AND IF you had read the article, you would see that they do not deserve to be ’shot on sight’ for their thoughtful handling, in this case.

I did read the article, as well as your comments, which is why I so easily dismantle them.

Such as your latest attempt at a straw argument to shore up your untenable position in this debate which you are not engaging in.

I never implied nor suggested anyone should be shot on sight, so if you’re not going to “engage” in this debate that you’ve been engaging in now for the past 3 days, perhaps you should also cease to engage in creating strawman positions for others simply to shore up your untenable positions which you are not actually stating, because you’re not actually debating in the debate you are in… but not in…

Maybe you’re not even really here.

The laws are on the books, they have been there for decades, and are enforceable.

No, if they were enforceable they’d be enforcing them.

I was not attempting to engage in a debate

You’ve tried that one already.

And the excuse for why you lost the debate you’ve been arguing for the past 3 days is that you were “not debating”, is indeed a tactic worthy of the most Rovian amongst us.

You are to be commended.

I was not attempting to engage in a debate.

The laws are on the books, they have been there for decades, and are enforceable.

Because you don’t agree with the laws, don’t understand the history behind them, nor can you fathom the state’s shared water interest toward the public welfare, then obviously that means that Utah Water Enforcement officers are scoundrels – for doing their jobs.

AND IF you had read the article, you would see that they do not deserve to be ‘shot on sight’ for their thoughtful handling, in this case.

Read my very first comment on the subject.

On a personal note, none of us come here for exasperation.

I am not your doctor, but you need psychiatric help.

You are own your own.

A thousand pardons.

I doubtdoubt even youyou would bebe that dumbdumb, but with youyou, who knowsknows?

You know your spell checker, right?

Its the one you swear you’re not using.

Or, in the case of my househouse, try overlapping medical practices, a farm on the coast, and much needed vaca’ time, Sherlock.

Once more we see you calling Bob names, bragging about your work, your property, and whatever the hell a househouse is, yet mysteriously not one single point of refute.

Thus, once more, you rest my case.

“Can’t you people limit yourselves to wasting time while at work??????”

Evening hours are most conducive to all my research and writing needs.

And btw, I’m not ‘semi-retarded’ for attempting to employ reason and expect same in return; I’m a moron.

Or, in the case of my househouse, try overlapping medical practices, a farm on the coast, and much needed vaca’ time, Sherlock.

You could not refute that fact, so, you cut and pasted other peoples words, then still unable to formulate a coherent response, started up with your personal character attacks on me, and BRAGGING about your stupid school, stupid job, stupid family, stupid sex life….etc, as if ANY of that had anything to do with the topic.

It doesn’t.

Fact is the water I capture is mine, whether with my hands, or with an extension of my hands, in the form of a rain barrel.

And none of your insults or self praise changes that fact.

He tries to get a rise out of educated professionals with advanced degrees, like myself and others, by devoting his days to calling US illiterate

Your position is untenable.

What you do for a living won’t change that.

Where you went to school won’t change that.

How good your sex with your husband is, won’t change that.

These are all things you constantly taut when presenting your positions that have absolutely nothing to do with the topic.

I don’t care where you work.

I don’t care who your stupid husband is.

I don’t care what stupid school you went to.

And I don’t care if you crap dandylions out of your arse on Tuesdays.

If you cannot debate a point without bloviating about how much more superior your life is to everyone elses, then clearly you just cannot debate.

Rafflaw just denounced your position, making him the 4th person who’s come in and denounced your position.

Your response?

To brag about how superior to everyone you think you are.

Serious signs of mental illness, and/or an unpaid cable bill.

Your friend in Onan. Seamus

My ‘venom’ comes from being fed up with being the target of antics
- page after page of article posts in my absence here that I am reading for the first time in the last several days.

He tries to get a rise out of educated professionals with advanced degrees, like myself and others, by devoting his days to calling US illiterate, the grownups – ‘babies’, the women ‘fat ass’, and crediting people with arguments they weren’t making because HE doesn’t even know how to read!

This he calls ‘debating’.

