Customary Use and Our 30A Legacy

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

Anyway if there is any chance for peace and happiness in this community it will be born out of compromise.....

Interesting comment considering that Dave Rauschkolb and Daniel Uhlfelder (and other CU folks) preach NO COMPROMISE. And when I throw in a viable compromise for the public to access the lightly used part of private beaches (back), I’m branded as a white supremist by Dave Rauschkolb on this thread. CU proponents are not interested in any compromise - no question about that.

 

[Poppaj]

How did you come to that in-credible conclusion from that post? Property rights disputes can ONLY be settled in a court of law or by agreement of the parties.

Correct, so save all your constitutional bloviating for the courtroom.

 

[bob bob]

Correct, so save all your constitutional bloviating for the courtroom.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

Correct, so save all your constitutional bloviating for the courtroom.

You can always switch channels to MSNBC if you don’t like what you see here. Nobody forcing to you read and comprehend the facts presented by FBB. You sure as hell aren’t challenging any of them with anything credible.

 

[Poppaj]

You can always switch channels to MSNBC if you don’t like what you see here. Nobody forcing to you read and comprehend the facts presented by FBB. You sure as hell aren’t challenging any of them with anything credible.

It’s because unlike you I’m not a keyboard attorney. You are trying to argue a legal defense in the court of public opinion while I am willing to wait for an actual court. Keep playing Perry Mason if it amuses you.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

It’s called staying informed with facts, unlike what you’ll find on CU Facebook pages and websites. I’m very grateful that people like FBB take the time to post information and present the “other side” with those facts. Too many CU advocates take personal offense with this information simply because these facts are not what they want to hear.

 

[FloridaBeachBum]

October 27, 1964 - 55 years ago. Before political office, actor Ronald Reagan, 30 minute speech "A Time for Choosing".[1]
"Someplace a perversion has taken place. Our [individual] natural unalienable rights are now presumed to be a dispensation of government, divisible by a vote of the majority. The greatest good for the greatest number is a high-sounding phrase but contrary to the very basis of our nation, unless it is accompanied by recognition that we have certain rights which cannot be infringed upon, even if the individual stands outvoted by all of his fellow citizens. Without this recognition, majority rule is nothing more than mob rule.

It is time we realized that socialism can come without overt seizure of [private] property or nationalization of private business. It matters little that you hold the title to your property or business if government can dictate policy and procedure and holds life and death power over your business." Page 780, 25. http://cdn.constitutionreader.com/files/pdf/constitution/ch123.pdf

[1] "The Founding Fathers knew a government can't control the economy without controlling people. And they knew when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose. So we have come to a time for choosing ... You and I are told we must choose between a left or right, but I suggest there is no such thing as a left or right. There is only an up or down. Up to man's age-old dream—the maximum of individual freedom consistent with order - or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism." Page 774, 24.

"But any time we question the schemes of the do-gooders, we are denounced as being opposed to their humanitarian goal. It seems impossible to legitimately debate their solutions with the assumption that all of us share the desire to help those less fortunate. They tell us we are always against, never for anything. Well, it isn’t so much that liberals are ignorant. It’s just that they know so much that isn’t so." Page 777, 15.

The full text of that address is as relevant today as it was in 1964.
A Time for Choosing - Wikipedia

When questioned "A Time for Choosing" by Ronald Reagan - YouTube
Unalienable rights "A Time for Choosing" by Ronald Reagan - YouTube

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

Can anyone please provide a spoiler on what "Customary Use-Revisited" being held on Wednesday evening July 10th from 6-8pm at the Coastal Branch Library will be about?

I can’t figure out what there is to “revisit” unless more CUers now see it’s not so black and white like maybe they thought (mislead with all the mistruths). Perhaps another tactic will be thrown out?

 

[bob bob]

Can anyone please provide a spoiler on what "Customary Use-Revisited" being held on Wednesday evening July 10th from 6-8pm at the Coastal Branch Library will be about?

I can’t figure out what there is to “revisit” unless more CUers now see it’s not so black and white like maybe they thought (mislead with all the mistruths). Perhaps another tactic will be thrown out?

Afraid facts might not be there?

 

[miznotebook]

Received info on the July 10 meeting stating that attendees would be updated on litigation in connection with customary use. It is sponsored by the Walton County Democratic Women's Club, and one of the members will be serving as moderator. Was unable to get further info on who else will be speaking. One of the members posted today that they are planning to record and provide closed captioning of the meeting.