Jump to content

Warren Mayor Looking To Ban Or Regulate Home Grows

Recommended Posts

Almost completely unenforceable.  Nuisance due to smells can have a fine put on it and abatement of smells can be requested.


 Other than that, all hyperbole and unenforceable ordinance suggestions.

Whatever happened to Dutch and his ordinance violations in Ypsi? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dutch was asked multiple times to abate the nuisance and refused.  At some point, you just become a jerk and an unfriendly neighbor.


Thisis common law issues.  Don't do bad stuff to your neighbor, work things out if you can, and try not to let yourself interfere with their quality of life and vice versa.


 If the smell is bad,... fix it. No biggie.


 And yes,.. it amazes me people do not tamper odor better.  I guess I am just old now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Almost completely unenforceable. Nuisance due to smells can have a fine put on it and abatement of smells can be requested.


Other than that, all hyperbole and unenforceable ordinance suggestions.

I'v seen it elsewhere, but they basically establish unique codes for cg grows. In this case they could require specific odor filtration devices, and even how to install/operate. Just saying. And if we ever do go legal, code & zoning is coming.


Makes me wonder how purina plants operate tho... seen em w/in major city limits. Vomit inducing... worse than paper mills imo. Guessing they can afford to out lobby.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Money was just the icing on the cake. the Trunk Law was passed in an open Act of Sedition by the Legislation to Change the MMM Act, by intentionally changing Michigan Criminal Code to Try to Enforce Crime that is Protected by the Act itself.

Sedition? Not exactly. Dumbassness? Absolutely. After all, dumbasses are everywhere. Right Timmahh?

Edited by GregS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a guy who lives in my area who got sick and tired of his neighbor making complaints against him to the local authorities. What did he do? He set up a pig farm in his back 40 and the prevailing winds go right at the pesky neighbor. There is nothing the neighbor can do about the smell because of the Freedom to Farm law or something like that.


Moral of the story:  Be careful what you complain about. It could be much worse.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not sedition to amend a law.  It passed by 90%margins in both houses needing only 75% to amend the Act itself.


Fortunate for us,  they were too dumb to realize that they needed to amend the act and only amended the criminal code. this has allowed people to fight this ridiculous law in court and EASILY win. 


They plan to re-pass this transportation bill as soon as they can.  They only need 75%. Seeing how easily it passed previously with 90% margins in both houses, it is likely it will pass again.  this time amending the act.





 Gosh I do not miss Your(timmy's and joes) hyperbole, melodrama, half truths and outright lies....

Link to comment
Share on other sites


A revolt or an incitement to revolt against established authority, usually in the form of Treason or Defamation against government.


Sedition is the crime of revolting or inciting revolt against government. However, because of the broad protection of free speech under the First Amendment, prosecutions for sedition are rare. Nevertheless, sedition remains a crime in the United States under 18 U.S.C.A. § 2384 (2000), a federal statute that punishes seditious conspiracy, and 18 U.S.C.A. § 2385 (2000), which outlaws advocating the overthrow of the federal government by force.


The crime of seditious conspiracy is committed when two or more persons in any state or U.S. territory conspire to levy war against the U.S. government. A person commits the crime of advocating the violent overthrow of the federal government when she willfully advocates or teaches the overthrow of the government by force, publishes material that advocates the overthrow of the government by force, or organizes persons to overthrow the government by force. A person found guilty of seditious conspiracy or advocating the overthrow of the government may be fined and sentenced to up to 20 years in prison. States also maintain laws that punish similar advocacy and conspiracy against the state government.


Governments have made sedition illegal since time immemorial. The precise acts that constitute sedition have varied. In the United States, Congress in the late eighteenth century believed that government should be protected from "false, scandalous and malicious" criticisms. Toward this end, Congress passed the Sedition Act of 1798, which authorized the criminal prosecution of persons who wrote or spoke falsehoods about the government, Congress, the president, or the vice president. The act was to expire with the term of President John Adams.


