1 ... 10 11 12
Boost_Crazy
Boost_Crazy HalfDork
7/12/19 1:17 a.m.

In reply to minivan_racer :

You are right. He exaggerated Nimble’s attitude towards his neighbor while admonished him for exaggerating the issue. I guess I exaggerated him defending the code. Lots of exaggerating to go around apparently. It appeared to me that he was blaming the victim, which I took as supporting the code. But I suppose it’s not, I guess you can blame the victim and disagree with the code. Kinda like getting your car stolen after leaving the keys in the ignition. 

Boost_Crazy
Boost_Crazy HalfDork
7/12/19 1:46 a.m.

In reply to irish44j :

I'm not sure what that means to say - people who like "freedom" and/or conservatives are ok with living in dumpy/trashy neighborhoods?

It worries me that you think this is an either/or situation. But it also explains why some are so quick to give up their freedom. 

The problem I have with this situation is that most of the people living under these rules did not choose them. Blanketing a county is much different than building a sub division with an HOA, in which the residents willingly trade off some of their freedom to prevent their neighbors from getting “trashy.”

I’m also concerned about the time frame in which this code went info effect. I haven’t confirmed, but it was mentioned earlier in this thread that this code is relatively new. Imagine being told that you could no longer use your property as you intended when you bought it. 

FYI, I was in Sacramento last night. A rather nice area at that. Still, the irony was not lost on me that an area so willing to confiscate freedom to “make things less trashy”...

Sure had a lot of human urine on the sidewalks. 

keithedwards
keithedwards New Reader
7/12/19 12:54 p.m.
Dave M said:

Um, this thread just hit Jalopnik. Congrats everyone! GRM forums are soon to be overrun. 

 

https://jalopnik.com/sacramento-county-says-its-illegal-to-work-on-your-own-1836085130

In that article it states "One commenter on the Grassroots Motorsports forum reported that he’d already been issued a $430 fine for working on his car in his garage:"SNIP

Is this accurate? I have looked through this thread pretty thoroughly, and never saw nimblemotorsports being sighted for working on a car in his garage. Have I missed something?

NOT A TA
NOT A TA Dork
7/12/19 1:49 p.m.
Boost_Crazy said:

In reply to NOT A TA :

It's very hard to write something that keeps people from running auto repair shops out of their home garage without keeping people who fix their own cars and hobbyists from being able to do what they want to do without creating a lot more work for government people to monitor whats going on.

Try your logic with just about any other crime. 

 

I didn't create the system, or the rules, just explaining how things work and why from my experiences. Even when I was on the Zoning Board of Appeals we didn't make the rules, we were the ones who had to make judgment calls on cases brought before the board. Don't make it personal.

 

irish44j
irish44j MegaDork
7/12/19 3:46 p.m.
Boost_Crazy said:

In reply to irish44j :

I'm not sure what that means to say - people who like "freedom" and/or conservatives are ok with living in dumpy/trashy neighborhoods?

It worries me that you think this is an either/or situation. But it also explains why some are so quick to give up their freedom. 

 

Freedom is not an absolute in any place where other people exist, since one person's freedom invariably affects someone else's freedom.

And again, I think the Sacramento law is dumb and the way it's being enforced is even dumber. But this is what happens when citizens sit back and aren't active in government, don't go to city council meetings, are ignorant of new regulatory proposals,  whatever. You get laws made by uninformed people and/or people who have different priorities than you as a citizen may have. And in the case of "gearheads," we will always be the minority of the populace, so actually need to go to these boring meetings and participate. The vast majority of the populace isn't working on cars at their houses, so doesn't give a rat's ass about how these laws affect "us."

I dislike having to get an annual safety inspection on my car because I know "I" maintain my cars and keep them in safe operating condition, so i shouldn't have to abide by such a law (freedom!). But then I think of all the morons out there on bald tires and brake pads metal on metal, and non-working lights on their cars, and accept the fact that it's a small price to pay to spend half an hour getting an inspection, on the premise that it will reduce the number of other idiots who could cause an accident.

Then I commute to the next state over (daily) where annual safety inspections don't exist. And the kind of rat-trap unsafe vehicles I see on the street, and the daily accidents I see because of them, is a great example of why these "annoying" laws exist. 

LifeIsStout
LifeIsStout Reader
7/12/19 4:32 p.m.
keithedwards said:
Dave M said:

Um, this thread just hit Jalopnik. Congrats everyone! GRM forums are soon to be overrun. 

 

https://jalopnik.com/sacramento-county-says-its-illegal-to-work-on-your-own-1836085130

In that article it states "One commenter on the Grassroots Motorsports forum reported that he’d already been issued a $430 fine for working on his car in his garage:"SNIP

Is this accurate? I have looked through this thread pretty thoroughly, and never saw nimblemotorsports being sighted for working on a car in his garage. Have I missed something?

Back on Page 1, it's the 4th post.

Toebra
Toebra Dork
7/12/19 5:51 p.m.
irish44j said:

But this is what happens when citizens sit back and aren't active in government, don't go to city council meetings, are ignorant of new regulatory proposals,  whatever. You get laws made by uninformed people and/or people who have different priorities than you as a citizen may have.

It appears you think that going to city council meetings would have an impact.  In my experience, this is not the case.

Boost_Crazy
Boost_Crazy HalfDork
7/12/19 6:31 p.m.

