Um. Tampering with someone else's property is usually a crime. Now if the tree was someone's property then you've got a good fight, but to just claim ownership over a public tree and use that as your excuse to tamper with someone's bike, etc. Well...
@Anon 1:07 - the City does not pay for or install tree guards, they are paid for and installed by either the Block Association or the residents of the building in front of which the tree is planted. So they are technically private property, surrounding the tree which is city property. @Anon 1:10, I would imagine the tree guard is there precisely to "prevent dogs from peeing on the plants and trees", hence no need for a bicycle to perform that function.
sadly in the absence of common sense (bikes locked to tree guards/fences usually obstruct sidewalk flow/traffice, never mind those who lock bikes directly to trees, another issue altogether) the "control freaks" must take charge. the absolute lack of care or consideration outside of oneself that is RAMPANT in the city now i believe justifies such measures.
You cannot affix property to City property and *poof* magically make it private property. These treeas are maintained by the City and no measure of magic guard rail will make them yours. My suggestion, don't put them there. You are violating the law by stealing people's bikes.
Locking bikes to trees is a huge fine (either $500 to $1000). I know that the law about locking bikes to signs is quite ambiguous (probably intentionally). That is probably the case of locking a bike to a tree guard.
Nonetheless, the legality of locking a bike to a tree guard does not have an affect on the legality of someone taking that bike.
Still not sure how that bike locked to that tree guard was obstructing the sidewalk in any way.
This seems remarkably similar to the "private bike rack" that was over on Avenue B for awhile. Overzealous citizen thinking their property somehow extends to public areas.
“If people want more property, move the the suburbs. “
Listen, before I form a definite opinion on this issue, I will need more data. However, as a native New Yorker, I am truly offended by this line because it is usually said by some clueless fly over state hick who, ironically, is from suburbia.
18 comments:
Um. Tampering with someone else's property is usually a crime. Now if the tree was someone's property then you've got a good fight, but to just claim ownership over a public tree and use that as your excuse to tamper with someone's bike, etc. Well...
Just out of curiosity, other than the usual control freaks being in charge, what is the big deal? It doesn't hurt the tree.
Good for them. Serves that moron bike rider, who obviously considers him/herself so special they don't believe rules apply to them, right.
I gather it is illegal to lock bikes to tree guards. Can anyone confirm?
these idiotic coop boards have no dominion over tree guards. Only the City can do something like this.
I would imagine a bike locked to the fence would prevent dogs from peeing on the plants and trees, isn't that a positive?
@Anon 1:07 - the City does not pay for or install tree guards, they are paid for and installed by either the Block Association or the residents of the building in front of which the tree is planted. So they are technically private property, surrounding the tree which is city property. @Anon 1:10, I would imagine the tree guard is there precisely to "prevent dogs from peeing on the plants and trees", hence no need for a bicycle to perform that function.
Yet they have no problem littering the tree with day-glo manifestos? Yeah! Public aggression is SO charming!
sadly in the absence of common sense (bikes locked to tree guards/fences usually obstruct sidewalk flow/traffice, never mind those who lock bikes directly to trees, another issue altogether) the "control freaks" must take charge. the absolute lack of care or consideration outside of oneself that is RAMPANT in the city now i believe justifies such measures.
You cannot affix property to City property and *poof* magically make it private property. These treeas are maintained by the City and no measure of magic guard rail will make them yours. My suggestion, don't put them there. You are violating the law by stealing people's bikes.
Locking bikes to trees is a huge fine (either $500 to $1000). I know that the law about locking bikes to signs is quite ambiguous (probably intentionally). That is probably the case of locking a bike to a tree guard.
Nonetheless, the legality of locking a bike to a tree guard does not have an affect on the legality of someone taking that bike.
Still not sure how that bike locked to that tree guard was obstructing the sidewalk in any way.
This seems remarkably similar to the "private bike rack" that was over on Avenue B for awhile. Overzealous citizen thinking their property somehow extends to public areas.
I don't know the rules for locking bikes to tree guards, but I did note there are 5 new bike racks installed on that block. They're all full, though.
I'd love to see the East Fifth Street Tree Committee take a shot at the Hell's Angels' Parking Lot over on East Third Street.
If people want more property, move the the suburbs.
“If people want more property, move the the suburbs. “
Listen, before I form a definite opinion on this issue, I will need more data. However, as a native New Yorker, I am truly offended by this line because it is usually said by some clueless fly over state hick who, ironically, is from suburbia.
@Anon 3:57 - Your unoriginal line is as boring as your post name. Go back to Keokuk, which I have no doubt is where a tool like you is from.
Gojira - I'm from the Bronx, where are you from, Ohio?
Hi there Dear, are you in fact visiting this web site regularly, if
so afterward you will definitely get good knowledge.
My webpage; Air Max 90 dama
Post a Comment