Led away in Handcuffs

[Smiling JOe]

In the heat of everyone's discussion, somehow it seems like this post got over looked. When I read it, one thing greatly concerned me. The poster said the Club Manager arrived with paperwork proving they could use the walkover and the beach, neighter the Sheriff's Deputy or the Security Guard would even look at them.

The second thing that bother's me is the security guard picking up people's personal belongings and moving them. Seems to me he should wait until the people come back and approach them. Obviously they don't know they have set up on private property.

What do you guys think?

In the Sheriff's Office defense, it is not their duty to interpret the laws, and looking at the documents might be considered as interpreting the ownership of the property. The security guard isn't paid for legal services either, and they are paid by the property owner(s), so they couldn't care less, unless you want to write their paychecks.

Regarding moving personal property, I hope the security guard who is moving the stuff, doesn't end up having to replace expensive items which he destroys, such as a Blackberry. That could bet pricey. Sounds like that guy needs a good ole spanking from his granny.

 

[yippie]

In the Sheriff's Office defense, it is not their duty to interpret the laws, and looking at the documents might be considered as interpreting the ownership of the property. The security guard isn't paid for legal services either, and they are paid by the property owner(s), so they couldn't care less, unless you want to write their paychecks.

Regarding moving personal property, I hope the security guard who is moving the stuff, doesn't end up having to replace expensive items which he destroys, such as a Blackberry. That could bet pricey. Sounds like that guy needs a good ole spanking from his granny.

I see your point. Hummm. Hopefully Dutchess will make some phone calls, etc. to the right people.

Also, I hope the security guard is covered in case things come up missing. I think he has taken his job over the line.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

I don't recall seeing any signs posted on your street, noting that murder is illegal, but again, I don't think that signs are required to be posted to state all of the laws.

I'm not absolutely sure, but I cannot prove a negative.

I believe you're correct that there are NO parking signs on Blue Mountain Road (at least based on a pic I am looking at as I am not down there now).

Then it would be assumed by the public that parking is legal on the side of the road if the right of way is wide enough which it usually is in which case there is more parking available at BMB access than you think thus alleviating the parking shortage that you validly bring up.

OR

Just because "no parking" signs don't exist, that there may still be some ordinance that basically states parking is not allowed on the side of the road (as you possibly suggest).

THEN

If it's the latter, could not the same "logic" be applied to people on the beach? If there are no signs on the beach, then the public assumes the beach is public and uses it in that manner.

BUT

Since there are deeds recorded at the county that state particular gulf front lots own to the MHW line and everyone is now an expert on "trespassing", shouldn't the public have been aware that IF and WHEN they walked on private property, that they were trespassing? Was this the "right" thing to do?

My point is we can't conveniently hide behind not knowing the "rules". The public is (was) not generally aware that there are private beaches.
Should this "ignorance" be parlayed into private property owners losing part of their property? I don't think this is right, personally. Tona-Roma was a situation where purely COMMERCIAL interests in Daytona Beach were pitted against the PUBLIC.

Sometimes I wonder why Walmart isn't sued (as an example) for the same thing. The general public uses their parking lot all day and all night long, right? People are "allowed" to even sleep in their campers on the parking lot. Let's go get'um boys!!!

People on this message board talk about doing the right thing and all. To simply "occasionally" use someone's property with or without their knowledge, to me, is not grounds for one to lose their private property unless you're a socialist.;-)

The "right thing" was not to trespass on your neighbor's private property in the first place.

The "right thing" is not to take away your neighbor's property because you did.

Yes, in SOME areas, I'm confident there are situations where the public has used the beach for over 20 years. Assuming so, they could prevail. But I'm sure there are MANY MORE areas where there was just an "occasional public use" that would NOT qualify that beach as public.

 

[seacrestkristi]

;-) Yeah Yippie, grayt points? What could be their incentive to flat out ignore the legal proof.....hmmmm

Dang Duchess, that really stinks like giant rotten eggs
Way to stick to your guns without gettin' arrested!
How does the sherrif have time for this nonsense ? Is this our taxpayer dollars at work? Gas is expensive, and more so is their time.The Retreat should have to pay for all their frivilous phone calls. What a giant crock o'crap.
...as the youtube video points out objectively.

Thanks, Graham. Grayt work.

 

[GRAHAM GINSBERG]

Why the computer voice? If you heard my voice you'd know why. Also it was late so the wife & kids were sleeping at 12am and I wasn't going to wake them to start role-playing. Okay you're the police man, no I want to be the judge. Nuff said, lets hope this blog moves on

Your local government has a duty to the tourist' s public health, safety and welfare, seeing they are only doing what is customary on these beaches.

