https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_to_roamShould we have this in the United States?
>>1933980>United States?>get shotehh nothing personal kid
We already do, its called open borders
Nah stay off my land hippie faggots theres plenty of public lands to go around
>>1933980when i was a kid we used to wander around the woods wherever we wanted because one of our friends told us we did have freedom to roam. turns out his scottish uncle told him about it. i don't remember anyone really caring though, we'd come out in someones yard and just walk to road, sometimes the neighbors would even wave.
>>1933980I'd like to go outdoors outside of the nordic countries but many of my options are limited to gay parks. You should make jokamiehenoikeudet a thing elsewhere too.
>>1934017Not in the east. Us out in the west are lucky.
>>1933980It’s definitely a paradox. As it applies in Northern Europe, it’s strictly limited to non-harmful activities like hiking. There are even restrictions on how close you can be to a dwelling. As a land owner, I’d never see anyone unless I was out on my land. As an outdoorsman, it would be my responsibility to abide by those rules. But that’s the problem. A lot of Americans are simply too retarded to follow those simple guidelines. They’d take it as an invitation to start bon fires, poach game, forage for edibles, leave trash behind, play loud country music, and generally make a nuisance of themselves. Land owners already think they’re allowed to shoot people for trespassing, so they’d think Freedom to Roam means you can’t camp or even take a break, and you literally have to “roam” at all times.So while the US was founded in the idea of common land (the antithesis of Euoropean aristocracy), and it’s a fantastic idea in theory, our people are use to retarded and irresponsible for it.
>>1934053we see continental europeans doing blunders in that matter as well, or they get completely autistic and stuck up in the definitions of the law. no one here would even dream about camping within a rural settlement, it simply defy the reason for going out. but to a cityfag from london or amsterdam that is heaven on earth. they have heard of right to roam laws, measure carefully 150m distance from the nearest house on google maps and then set up their tent right next to my boat and bbq house by the lake, not knowing thats also part of my property (not land, property, there is a difference here) and im in full right to chase them off. its simply a comfy place for them to camp and they dont know better. or they try to fight you pointing at a map and citing the laws they dont really understand. in reality its never a problem you just get a little pissed sometimes about how rude some people are. with this summers travel restrictions we found out some of our own isnt that much better, a few popular hotspots had to be closed since people where camping, shitting and drinking so close it was risk of mass infection and they caused a lot of disturbance to locals.
>>1933980The problem is that these laws lead to some people feeling entitled to others' property.I don't have a problem if you're walking around, riding your bike or camp a night or two if you keep to yourself and don't leave trash.The problem comes on when I'm doing my job, hauling grain with a tractor or driving on the paths with some wide implements and these assholes decide to throw a fit and think they own the road you paid for.My dad and I once passed a group of hikers in the car at more or less 7mph, next day police show up because one of these retarded pensioner faggots felt "in danger of his life". The cops thought it was just as stupid.I wonder if this would be different in other countries or if all people are this retarded.
>>1933980We have enough land that we don't need it, we can afford to have tiers of activities. Private land / National Park / National Forest / BLM land
>>1934086>>1935517There's retards everywhere unfortunately. They'll continue to be retarded no matter what the laws are, just in different ways. Here they trash and blast music in national parks where camping is technically illegal but tolerated if you're respectful. Eventually they'll ruin it for everyone I guess.
Nigga in your country even people with mental problems have acces to guns so i dont think its a good idea
>>1935517im a farmer so i can relate, but people here completely lack that mentality to call cops for everything and feel "in danger of his life" etc... you get it. walking in front of farm equipment is stupid you might get run over or packed into a haybale. people know this, we drive like people know this and if you called cops you can be shure they would laugh their ass of and tell you the same.and i still dont get this thing about property, dont you have any distinction between the land that you live on and use every day and just a random patch of land high up into some mountains that you never use? with our laws people have no rights to access the first, they have constitutional right to access the last.
>>1934022nobody minds kids playing around as long as they don't wreck personal property
>>1936326In your country they confiscate pencils that are too sharp. Cope harder faggot
>>1934053>So while the US was founded in the idea of common landYeah ok bud
>>1934053>forage for ediblesThat is not prohibited at least in Finland.