And you ‘guys’ invite this idiocy by encouraging the
3-ring circus atmosphere.

I want to get back to intelligent Constitutional and other legal discussion – specifically with regard to the outgoing Administration

Thingum has a hair across his butt

I have to admit, I can see you being an expert on this topic.

I think it’s supposed to be.

But I’ll agree it’s not when you’re here.

I’d have to agree.

****

No. The ‘fact’ is there are laws on the books which are completely valid, enforceable, and longstanding-since the mid 70′s. How you feel about them is your opinion which counts for nothing.

I wasn’t debating. This is not a debate site and you are not a worth debating.

Thingum has a hair across his butt and he needs someone like you to team up with. He enjoys being a jerk – like you.

I’m not intimidated.

When are you leaving, again, to set up the ‘debate’ site?

I want to mark my calendar.

——-

1976

Fight for Water in West Grows; Battle for Water, Vital to Dry Parts of Sunbelt, Intensifies in West

By GRACE LICHTENSTEIN Special to The New York Times

August 22, 1976, Sunday

Page 1, 2228 words

” DENVER, Aug. 21 The battle over water in the semiarid West, a battle that began when white men first started permanent settlements here, is fast reaching a critical stage that will determine the future of the dry sections of the region…”

The fact is the idea of a law prohibiting someone from capturing a little of the rain over their own property, is ludicrious and plays no serious role in water conservation.

Targeting large scale water capture efforts is one thing, but telling people they can’t put a bird bath in their back yard, or put out a rain barrel is foolishness, and only a fool would support such a law.

You mean the crap you sling in here or are you just very fast at changing bedpans?

BTW, I get paid a lot of money these days for slinging ‘crap’.

This is not a new area of regulation for the West.

http://www.martenlaw.com/news/?20080723-rainwater-harvesting

“In the United States, water resources are primarily governed by state, rather than federal, government. State and local governments have taken opposing approaches to rainwater. As noted above, for example, Colorado assumes that rainwater contributes to streamflows and, therefore, prohibits rainwater capture systems.[8] Similarly, local and state building codes, zoning laws, and other regulations in Colorado and other states may limit rainwater harvesting’s availability.”

Bob, Esq. 1, September 9, 2008 at 8:21 pm

Gyges,

“I think your point may be moot. Wouldn’t you admit that for all intensive purposes once the water hits whatever gathering device is used, it’s on the ground? It would therefore be subject to the well established doctrines you’ve mentioned,”

I don’t use a spell checker. I do edit myself, when I have time.

Seriously, I was born and raised there and the backward attitudes and lack of freedom is stifling. It’s pretty much a police state.

I admire your tenacity.

“BTW, Bob Esq is NO expert on property – that’s for damn sure!”

Unlike you, I never held myself out as an expert; completely dismissing the need to bolster claims with reasons & arguments via those shameless ipse-dixitisms of yours.

Even more comical is your sweeping generalization as to my knowledge of the topic; all the while betraying your ignorance via refusing to so much as address a single principle of real property or constitutional law I cited in support. Who needs all that work leading up to and resulting from a law degree so long one can declare herself a juristic whiz by virtue of marital and family relations. Thus the reason your Googling up and tossing around those non-sequitor replies of yours reminds me of apes in trees flinging their crap at passers-by in a zoo.

You have a nice day.

What we see once again is you failing to respond with a coherent argument when your position is refuted and instead making general accusations about my not reading.

I did read patty, and what I saw was you, contorting yourself to try and disguise the fact you use a spell checker prior to commenting and desperatly trying to ignore the fact that your assertation that water that is captured is “on the ground” thus implying others rights to it, was just proven wrong.

You said;

Patty C
1, September 9, 2008 at 11:31 pm

Wouldn’t you admit that for all intensive purposes once the water hits whatever gathering device is used, it’s on the ground?

But the fact is if I use my mouth as a device to capture water, its not on the ground.

If I use my hands as a device to capture water its not on the ground. If I let the water roll from my mouth to my stomach, using my stomach now as a device to hold the water, its not on the ground.

