a long way toward ameliorating some of that problem. Or not.

We need a huge fire like the Pacific Palisades area to scorch the RPV area, taking the Lunada Bay Boys with it.

When Mikey says that the property owners take efforts to keep the "undesirables" out, yes, it means the non-whites. And at times with the tacit approval of local LE.

Not non-whites. The poors. Who are the Lunada Bay Boys?

Clearly you're ignorant of what I was talking about. Have you ever heard of this thing called "Google?"

Diego in Seattle wrote: ↑Tue Jan 28, 2025 4:58 am Clearly you're ignorant of what I was talking about. Have you ever heard of this thing called "Google?"

Humor me. Who are they, and why do they suck?

Innocent Bystander wrote: ↑Tue Jan 28, 2025 5:00 am

Diego in Seattle wrote: ↑Tue Jan 28, 2025 4:58 am Clearly you're ignorant of what I was talking about. Have you ever heard of this thing called "Google?"

Humor me. Who are they, and why do they suck?

A bunch of surf nazis in Rancho Palos Verdes who think they own a certain break and have been using violence and intimidation to keep “non-locals” off their turf since probably the ’60s.

Mikey wrote: ↑Tue Jan 28, 2025 5:20 am

Innocent Bystander wrote: ↑Tue Jan 28, 2025 5:00 am

Diego in Seattle wrote: ↑Tue Jan 28, 2025 4:58 am Clearly you're ignorant of what I was talking about. Have you ever heard of this thing called "Google?"

Humor me. Who are they, and why do they suck?

A bunch of surf nazis in Rancho Palos Verdes who think they own a certain break and have been using violence and intimidation to keep “non-locals” off their turf since probably the ’60s.

I don’t claim to know the law, but it would seem that the waterway is public, and the land is private. Stay in or on the water and you are fine. Step on the bank and you are trespassing.

Just to make IB's day....

Trump To Sign Order To Cancel Visas of International Students Who Broke Laws in Pro-Palestine Protests

President Donald Trump is expected to sign an executive order on Wednesday instructing federal agencies to identify and deport international students who broke laws while participating in pro-Palestine demonstrations.

The order, first reported by the New York Post, will instruct the Justice Department to investigate antisemitic graffiti and intimidation on college campuses. Federal agencies will be given 60 days to issue recommendations for the White House regarding how to address antisemitism in the U.S.

"To all the resident aliens who joined in the pro-jihadist protests, we put you on notice: come 2025, we will find you, and we will deport you," Trump wrote in a document describing the planned order, according to Reuters.

“I will also quickly cancel the student visas of all Hamas sympathizers on college campuses, which have been infested with radicalism like never before,” he added.

See ya.

https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2025 ... rotesters/

Keep to the subject of the thread.

Sin
SamPG

Mikey wrote: ↑Thu Jan 30, 2025 6:08 am Keep to the subject of the thread.

Sin
SamPG

Agreed. Threads have titles and topics for a reason.