City puts bite in 'no barking' ordinance

[Gan]

MOUNT DORA - The city may put a leash on frequent dog-barking.

Under a proposed change in Mount Dora's noise ordinance, dogs won't be able to just keep barking and barking, creating a disturbance in a neighborhood.

Mount Dora already prohibits dogs from barking for five minutes at a time. But under the revised ordinance, even if dogs bark for less than five minutes, their owners can be cited by the city if the dog barks for three periods in 24 hours.

Such barking is considered a noise disturbance.

If passed, residents can add barking dogs to noisy radios, TVs, musical instruments, loudspeakers, tape players, record players, power equipment and similar devices.

Loudspeakers, public address systems or similar devices can be used at activities authorized by the city including parades and art festivals.

Currently, the ordinance says dogs can bark for at most five minutes at a time or intermittently for at least 30 minutes.

City staff starting changing the noise law after resident Monique Richardson told the council in August she was concerned about a new renter in her neighborhood that has a dog or dogs that bark at all hours.

In response, council members told the city attorney and City Manager Michael Quinn to change the ordinance so enforcement would be easier.

The revised ordinance may go to the council Sept. 18.

http://dailycommercial.com/print.asp?SectionID=31&ArticleID=21260
________________________________________________

Woof!

[Celephais]

Haha, while I think it's great cause I fucking hate barking dogs... something tells me we'll see some animal cruelty charges coming out of this place soon as people attempt to shut their dogs up.

[CrystalTears]

Our neighbor would be screwed.

[Trouble]

A friend of mine adopted a dog that had its vocal cords removed because of barking. How scary/cruel is that?

[Blazing247]

That doesn't sound at all difficult to enforce...right. It's a nice thought, because dog's who incessantly bark (or worse, lap dogs who YELP) are fucking annoying and is easy to train them otherwise, but gee, shit happens.

[Goretawn]

Next, residents will not be able to talk for more then 3 minutes in a public place. We really have become the united states of the offended.

[Blazing247]

I don't think it has to do with offensive as much as courtesy for your neighbor. Nobody has courtesy anymore, and if they did, an ordinance like this wouldn't be necessary. Just like you don't want to hear someone else's baby scream on a plane, you don't want to listen to someone's Nextel conversation in line at a bank, you definitely don't want to listen to someone's poorly trained mutt all fucking day. Your comparison isn't really justified.

[Sean of the Thread]

This is sort of thing is common place isn't it?

I've had the city code people, animal control and police to my house several times when my dog was a puppy about 10 years ago for this shit. Sucked.

[CrystalTears]

... or someone honking on their horn to pick up someone, or talking loud on their cellphone in general, or double parking, or using your lawnmower at 9am on Sunday (I sleep til noon, so there), or wearing spandex in public...

Do we really need laws because people can't just ignore the offensive and rude?

[Latrinsorm]

You can't really block out noise, though, unless you're a boddhisattva or something. The question isn't whether this particular ordinance is deserving of conservative QQing, the question is whether noise ordinances per se are.

[Gan]

Reminds me of the great church bell debate we had here a few years back.

[Celephais]

Reminds me of the great church bell debate we had here a few years back.
That was awesome. Fuck church bells!
http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?t=22196

[Sean]

Skrim is clearly pro dogs barking early Sunday morning. It soothes her.

[Tsa`ah]

... or someone honking on their horn to pick up someone, or talking loud on their cellphone in general, or double parking, or using your lawnmower at 9am on Sunday (I sleep til noon, so there), or wearing spandex in public...

Do we really need laws because people can't just ignore the offensive and rude?

I think it probably has more to do with people who let their dogs out at night and leave them free to bark their little heads off .... waking everyone up around them at all hours of the night to the wee hours of the morning.

There are times when noise is just going to be noise, it shouldn't happen when a majority of people are trying to sleep.

Honking a horn at noon is different than honking a horn at 4-6am. Get your fucking lazy ass out of the car and ring the fucking door bell ... or better yet, use that cell phone you insist on driving with and calling the person who should be on their door step waiting for you to arrive.

Mowing the lawn in the morning forcing everyone to wake up because you're to fucking stupid to realize it's better to mow later in the day? Fuck you ... give me a free day where I can't be prosecuted and I'm feeding your limbs into that fucking mower one at a time ... after I'm done with the limbs I'm shoving you in crotch first.

It's one thing to be inconsiderate, but when it impacts everyone on your block, the next block over and so on ... you've already proven you're too fucking stupid to recognize it, let's start hitting your pocket book with fines until you figure it out.

[TheSmooth1]

Wah. What about the people who work night shifts and sleep during the day? Or people napping?

Christ.

[Tsa`ah]

Wah. What about the people who work night shifts and sleep during the day? Or people napping?

Christ.

While I have the utmost sympathy (I've worked more than my fair share of those hours) for those that work the graveyard, the world operates 9-5.

When you "elect" to work outside of the norm, you "elect" to rest when the rest of the world is going.