The Sedition Act failed miserably. Thomas Jefferson opposed the act, and after he was narrowly elected president in 1800, public opposition to the act grew. The act expired in 1801, but not before it was used by President Adams to prosecute numerous public supporters of Jefferson, his challenger in the presidential election of 1800. One writer, Matthew Lyon, a congressman from Vermont, was found guilty of seditious libel for stating, in part, that he would not be the "humble advocate" of the Adams administration when he saw "every consideration of the public welfare swallowed up in a continual grasp for power, in an unbounded thirst for ridiculous pomp, foolish adulation, and selfish avarice" (Lyon's Case, 15 F. Cas. 1183 [D. Vermont 1798] [No. 8646]). Vermont voters reelected Lyon while he was in jail. Jefferson, after winning the election and assuming office, pardoned all persons convicted under the act.


In the 1820s and 1830s, as the movement to abolish Slavery grew in size and force in the South, Southern states began to enact seditious libel laws. Most of these laws were used to prosecute persons critical of slavery, and they were abolished after the Civil War. The federal government was no less defensive; Congress enacted seditious conspiracy laws before the Civil War aimed at persons advocating secession from the United States. These laws were the precursors to the present-day federal seditious conspiracy statutes.


In the late nineteenth century, Congress and the states began to enact new limits on speech, most notably statutes prohibiting Obscenity. At the outset of World War I, Congress passed legislation designed to suppress antiwar speech. The Espionage Act of 1917 (ch. 30, tit. 1, § 3, 40 Stat. 219), as amended by ch. 75, § 1, 40 Stat 553, put a number of pacifists into prison. Socialist leader eugene v. debs was convicted for making an antiwar speech in Canton, Ohio (Debs v. United States, 249 U.S. 211, 39 S. Ct. 252, 63 L. Ed. 566 [1919]). Charles T. Schenck and Elizabeth Baer were convicted for circulating to military recruits a leaflet that advocated opposition to the draft and suggested that the draft violated the Thirteenth Amendment's ban on Involuntary Servitude (Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47, 39 S. Ct. 247, 63 L. Ed. 470 [1919]).


The U.S. Supreme Court did little to protect the right to criticize the government until after 1927. That year, Justice louis d. brandeis wrote an influential concurring opinion in Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357, 47 S. Ct. 641, 71 L. Ed. 1095 (1927), that was to guide First Amendment Jurisprudence for years to come. In Whitney the High Court upheld the convictions of political activists for violation of federal anti-syndicalism laws, or laws that prohibit the teaching of crime. In his concurring opinion, Brandeis maintained that even if a person advocates violation of the law, "it is not a justification for denying free speech where the advocacy falls short of incitement and there is nothing to indicate that the advocacy would be immediately acted on." Beginning in the 1930s, the Court became more protective of political free speech rights.


The High Court has protected the speech of racial supremacists and separatists, labor organizers, advocates of racial Integration, and opponents of the draft for the Vietnam War. However, it has refused to declare unconstitutional all sedition statutes and prosecutions. In 1940, to silence radicals and quell Nazi or communist subversion during the burgeoning Second World War, Congress enacted the Smith Act (18 U.S.C.A. §§ 2385, 2387), which outlawed sedition and seditious conspiracy. The Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the act in Dennis v. United States, 341 U.S. 494, 71 S. Ct. 857, 95 L. Ed. 1137 (1951).


Sedition prosecutions are extremely rare, but they do occur. Shortly after the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center in New York City, the federal government prosecuted Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman, a blind Egyptian cleric living in New Jersey, and nine codefendants on charges of seditious conspiracy. Rahman and the other defendants were convicted of violating the seditious conspiracy statute by engaging in an extensive plot to wage a war of Terrorism against the United States. With the exception of Rahman, they all were arrested while mixing explosives in a garage in Queens, New York, on June 24, 1993.


The defendants committed no overt acts of war, but all were found to have taken substantial steps toward carrying out a plot to levy war against the United States. The government did not have sufficient evidence that Rahman par ticipated in the actual plotting against the government or any other activities to prepare for terrorism. He was instead prosecuted for pro viding religious encouragement to his cocon spirators. Rahman argued that he only performed the function of a cleric and advised followers about the rules of Islam. He and the others were convicted, and on January 17, 1996, Rahman was sentenced to life imprisonment by Judge Michael Mukasey.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...