Too much control

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • the truth Holladay, UT
    April 8, 2013 5:10 p.m.

    @Ultra Bob

    No it doesn't.

    The purpose of government is to secure those liberties and freedoms, not take them away for a secure bowl of porridge.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    April 8, 2013 8:21 a.m.

    @the truth, Holladay, Ut

    Exactly. The decision to live in a civilized society requires the giving up of some freedoms and liberty in exchange for other more desirable freedoms and liberty. Like when we take away your freedom to burn your garbage so that everyone may breath clean air. Like taking away your freedom to drive as you please so that everyone may have the freedom to drive without injury.

  • the truth Holladay, UT
    April 7, 2013 5:21 p.m.

    Ultra Bob is living proof it is all about control.

    It doesn't matter if it is the government or your neighbor.

    Loss of control to others is loss of freedom and liberty.

    But the fact of matter is government has become distant from the people.

    When the epa or dcs or dhs or whatever government organization comes to your door it is not about "the people".

    When politicians are in office for decades there is NO answering to the people anymore.

    With the extreme left, with "progressives" of any party, it is all about control.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    April 7, 2013 8:23 a.m.

    Ali'ikai 'A'amakualenalena
    Provo, UT

    I agree, but what's that got to do with the government that we have now?

  • JoeBlow Far East USA, SC
    April 7, 2013 7:48 a.m.

    I completely understand that oftentimes govt agencies overstep their bounds. That is what makes the news. It is the "crazy" things that get all the attention.

    However, do you really want to get rid of the FDA? Do you think we need some oversight?

    EPA? What a bunch of loonies, right? China does not have an EPA. Would you want to drink their water and breathe their air? What would business dump into our rivers if we let them regulate themselves?

    How about we work to fix those agencies? People love to take the All or Nothing approach (on both political sides).

    And we see plenty of that on this board alone.

    C'mon you folks in the "reasonable middle". Lets stop letting those on the far right and the far left get their way. If we let them, they will ruin this country.

  • Salsa Libre Provo, UT
    April 6, 2013 11:14 p.m.

    Mountanman Hayden, ID

    So, if I understand you right, the Obama administration is not "the government", but it is the various departments run by unelected administrators and their staff? If that is the case, why do you even bother to complain about Congress and the Office of the President? Instead, you complain about the IRS, EPA, NSF, NASA, USDA, FBI, CIA, DOE, DOJ, DOT, Navy, Army, Air Force, Marines, and every other aspect of government that keeps the United States functioning through the decades.

    You can refuse to pay your taxes, but there are consequences because you have a convenent with this country to contribute to its operations according to the decisions of Congress. However, you can always disagree with governmental policy and inform your representative of your opinions. You do this every day with your comments on this website. And we have the ability to change and/or influence our government by elections every 2-4 years. It's our legacy and has been such for over 200 years.

    You certainly have greater say than you have with the religious beliefs set by your religious affiliation. There, if you disagree or question, you're OUT!

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    April 6, 2013 8:38 p.m.

    @ Salsa Libre. The REAL government is the IRS, the EPA, the Department of Education and hundreds of other "departments" and unelected bureaucrats in Washington DC. Don't believe it? Like I said, just don't pay your taxes or try to influence or disagree with any policy of the above and you will find out who controls your liberty, your property and your life.

  • Salsa Libre Provo, UT
    April 6, 2013 7:08 p.m.

    Re: Mountanman Hayden, ID

    Obviously you've never experienced a Homeowner's Association, gone to school, experienced an established religious organization, or been in the path of a corporation/business that wanted special consideration in having access to your land and/or property or wanted to invade your space with activities you may have found undesirable.

    " . . . activist, liberal justices" is perhaps the most self-serving, lame excuse disaffected, anti-government types use when the U.S. Supreme Court swing vote (Justice Anthony Kennedy) doesn't vote with the other four conservative justices. Ask yourself, "Why do we have a Supreme Court?" For those with an extremely-limited understanding of the Constitution and a expectation that everything they want should be the reality, know that there are many who may disagree:

    "Your freedom stops where my freedom extends, and my zone of freedoms is quite extensive!"