>>1936369If you did this in Burgerland you’d be held at gunpoint until the police arrived, then arrested and charged with trespassing. If the land owner is a little dumb/crazy, they’ll shoot you and claim it was self defense.We live in a low trust society, and it doesn’t bode well for the future.
Spent some time in scandinavia, it was pretty cool to just go camping in the woods without worrying about who owns the land.>Should we have this in the United States?Oh hell no. It only works there to the extent that it does because people there have some level of respect for the land and the landowners. Here you'd just have #vanlifers squatting in people's lawns and dumping their trash in grain bins.
>>1936378how about not picking berries in someomes garden? if you did that on my land i wouldnt know, you will be about 2 hours drive away from me and even if i was present its highly unlikely i would notice you.
>>1936403The worst is when people install game cameras on your land so they know where to poach come deer season.Gone are the days when you could host satanic rituals on your own land without fear of being blackmailed later.
>>1934043>tfw upstate new yorkHOW IS EVERYTHING PRIVATE PROPERTY?WHO THE FUCK OWNS ALL OF THIS LAND?WHAT ARE THEY EVEN DOING WITH IT?
>>1933980yes but only for me.
>>1936403>forage>a fucking gardenBruh...
>>1937663>HOW IS EVERYTHING PRIVATE PROPERTY?Because pretty much all of it was carved up in the seventeenth century.>WHO THE FUCK OWNS ALL OF THIS LAND?Lots and lots of people.>WHAT ARE THEY EVEN DOING WITH IT?Nothing, a cabin or vacation home or timber/hunting/grazing/farming/etc. leases are the three most common answers.
>>1937672then why would someone charge them with trespassing?
>>1937663Texas is even worse. Like 99% of the land in the eastern 2/3 of that state is private property. It makes me glad that I turned down a relocation opportunity to suburban Dallas in 2016 and stayed in Upstate New York.
>>1938064Based trespasser anon
>>1938064Precisely: the only reason to not trespass is fearing repercussions from the owner
>>1938070For every two you take down, two more share take their place. Your private property cannot be defended from the mob, join us or perish !
>>1938059I've wandered onto properties before in Texas. Luckily I go in the middle of the day so they're usually at work and don't notice me walking across their property.
>>1938173I've always been too much off a pussy and social retard to trespass onto private property but will keep your advice (weekdays in the middle of the day) in mind if I finally grow a pair in the future.
>>1938176Just stay away from actual structures and don't go back to the same place.
>>1933980No. My property is my property, no one hunts or camps on it but me. That said I have small river that runs through my property and I have a lot of people on canoes that stop and ask if they can make a small camp by the water for the night and I usually allow them as long as they pick up their trash and shit.
>>1937663>WHO THE FUCK OWNS ALL OF THIS LAND?Old Boomers and fudds who bought it when it was cheap as shit>WHAT ARE THEY EVEN DOING WITH IT?Setting up a corn feeder and a deer blind and "hunting" a couple times a year
>>1938182you dont own land then, just property. when will you retards get it into your head that these rights we have doesnt apply to our private property. isnt there privately owned wilderness in usa far away from people or are all you landowners just 5 acre larpers?if you owned a perfectly round area here and only had a tiny shed in the middle that area could be 70k sqm/17 acres that none could claim right to access. add fenced land, cultivated land, a boathouse, a barn etc whatever and then draw a 150m radius around all of that then suddenly it becomes a whole lot bigger and most likely reach your neighbours property. then add the fact no one camps in rural areas anyway when they can take a short drive and camp in actuall wilderness and suddenly the issue is gone completely. the only difference is i and many more like me own parts of that wilderness, its not state, crown or public land but its accessible for the public by law. all economic rights except forage is still held by the owner and no landowner would ever fight against that law since it holds the key for us to access our land and straight out impossible to keep an eye out for trespassers.