Clearly, the home owners are the aggressors and local government knows about it, yet they continue to advertise how wonderful your area is and that tourists world wide should flock to your shores, yet no where in the county's websites (that I've seen) prepares tourists to include a tape measure while visiting one of these beaches. No mention is made of the obvious hostility on these beaches.

It?s a tourist trap, its deception, an irresponsible act that the local government and those standing by doing absolutely nothing, those thriving off the tourists industry, should be ashamed of and held accountable.

 

[yippie]

Why the computer voice? If you heard my voice you'd know why. Also it was late so the wife & kids were sleeping at 12am and I wasn't going to wake them to start role-playing. Okay you're the police man, no I want to be the judge. Nuff said, lets hope this blog moves on

Your local government has a duty to the tourist' s public health, safety and welfare, seeing they are only doing what is customary on these beaches.

Clearly, the home owners are the aggressors and local government knows about it, yet they continue to advertise how wonderful your area is and that tourists world wide should flock to your shores, yet no where in the county's websites (that I've seen) prepares tourists to include a tape measure while visiting one of these beaches. No mention is made of the obvious hostility on these beaches.

It?s a tourist trap, its deception, an irresponsible act that the local government and those standing by doing absolutely nothing, those thriving off the tourists industry, should be ashamed of and held accountable.

Graham, I am curious. Do you live here? I am trying to grasp the your relationship with the area. Do you vacation here? Or own property here? Another question, what was the purpose in starting your website? Just curious.

 

[GRAHAM GINSBERG]

In response to Walton County?s TDC ?public vs private beaches?
http://story.waltonsun.com/article.display.db.php?a=1734

Walton County?s TDC stated:
?Many of the county?s beaches are private due to the way some of the area?s properties were originally deeded?.?

My opinion: There are no ?PRIVATE BEACHES? in Florida:

Beaches consists of 2 elements: (1) A dry sand area and (2) A wet sand area

The dry sand area can be either privately of publicly owned, while the wet area has proprietary (ownership) authority and held in trust for the public:

?All tidally influenced waters to the mean high water line and navigable fresh waterbodies to the ordinary high water line in existence when Florida became a state in 1845 are considered sovereign. In accordance with the Constitution of the State of Florida, these lands are held in trust by the state for all the people. As the Trustees, the Governor and Cabinet have proprietary (ownership) authority over sovereign submerged lands and their uses and are responsible for insuring that these lands and the associated aquatic resources remain healthy and in abundance for present and future generations.?

Reference: http://www.dep.state.fl.us/WATER/wetlands/erp/propvreg.htm

Hence, to say a beach in Florida is a ?PRIVATE BEACH? should be considered both false and misleading.

A desert has no water, no wet sand area, no problem there, it could be private.

What is a desert area with water? A beach.

Who is part owner of the wet area? The public.

Therefore
Wet + Dry cannot be ENTIRELY PRIVATE

DEF:
private 1. a. Secluded from the sight, presence, or intrusion of others: a private hideaway. b. Designed or intended for one's exclusive use: a private room. 2. a. Of or confined to the individual; personal: a private joke; private opinions. b. Undertaken on an individual basis: private studies; private research. c. Of, relating to, or receiving special hospital services and privileges: a private patient. 3. Not available for public use, control, or participation: a private club; a private party. 4. a. Belonging to a particular person or persons, as opposed to the public or the government: private property.

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

In the heat of everyone's discussion, somehow it seems like this post got over looked. When I read it, one thing greatly concerned me. The poster said the Club Manager arrived with paperwork proving they could use the walkover and the beach, neighter the Sheriff's Deputy or the Security Guard would even look at them.

The second thing that bother's me is the security guard picking up people's personal belongings and moving them. Seems to me he should wait until the people come back and approach them. Obviously they don't know they have set up on private property.

What do you guys think?

Someone stated that the Retreat and the Inn at BMB has reported trespassing so many times, that I'm sure it's been studied and analyzed beforehand by the Sheriff's department. So I'm sure the deputies are in no mood to "revisit" the legalities over and over again each time they are called out there and challenged by the "trespasser". They are doing the right thing with the laws as they are now.

 

[GRAHAM GINSBERG]

I am a potential tourist in your area, an American, never been to your area, but love Florida and America's beaches.

People go to a beach to relax, not to fight.

Upland property owners are numerous, but represent a very small percentage of the population of Florida, let alone the country.

I care primarily about the public, creating dialog and showing news releases about the issues relating to beach access.

Your area is no different than the issues here in Naples Florida, Hawaii, or in NJ. You're still America and we're still Americans debating issues regarding quality of life and rights. How great is that!

 

[BlueMtnBeachVagrant]

Bobby, PLEASE... after reading the last two posts from your "buddy", you REALLY need to find another spokesman. I really AM thinking about you.