Well, Chuck, I don't have any razor wire and my only electric fence is for animal control (4 legged). I do intend over time, as I can collect the materials, to put a 7-8 ft high "stone" wall arround my nutso neighbor on three sides of his property. I intend to use demolished concrete (without rebar). Shouldn't be too hard to stack with pallet forks on the FEL. I think I will be performing a public service in putting a bullet proof fence around his shooting activities. If the discretionary spending budget of the typical neighbor weren't so low I'd probably be able to pass the hat and get enough donations to cover most cost. (Shooting onto someones property without permission is also TRESSPASS as per my lawyer. Demonstrates current topic connection.)
Of course most people are pretty nice and when not crowded tend to be even nicer (as in a rural setting). Most of the problems being cussed and discussed in this thread aren't caused by residents of the areas where the problems transpire. Sure some are but the majority are caused by outsiders, frequently "City Folk". It frequently is an extension of an anonymity syndrome. Folks with a low degree of social consciousness when able to act anonymously often do some pretty low things. Population density tends to correlate inversely with "friendliess". In general, in less densely populated areas folks take time to be friendly. An example: Mick Dundee at walkabout creek gets a friendly acknowlegement to his greetings BUT on the streets of NYC his G'day goes unanswered until he gives up trying to smile and greet everyone he passes.
On the topic of tresspassers: Those folks are criminals, scoflaws who want at least some of the benefits of property without having the responsibilities. As our social fabric continues to weaken, especially in the area of personal responsibility where nothing bad is ever the sufferer's fault and someone ELSE should be sued if there is a bad outcome for them, it becomes a less civil (or civilized) world for all of us to live. I won't insert the story of the grasshopper and the ants here or hum the "Battle Hymn of the Republic" for background but I think most folks can see where I was headed. When thinking of the things several of us have done or would like to do to disuade tresspassers, a scene from a John Wayne movie came to mind where one of the Duke's two sons gets knocked to the floor after taking a poke at the Duke. The Duke had said something like, If you won't respect your elders, I'll teach you to respect your betters! Clearly, tresspassers don't respect the law or the land owners rights and I say it is high time they were smacked up side the head with one or both. This is a good neighbor/bad neighbor neutral issue. Good or bad neighbor, half full or half empty, no fence or electric razor wire, none of that is at issue. The issue is a premeditated criminal act depriving the landowner of his right to control access and use. If a tresspasser does nothing to hurt the land, picks up and removes litter, and plants a tree he is still a premeditated lawbreaker who has usurped the right of the owner to controll access and use of his land.
For anyone who dissagrees with the last statement above and believes that "no harm no foul" is a better fit then please publish the contact information for your mother, wife, sister(s), and or girlfriends. There may be those here in need of temporary feminine companionship who could be trusted to return same in as good or better condition as when found and have supplied them with good food, drink, and entertainment. No harm, no foul, and returned in good or better condition, such a deal, what an opportunity. Sounds better than what tresspassers usually do and yet there is considerable resistance to prosecuting tresspassers. (One of those things that make Arsenio Hall go "HMMMMM")
I remain comforted by the URL recently posted here that allowed me to check the state laws regarding my liability to provide a safe environment for tresspassers. None. I can't legally dig a pit and put punji sticks on the bottom but short of overtly setting a trap for a tresspasser they tresspass at their own risk and I am not bound to reduce that risk and may through coincidental actions increase their risk as long as my actions had a legitimate basis other than harming tresspassers. Now if only there were a bounty on tresspassers (with a percentage to the courts to grease the skids) we might be able to reduce this form of encroachment on the personal freedom of landowners.
Patrick
P.S. To Ranchman: Thank you, you are very kind.