>>1938239I don't understand what you're trying to say. I own 80 acres, there is a river that divides my property in half. I don't have a say over who can boat down a navigable waterway, no one does except the Coast Guard. I do have a say, however, who comes ashore on my property and I usually let people do it if they're pleasant about it. So no, my property isn't accessible to the public by law, but the river is because nobody owns navigable waters except the United States.
>>1938251>I don't understand what you're trying to saySo it's not just me lmao
>>1938251>>1938260He's saying our definition of land is incorrect if it's developed or fence. In that case it becomes "property" which is legally distinct from "land". Put another way, if all of your improvements on your land were in a front acre and you had not cultivation or fencing on the rest, under his legal system, the remaining 80 acres would be included in right to roam. What he doesn't get is that the distinction in use makes no difference to us culturally, our land is our land period, whether a stranger is lurking about next to the house or setting up camp in the back 40, and no one else has a right to be on it without our permission.
>>1938285the remaining *79 acres
>>1938251these rights have a minimum distance from any developed or used land where they can be claimed. i dont know what your 60 acres look like and what its used for, most likely it wouldnt fall under our right to roam laws aka it would be seen as private property or farmland. i have about your size of fields around my farm, then some more woods and bogs around that again with a few houses on small parcels of land sold by my grandparents. its not a single place i would not have the right to chase of campers if i wanted to, but i have only done it once thoose was some rude dutchfags putting up camp right outside my boathouse, who knows how many i didnt even notice over the years? its not like i patrol my land 24/7. right now im shitposting from my cabin right below the treeline a good 20min drive away. its about 3x as much land detatched from the farm, this is the kind of land where people are free to roam and camp, but still not within sight and reach of disturbing my cabin as long as im here.
>>1938285still not correct but close. and you dont seem to own land in the wild like we do. basicly this whole right to roam=bad is based on huge missunderstandings from your parts thats pretty hard to explain when you dont know how our system works
>>1934053> A lot of Americans are simply too retarded to follow those simple guidelinesYes>play loud country music,Most of the tards on the trail blasting music aren't listening to country music ymmv
>>1938302Point taken, but to clarify we do own undeveloped stand-alone plots of land in the wild too, but culturally we see it no different than acres contiguous with our developed acres. Seems to me your system would be like private stewardship of public lands in exchange for all but exclusive economic rights. Here we would make no distinction between the right to gain from the land and the right to simply be upon it, when it comes to anyone who does not hold the property deed. Alternatively, there is also land in the wild that is owned by no one, to include the public. Do you have anything like that? If that were not the case here, I think more would be open to right-to-roam.
>>1938355landownership here might look like a complete fuckup for an outsider because of all the ancient rights and customs that can be placed above an individuals ownership. for example all my land falls under sami reindeer-heerding grounds, they simply have exclusive rights to keep reindeers here and i dont. no point in even trying to fight it its been like that since long before my land was mapped. i can only fence off land but if i do they can claim economic compensation for lost grounds but it needs to be massive areas before it become an issue. the local farmers also has pasture rights for cattle and sheep on my land simply by old customs thats been around for so long its now become law. then there is all kinds of other rights, like person A can have right to a boathouse and fishing for his own personal use, owners of propert B has right to use your road to access their property, farm C has right to get firewood from your forest and so on. none of them will become void if i sell my land and the new owners have to respect them, its simply part of the deal when they bought my land. same with our holy grail, the right to roam freely.as for un owned land, turns out its more common than i was aware off. basicly 95% of finnmark is like that, only settlements have mapped properties the rest is just state/public land with a massive mess of various rights to use or live off the land. then again its the homeground of sami's and they couldnt care less of drawn lines on a map.
>>1933980>only allow the elite to have actual land rights>call it freedomwhy are eurps so fucking defective? I mean, besides the intense inbreeding?
>>1938333>Most of the tards on the trail blasting music aren't listening to country music ymmvI’m in the South.
>>1938058Because “it’s muh private property.”
>>1938182>implying you can "own" land
Can you take cuttings in public space? Like a public beach. Asking for a friend
Here in Vermont unless the land has been posted and registered or unless you're told you are not permitted you are presumed to have access for walking, hunting, and fishing. This is enshrined in our constitution.