  • Ali'ikai 'A'amakualenalena Provo, UT
    April 6, 2013 6:35 p.m.

    Re: Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT

    Again, who is government? It is not some anonymous entity waiting to do you injustice. Unless you live in a cave on an uninhabited island (except for you) isolated from civilization, government is usually an elected group of representatives chosen to make laws and enforce laws in the interests of the general public.

    So, government is you, your neighbors and friends, or people you know whom you may or may not have voted to elect to serve as your representative. However, if you think government is too influenced by money and special interests, then you have an issue with the process of determining the government you have, not an issue with the philosophical basis of representative government.

    If you don't like who your neighbor voted for or whom was elected as your representative, then you only have a problem of how your views appeal to the voting public. Although you probably don't consider your views to be "wrong", certainly you don't like who others select, and that is the issue. Not government, per se, but representation that doesn't reflect your particular interests.

    That's Democracy!!

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    April 6, 2013 4:16 p.m.

    I am not the government and neither are you. Elections are frequently overturned by activist liberal judges that are appointed by other agenda driven bureaucrats. I do not fear Exxon or any other "evil" corporation because if I don't like them, I am FREE not to buy their products therefore they do not control me in any facet of my life. Sorry about your life! On the other hand, don't pay your taxes and you will learn who controls you, your property and your liberties.

  • mark Salt Lake City, UT
    April 6, 2013 3:26 p.m.

    "First, "whoever owns the tree has control of the destiny of the tree, and if they want to kill it they can do so," Merullo observes. (That's true absent any local laws or regulations requiring that owners get permission to remove trees.)"

    That's from an article in the Seattle Times talking about tree laws in Washington. (I found that just on a quick search, I'm sure that if anyone else wants to know what they are talking about when it comes to laws governing trees in Washington they can do a search themselves.) It seems that the letter writers daughter is reacting to a local law, perhaps a city ordinance or a home owners association's regulation.

    I would say that this hardly warrants the hysteria of Anti and Mountanman. USSR and N Korea indeed.

  • ugottabkidn Sandy, UT
    April 6, 2013 12:41 p.m.

    When will the fool that is fearful of "government" realize that he is government? It is he with his neighbor that decides what is good for the community. In a democracy it's up to you to get the Hatches of the world to do your bidding and not Exxon's. I detect that several of you have already given way to handing your life over to those that pad the pockets. What a sorry state you put us in.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    April 6, 2013 11:44 a.m.

    On the other hand,

    People in Arkansas bought homes, not knowing an Exxon oil pipeline ran through their neighborhood---until the pipeline burst. Twenty homes have had to be evacuated as the oil gushes from the ground.

    Our former home on the east coast, sitting on one acre of land, had an area that we weren't permitted to alter because it was designated wetlands. We also paid a yearly maintenance fee for upkeep of "common areas," and there were also restrictions on various things people were permitted to do to their property-- such as what types of fences were permitted (no chain-link). Homeowners could petition the home association board for execptions to the rules. The home association board consisted of people living in the development and had to run for re-election.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    April 6, 2013 10:47 a.m.

    The proper role of government is to control the activities of it’s citizens. Control is the only way to protecting it’s citizens from the bad guys who are for the most part the citizens themselves.

    While we might think we control our government, we are still a long way from democracy. And we seem to be getting further away from being a republic where citizens have any say.

    Government has the ability to control who gets rich. Because the people are not in control of their government, most, if not all, of the controls are made to the profit of those select individuals who do control the government.

  • Anti Bush-Obama Washington, DC
    April 6, 2013 10:39 a.m.

    When America was in Socialist's land. Let my people go.

  • Anti Bush-Obama Washington, DC
    April 6, 2013 10:31 a.m.

