Excellent article in the globe... we all should read

[Mike P]

I guess you don't care about the rights of the shorefront owners paying even more taxes than the average citizen, then. They're not getting a free ride, ya know. They're assessed to the mean low water mark.

I knew a guy who was even paying taxes on land that was under water at low tide.

[basswipe]

Originally Posted by Mike P

I guess you don't care about the rights of the shorefront owners paying even more taxes than the average citizen, then. They're not getting a free ride, ya know.

Nope I don't care that they pay more.All the citizens of Mass pay. Just because some citizens of Mass pay more than the average citizens they should have more rights?When you put the money that all non-waterfront property owners pay next to that of those who own waterfront property,the waterfront folks don't even come close to the monetary amount payed by non-waterfront tax payers.Should they have more rights?Hell no!And to restrict 3/4 of the shoreline from access...no way,this is America.

Nobody gets a free ride Mike.I'm a flat tax rate proponent.We should all pay the same and do away with the priviledged bull$h!t and put all American citizens on a slightly more level playing field.

You folks in Mass are nuts to allow 3/4 of the shoreline YOU pay for to be unaccessible.

[basswipe]

As I can no longer comment on this thread due to my New Year's resolution I have to state my beliefs without prejudice.

I am a STRICT federal constitutionalist.I believe in our constitution literally.1st amendment says I have the freedom of speech then I will say what I believe without yelling "FIRE".Second amendment says I have the right to own a firearm and in this day and age means I should be able have a fully automatic M16 assault rifle to which I can counter a government soldier.The third amendment says I have the right to worship the sun if I choose to do so as long as it doesn't interfere with the state.......shall I continue?

NEVER give up YOUR rights because someone else is putting more money into the pot!Millions of lawmakers/lawyers/ judges have spent way to much time AND MONEY interpreting a document that does not need any interpretation whatsoever!NEVER!

My response to this thread was not meant to be taken as a hostile response,but I am who I am.Its time to stand up regardless of how rediculous the Mass state law is!And rediculous it is!

[Mike P]

Originally Posted by basswipe

I am a STRICT federal constitutionalist.I believe in our constitution literally.1st amendment says I have the freedom of speech then I will say what I believe without yelling "FIRE".Second amendment says I have the right to own a firearm and in this day and age means I should be able have a fully automatic M16 assault rifle to which I can counter a government soldier.The third amendment says I have the right to worship the sun if I choose to do so as long as it doesn't interfere with the state.......shall I continue?

Yeah, you should have continued---you stopped too soon:

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

[spence]

Originally Posted by basswipe

I am a STRICT federal constitutionalist.I believe in our constitution literally.

Not sure if there is a literal interpretation of the constitution...if there were we wouldn't need the judicial system would we

-spence

[Maloney]

Hey Mike, wasn't there a challange to a similiar law in New Jersery, I think it was NJ, a few years ago? The state law was like ours but the Supreme Court of the state reversed it. I wonder what the details were.

[Mike P]

As far as I know, NJ has always adhered to the traditional rule that property rights end at the mean high water mark.

You may be thinking of NY, where the courts have held that a colonial document called the Donnegan Patent supercedes state law. Apparently, the Donnegan Patent grats title, or at least exclusive use, outwards from the land itself. It has been used by landowners along the north shore of LI to deny public access.

[clambelly]

Originally Posted by basswipe

You folks in Mass are nuts to allow 3/4 of the shoreline YOU pay for to be unaccessible.

good luck walking all that shoreline. id say half the shorelines in mass are inexcessible because of all the damn boulders the glaciers left when they receeded.

besides that...im a shellfisherman and ive had many battles with the property owners who think they own the water! however, the law is the law. if you don't like it, lobby to have it changed. your right, this is America. we have the right to assembly. march on beacon hill and let the solons know how you feel.