Obnoxiously loud anything is bogus anytime of the day, but the world has to move on ... that means horns and mowers.

[TheEschaton]

Wow, I can't believe the church bell thread was two years ago. I distinctly remember reading it, but it's from 2005, I don't know how I could have been involved in it.

[Khariz]

Wow, I can't believe the church bell thread was two years ago. I distinctly remember reading it, but it's from 2005, I don't know how I could have been involved in it.

While I don't remember the church bell thread, I distinctly remember a church bell case in my 1L Torts class. Nuisance. Funny ass case.

[Warriorbird]

I think my favorite 1L case so far involved a crazy old woman and a leperchaun.

[TheEschaton]

We were asked a research question once about whether Satan had been sued in court - turns out Satan HAS been sued, in federal court.

-TheE-

[Sean]

Wow, I can't believe the church bell thread was two years ago. I distinctly remember reading it, but it's from 2005, I don't know how I could have been involved in it.

It wasn't even a year ago unless we're thinking about different threads:
http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?t=22196

[Stanley Burrell]

It wasn't even a year ago unless we're thinking about different threads:
http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthread.php?t=22196

What would be really bad is if they had this pack of yippy chihuahua that always barked in unison with the morning church bells. Double pane noise proof glass and aluminum siding couldn't even block out that abomination.

Sorry, my mind is wandering decaffeinedly.

[Stanley Burrell]

We were asked a research question once about whether Satan had been sued in court - turns out Satan HAS been sued, in federal court.

-TheE-

Who won?

[TheEschaton]

It was thrown out of court and the guy was recommended to psychiatric counselling. Our research prof just wanted to know if we could find it. It is quite humorous, though, because the judge wrote a whole opinion on it.

And I'm an idiot, I was looking at Zhelas's join date (May 2005) and for some reason processing that as when the thread began.

The Satan decision is below. The whole part about jurisdiction is hilarious.

-TheE-
---------------------------------------
United States District Court, W. D. Pennsylvania.
UNITED STATES ex rel. Gerald MAYO
v.
SATAN AND HIS STAFF.

Misc. No. 5357.

Dec. 3, 1971.


Civil rights action against Satan and his servants who allegedly placed deliberate obstacles in plaintiff's path and caused his downfall, wherein plaintiff prayed for leave to proceed in forma pauperis. The District Court, Weber, J., held that plaintiff would not be granted leave to proceed in forma pauperis who in view of questions of personal jurisdiction over defendant, propriety of class action, and plaintiff's failure to include instructions for directions as to service of process.
Prayer denied.


*282 Gerald Mayo, pro se.
MEMORANDUM ORDER


WEBER, District Judge.
Plaintiff, alleging jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 241, 28 U.S.C. § 1343, and 42 U.S.C. § 1983 prays for leave to file a complaint for violation of his civil rights *283 in forma pauperis. He alleges that Satan has on numerous occasions caused plaintiff misery and unwarranted threats, against the will of plaintiff, that Satan has placed deliberate obstacles in his path and has caused plaintiff's downfall.

Plaintiff alleges that by reason of these acts Satan has deprived him of his constitutional rights.

We feel that the application to file and proceed in forma pauperis must be denied. Even if plaintiff's complaint reveals a prima facie recital of the infringement of the civil rights of a citizen of the United States, the Court has serious doubts that the complaint reveals a cause of action upon which relief can be granted by the court. We question whether plaintiff may obtain personal jurisdiction over the defendant in this judicial district. The complaint contains no allegation of residence in this district. While the official reports disclose no case where this defendant has appeared as defendant there is an unofficial account of a trial in New Hampshire where this defendant filed an action of mortgage foreclosure as plaintiff. The defendant in that action was represented by the preeminent advocate of that day, and raised the defense that the plaintiff was a foreign prince with no standing to sue in an American Court. This defense was overcome by overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Whether or not this would raise an estoppel in the present case we are unable to determine at this time.

If such action were to be allowed we would also face the question of whether it may be maintained as a class action. It appears to meet the requirements of Fed.R. of Civ.P. 23 that the class is so numerous that joinder of all members is impracticable, there are questions of law and fact common to the class, and the claims of the representative party is typical of the claims of the class. We cannot now determine if the representative party will fairly protect the interests of the class.

We note that the plaintiff has failed to include with his complaint the required form of instructions for the United States Marshal for directions as to service of process.

For the foregoing reasons we must exercise our discretion to refuse the prayer of plaintiff to proceed in forma pauperis.

It is ordered that the complaint be given a miscellaneous docket number and leave to proceed in forma pauperis be denied.

W.D.Pa., 1971
UNITED STATES v. SATAN AND HIS STAFF
54 F.R.D. 282

END OF DOCUMENT

[Venom]

If passed, residents can add barking dogs to noisy radios, TVs, musical instruments, loudspeakers, tape players, record players, power equipment and similar devices.


So. I could only run my circular saw/drill/router/grinder for 10 minutes in a 24 hour period?

Eff that.

I'd be all over the city council if they tried passing something like that around here.