So if you want a shot at lawsuit lotto and don't mind risking your life there ya go, just be a long hair with a black in your car in MS,AL,GA,or WV and see how far your ass gets before you see flashing lights, you can bet your last buck it sure as fuck won't be very far, they don't cotton no salt and pepper friendships down there..
I have long hair and was pulled over in WV for having no lights on my trailer. The officer was genuinely concerned that someone could rear-end me. He did not cite or warn me. He recommended me using my hazard lights (one brake light was working) until I got home (non-WV plates on car and trailer). Granted, I was with my white daughter, but still the long hair evoked nothing.
If you look back to the top of the thread (poster: Trepidity), his claim was that the "North American" approach was that "the property owner is responsible for maintaining a sidewalk in front of their house." That was what I was responding to. "Anything" meant "anything in maintaining." And please don't respond and say that shoveling snow is maintaining unless your ego requires you to always be right.
Perhaps it is state law in CA, but in practice the cities I've lived in there (Anaheim, Santa Ana, Orange) have always done the repair work and have never asked me for compensation (other than the same tax rate all property owners pay). I think the state law is purely for liability purposes when someone trips and falls in front of your house.
I live in a small rural town, with maybe 500 yards of sidewalk. About half of it is between and near the school, library, and town hall. The town does indeed run a tiny snowplow to clear all the sidewalks - it's a question of safety and efficiency; it would be a bit foolish to insist everyone with a 50 foot frontage keep their own portion clean.
I'm impressed. Every city I've ever lived in required the homeowners to clear their own walks. I guess in a town of only 500 yards of sidewalk, the town can easily do the job.
Of course I can.
I was not referring to your ability to say it.
Whether or not something is constitutional is a matter of opinion, not fact.
1 + 1 = 3, you say? Ridiculous.
And only the courts' opinion matters.
Oh, pedantic much? Effectively, only the courts' opinions matter, because random Internet guy cannot do anything about the fact that his opinion is that a law is unconstitutional.
you completely missed the point, even though you just refuted your own point.
I did no such thing. Re-read and comprehend. The sidewalk repair (where I've lived) is not the homeowner's responsibility. The city takes care of it. All city homeowners pay taxes that fund the sidewalk repair. It is not the homeowner's individual responsibility or sole cost.
The only opinion that matters is that of the courts (with the Supreme Court getting the last say, if they choose to).
An action or law is not unconstitutional until judged to be so.
Ridiculous. A law is unconstitutional if it violates the constitution.
The only thing to be said here is that, in practice, what the courts say has the most impact. You cannot say that something can not be considered unconstitutional just because some judges haven't declared it to be so.
Of course I can. It is effectively how it works. Whether or not something is constitutional is a matter of opinion, not fact. And only the courts' opinion matters.
That wasn't an anecdote. It was a specific example.
Oh, so mine is an anecdote, and yours is an example. Got it!