Right to roam: The European freedom that’s illegal in the USA
-
In Spain its also forbidden to own beaches. You can wander any beach with no restriction.
In Estonia, one may not prevent passage along the beach of a body of water (sea, lake, river).
Some land owners try. It's legal to ignore them and travel along the shore, but if a river valley is densely settled and every tenth person has built a fence too far, it becomes somewhat harder to fish there.
As for dry land - if it's not fenced in, from dawn to dusk, without damaging crops or landscape, one is allowed to roam there.
-
England has limited right to roam plus public right of way. This effectively means that most land is accessible one way or another.
The vast majority of land isn't open access though. Most woodlands and fields are privately owned and you are not allowed to walk through them.
-
The vast majority of land isn't open access though. Most woodlands and fields are privately owned and you are not allowed to walk through them.
We have public right of way, so you can definitely walk through them.
-
We have public right of way, so you can definitely walk through them.
Only if there is a public footpath through it. Otherwise you are trespassing if you don't have the land owners permission
-
Only if there is a public footpath through it. Otherwise you are trespassing if you don't have the land owners permission
Why would you walk over an overgrown field?
-
Why would you walk over an overgrown field?
You would typically walk around the edge of it, but you don't have permission to do that either and we don't have the right to roam here.
-
I guess you visited vienna?
Exactly. But also when studying art history you find it on the captions of the manual
-
My wrist hurt reading that
I've actually shot one and while it was weird and uncomfortable, the recoil wasn't that bad. Owning one is kinda stupid though.
-
I that same sense me and my wife have a right to get pregnant, but I got my tubes tied.
Mmmh ... You can start a new party in the US. If it's really successful, it may supplant one of the two parties that are there. The issue with the system, however, is that all incentives are aligned against more than two parties being successful at the same time.
That's a bit different from you (cis male, I guess) becoming pregnant, in that you actually don't have the right hardware (meatware?). I guess comparing with your 58-year-old mother-in-law becoming pregnant may be more apt. ^^
-
Mmmh ... You can start a new party in the US. If it's really successful, it may supplant one of the two parties that are there. The issue with the system, however, is that all incentives are aligned against more than two parties being successful at the same time.
That's a bit different from you (cis male, I guess) becoming pregnant, in that you actually don't have the right hardware (meatware?). I guess comparing with your 58-year-old mother-in-law becoming pregnant may be more apt. ^^
You seem to know your inclusive gender terminology well, why not inclusive pregnancy terminology? So, I'm talking about a classical man/woman relationship. Sure a woman carries the embryo and she does all the heavy lifting (pun intended). I'm not saying it's an equal divide. But a man also shares in the pregnancy. We very much experience hormonal and psychological change as well. https://www.menshealth.com/health/a19529157/how-pregnancy-affects-the-father/
That was not the point of this thread, but you got me triggered.
-
System shared this topic on