No one has a right to the water in my hands, mouth, or stomach, all things I can use as devices to capture and contain water.

However, I will concede that once I dispense the water from my body in the form of urine, then it is sometimes on the ground.

You’re certainly welcome to it then.

Once again, you’ve proven you don’t read before commenting.

BTW, Bob Esq is NO expert on property – that’s for damn sure!

No.

If it hits the top of my head its not on the ground. If I open my mouth and catch some it’s not on the ground. If its in my stomach, it’s not on the ground. People have no right to water in my mouth or in the palm of my hands.

But I will admit that for all intensive purposes once the water hits the top of your head, it’s on the ground.

****
http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/intensive.html – 2k

Another example of the oral transformation of language by people who don’t read much. “For all intents and purposes” is an old cliché which won’t thrill anyone, but using the mistaken alternative is likely to ‘elicit’ guffaws.

- have a fat ass…

You proved nothing here, tonight, or any other night
- with the possible exception that you are the proverbial
‘missing link’, ape.

Busted.

I can assure you, and anyone else who is interested, I do not!

Patty C
1, September 9, 2008 at 10:11 pm

Busted.

Your abrupt and premature

line breaks like this one, are not due to what they are due to on everyone elses computer, and that is transfering text from your word processor to this blog form.

For you its your “writing style”.

So its your “writing style” that causes

you to break sentences in half like this.

How exactly does one develop such a writing style as to

just break

sentences like this?

Beyond some sort of mental or visual impairment?

No patty, unless you’re telling us you have some sort of brain damage that causes

you to break sentences like this, then we can safely assume it is what it is on everyone elses computer.

Formatting issues caused when cut and pasting from your word processor to the blog.

I’m sure you know a lot about computers.

Just like you don’t use a spell checker.

Sure.

I started with the green dinosaur CRT’s in the early 80′s.

Unfortunately for me, what I am forced to use, professionally,
has never been my personal choice.

For your information, ape, my Mac is compatible with Microsoft and Excel, but only if I choose it through MacLink – which I never have.

Your writing style is

to break sentences like this, because of some form of staggered dyslexia?

Sure Patty.

Sure.

Sure.

I don’t have ANY word processing programs on my personal computer
- period.

My writing style is what it is, however, I DO edit myself when I have time.

Only YOU would attempt to invoke a ‘mental condition’ as explanation
on such a basis.

Newsflash – whatever I cut and paste is pretty obvious – accentuated by repeated glaring use of quotations marks and/or links to websites.

And no one, just

randomly breaks sentences

like this Patty. No

one.

Unless of course you suffer from some sort of mental condition.

Those aren’t “typos”. Who makes a typo by breaking the sentence before concluding it?

No, those are not typos Patty.

The ONLY time that occurs, is when cutting and pasting from a Word Processor, into a blog or other web enabled form.

Its a very common, very well documented issue.

Line breaks in mid sentence is caused by transfering text from a word processor, to a web enabled form.

Thats a fact.

I don’t have any MS software on my PC – never have.
I hate Microsoft! I am an avid Apple user

Why does that not surprise me?

Unfortunately, like most MAC users, you don’t know much about “pewters” and such. Otherwise you’d know that MS Word was one of the FIRST Apple programs ever. In fact, APPLE relied on Bill Gates and programmers like him to develop their application software.

Thus, whether you use a MAC or PC, is moot.

Both Word Perfect, (Corel, NOT Microsoft) and MS Word, works with both Apple and IBM type PC’s.

So your attempt to deny based on your computer type, is thus moot.

“I think your point may be moot. Wouldn’t you admit that for all intensive purposes once the water hits whatever gathering device is used, it’s on the ground? It would therefore be subject to the well established doctrines you’ve mentioned,”

That’s just my point; the water captured does not return to the ground system by definition. Thus, in a huge leap of logic, laws against rainwater collection ASSUME that the rain or snow you collect would “[OTHERWISE return to the stream system or to groundwater, and when it returns it is owned by someone who has a legal right to it."

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2007/nov/17/a-solution-that-holds-water/

Assuming that the State has sovereign power over the water in the sky above your land is the first leap.