    They really think socialism is going to work this time. People like this will be very sorry when they find out what a big mistake they are making by destroying the very foundations of the country and figurativley giving it back to the redcoats.

  • Anti Bush-Obama Washington, DC
    April 6, 2013 10:28 a.m.


    This is what comparison I use myself making when I think of these pro-big government communist worshippers.

    It's like they think that if they jump off a cliff that they will fly. It has never worked nor will ever work but yet in their deluded minds they think it will work this time.

  • Anti Bush-Obama Washington, DC
    April 6, 2013 10:18 a.m.

    The government just needs to sit down and shut up. Build the roads, deliver the mail keep the boarders secure. Anything more is usurpitation.

    If people can't chop down their own trees or consume what food they want? what are they free to do?

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    April 6, 2013 9:52 a.m.

    @ airnaut. Where is the line between "G'ment" tyranny and individual freedom? Who has the right to tell you what is good or bad for you then force you to comply? We might as well be living in the former USSR or N. Korea where if you step out of line, someone from the government comes and takes you away to a "re-education" camp! How did those people give up their personal freedoms one at a time until they were ruled by tyrants? My point; you are walking on very dangerous ground when you give the government ever more power! It happens every time and with the approval and applause of fools!

  • airnaut Everett, 00
    April 6, 2013 9:13 a.m.

    I lived in Washington State for 22 years, never heard of such a law.

    I know many neighborhoods with "Home Owner Associations" with all sorts of rules like you suggest. Npthing about Government regulation however.

    You do have to purchase a tree permit in some areas. But it's no different than buying a Christmas Tree permit for $5 during the holidays.


    That mean old nasty G'mint!
    How dare they tell us we can't burn our trash,
    or dump our used motor oil in the gutter or outback,
    have as many dogs and cats as I want,
    or build our homuses to code!

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    April 6, 2013 7:57 a.m.

    Welcome to the new "fundamentally transformed" America!

  • The Real Maverick Orem, UT
    April 6, 2013 7:54 a.m.


    Which is why I laugh when utahns rant against the federal government. They lash out at the Feds but turn a blind eye to the local government. Zion curtain anyone?

  • Baron Scarpia Logan, UT
    April 6, 2013 7:04 a.m.

    My brother lives in a housing development where the developer controls what kind of vehicles he can park overnight in the street (no trailers), how he can landscape his front yard (no changes, period!), and the colors he can paint his building (can't deviate from the established color scheme of his neighbors). He's forced to pay for a yard maintenance company that comes to mow and blow every week -- no choice there.

    He also has a monopoly utility that demands that he can only buy power from that utility, and due to the developer's requirements, he can't install a solar panel to try to "free" himself from the local utility.

    My kids went to the moview recently and brought some healthy wraps to eat during the movie, but were told they couldn't bring food into the theater and if they wanted to eat, they had to eat the unhealthy fare offered at the in-house concession stand.

    To me, I think big business has "too much control" over our lives...

  • Mad Hatter Provo, UT
    April 6, 2013 2:24 a.m.

    You might look further and consider the background for the ordinance and why the city in question considered it important to review requests to cut down trees. Oftentimes people don't understand the reasons such a regulation is considered, when it is appropriate, and when there may be some other agenda at work.

    Certainly in an up-scale neighborhood where residents value the trees that lend charm to the neighborhood and enhance real estate values, the cutting down of trees can have significant economic affect. Similarly, there may be restrictions on cutting specific trees as an enviromental consideration (eg. old growth oaks) because other varieties may introduce insect/disease problems and/or be unsightly as they mature. Also, it may be just a HMO issue and not within the jurisdiction of the city.

    The letter does not provide adequate information to effectively determine the background of the issue. Certainly, anectdotal evidence is insufficient, particularly when personal self-interest motivates opposition. And if the regulation is shown to be arbitrary and capricious, then, and only then, is it reasonable to oppose the ordinance and initiate effective debate the regulation. It is simply an issue of proper land use and stewardship.