The second leap is drafting the law without any constitutional basis for exercising such power.

Example, Colorado's constitution only refers only to stream water.
While the Utah constitution doesn't even go that far (see Article XVII, Section 1. [Existing rights confirmed.])

Finally, rainwater falling to the ground is in no way guaranteed to find its way back to the water table and requires labor to acquire it. Thus these laws not only exceed constitutional and real property law bounds, but they also contradict the theory of property by which the founders staked their claim with the Declaration of Independence.:

“Though the earth, and all inferior creatures, be common to all men, yet every man has a property in his own person: this no body has any right to but himself. The labour of his body, and the work of his hands, we may say, are properly his. Whatsoever then he removes out of the state that nature hath provided, and left it in, he hath mixed his labour with, and joined to it something that is his own, and thereby makes it his property. It being by him removed from the common state nature hath placed it in, it hath by this labour something annexed to it, that excludes the common right of other men: for this labour being the unquestionable property of the labourer, no man but he can have a right to what that is once joined to, at least where there is enough, and as good, left in common for others.” (J. Locke, 2nd Treatise, Sec. 5 ‘On Property’)

Your “writing” style just happens to perfectly mimic a well known text transfer issue.

Sure.

You just randomly

break sentences

like this.

Because its your

writing style.

Sure it is.

I don’t have any MS software on my PC – never have.
I hate Microsoft! I am an avid Apple user.

This is my writing style and I make my share of typos – just like JT
because I am BUSY.

I am a champion speller – since early childhood!

Lets all observe a little anomoly we see with so many of Patty C’s comments.

Notice how in her comments where she says anything more than a sentence or two, we always find these odd breaks in the sentence.

The line just “breaks” and a new line starts, right in the middle of a sentence, as you can see from this example taken from her Autobiography posted earlier.

—

Patty C
1, September 8, 2008 at 11:40 pm

I have a new, more interesting, and motivating career and a new,
more interesting, partner in life and love, fantastic sex, an idyllic lifestyle – overall

—

Note the two unusal line breaks in these statements?

Ever wonder where they come from?

Well, they come from using a word processor.

When you use a word processor, like MS Word, or Corel Word Perfect, or any of the other processors out there, the formatting doesn’t transfer correctly to the HTML page (this blog) so line breaks occur in the transfer.

Its a common issue when cutting and pasting from Word Processor programs to blogs and chat rooms.

So what does this mean?

It means Patty is using a Spell Checker on her comments, prior to posting.

Thats right.

The woman who apparently hates me and several others in here so badly that when she cannot defeat us in open debate, turns to spell checking our posts to accuse us of being ignorant because of a few typographical errors in our rapidly written comments, is herself, using a spell checking program prior to commenting in here.

There is no doubt here. This is a formatting transfer error that you can easily reproduce yourselves should you doubt it.

Patty C is such a bad speller, she has to use a spell checker to post a comment for fear of a spelling or grammatical error.

So while I will once again gladly admit to making numerous typographical errors in my comments, I also gladly admit that I am not so illiterate that I need to run my comments through a spell checker prior to posting them.

Like Patty does.

*This Comment Is Proudly Presented in Original “First Draft” condition.

Typos and all.

You’re a smart one Patty, thats for sure.

I can assure you, and anyone else who is interested, I do not!

Really?

So when you call me names like “big ape”, thats your way of being friendly?

Go figger.

http://www.martenlaw.com/news/?20080723-rainwater-harvesting

Environmental News
July 23, 2008
Box of Rain – States Take a Closer Look at Rainwater Harvesting

and Cro,

You are the one who pitches fits when he loses an argument and switches to personal attack mode with either the big fat mouth/big fat ‘arse’ insults.

I can assure you, and anyone else who is interested, I do not!
And I never have… My thighs are ‘cottage-cheese free’, too!

Well then I agree, assuming that the law has remained unchanged, it’s a bad law. Although I stand by my statement that this paticular case is reasonable and is being handled well, I don’t find anything wrong with the idea of regulating medium to large scale harvesting of rainwater.