In reply to irish44j :

You completely sidestepped the conversation. No one is asking for absolute freedom. You implied it is an all or nothing situation, not me. Prohibiting an act is taking away 100% of the freedom to do said act. Neighbor A wants to work on his car on his own property. Neighbor  B isn’t interested in working on cars, and doesn’t want Neighbor A to either. So Neighbor A is prohibited from not only working on cars, but from even owning the tools to do so. I don’t think I like what you consider compromise, or freedom for that matter. And compromise should not be to keep your head down and hope no one reports you.  

Here is a good test to see if a code is overly prohibitive. Tomorrow, EVERYONE in the county who is in violation gets a fine. Not such a trivial matter now, is it? How quickly does that law get changed now?

So, why is this not as important if it’s just Nimble? He’s a “bad neighbor,” so it’s okay? Taking away the freedom from one guy is no big deal, he probably deserved it, right? He should just shut up, “crawl under a rock,” and hope to be left alone?

 

SVreX
SVreX MegaDork
7/12/19 6:52 p.m.

In reply to Boost_Crazy :

I have never made a single post defending this stupid law. 

Doesn’t change that this thread is based on a LOT of exaggeration and untruths. (And you are repeating some of them)

Coming here to post (or even brag) about the latest uninformed site to continue the viral streak is nothing but grandstanding. 

You and I are gonna have to agree to strongly disagree on this. 

Boost_Crazy
Boost_Crazy HalfDork
7/12/19 7:50 p.m.

In reply to SVreX :

Someone else already pointed out that you weren’t defending the law, and I acknowledged they were right, I was wrong. I concede that you did not defend the law. I apologize. You blamed the O.P. for being cited, and while I disagree with that, it’s not the same thing. 

Please point out my exaggerations and untruths as they relate to the topic. I already acknowledged that you were not directly defending the law, but there is no other exaggeration or untruth on my part. You are definitely entitled to your own opinions, but you wrong to say that what I’ve written on the topic is untrue. 

You lost me on the part about other sites, I never mentioned any sites, unless that was directed at someone else. 

irish44j
irish44j MegaDork
7/12/19 7:53 p.m.
Toebra said:
irish44j said:

But this is what happens when citizens sit back and aren't active in government, don't go to city council meetings, are ignorant of new regulatory proposals,  whatever. You get laws made by uninformed people and/or people who have different priorities than you as a citizen may have.

It appears you think that going to city council meetings would have an impact.  In my experience, this is not the case.

I'm speaking in a general sense about participation. Whether that be visiting your local rep, writing letters, going to meetings, whatever. It may or may not work, but it nobody even bothers, it definitely won't work. This is lobbying on a small scale. I worked in politics at the US Senate some years ago and you'd be surprised what can get done by individuals who are persistent, polite, and present an intelligent case, without big money donations. This is micro-politics on niche issues. You're not battling "big oil" or "big pharma" on little things like this. You're just battling some grumpy grandmother or something. 

In my neighborhood, our HOA board is almost entirely people who dislike HOAs and joined/got elected in order to STOP the HOA from creating new regulations or spending money on dumb stuff. This is what I mean about participation.

Or, we can all just bitch on the internet and pat each other on the back for being such a hardcore resistance faction.......wink

keithedwards
keithedwards New Reader
7/12/19 7:57 p.m.
LifeIsStout said:
keithedwards said:
Dave M said:

Um, this thread just hit Jalopnik. Congrats everyone! GRM forums are soon to be overrun. 

 

https://jalopnik.com/sacramento-county-says-its-illegal-to-work-on-your-own-1836085130

In that article it states "One commenter on the Grassroots Motorsports forum reported that he’d already been issued a $430 fine for working on his car in his garage:"SNIP

Is this accurate? I have looked through this thread pretty thoroughly, and never saw nimblemotorsports being sighted for working on a car in his garage. Have I missed something?

Back on Page 1, it's the 4th post.

No, that doesn't state what items were (allegedly) in non-compliance. A few pages later there were items stated, but I never saw any reference to being sited for performing either major (or minor) repairs in his (closed) garage. Did I miss it?

Boost_Crazy
Boost_Crazy HalfDork
7/12/19 8:32 p.m.

In reply to irish44j :

I'm speaking in a general sense about participation. Whether that be visiting your local rep, writing letters, going to meetings, whatever. It may or may not work, but it nobody even bothers, it definitely won't work. This is lobbying on a small scale. I worked in politics at the US Senate some years ago and you'd be surprised what can get done by individuals who are persistent, polite, and present an intelligent case, without big money donations. This is micro-politics on niche issues. You're not battling "big oil" or "big pharma" on little things like this. You're just battling some grumpy grandmother or something. 

In my neighborhood, our HOA board is almost entirely people who dislike HOAs and joined/got elected in order to STOP the HOA from creating new regulations or spending money on dumb stuff. This is what I mean about participation.

Or, we can all just bitch on the internet and pat each other on the back for being such a hardcore resistance faction.......wink

The O.P. has already stated pages back that he is persuing the matter with his local government. 

I don’t live in the county. I did look up my local codes, and thankfully they are very reasonable. A nice balance between allowing people to work on their cars and keeping the neighborhoods looking nice. No restrictions in your garage, driveway allowed with time limits and stipulations that the car should look driveable when you are not actively working on it. Seems to work. 

In my opinion, this is a bad law that exists because it has been hidden in the dark and is rarely enforced. Shining a light on it may do some good in fixing it. 

irish44j
irish44j MegaDork
7/12/19 8:38 p.m.
Boost_Crazy said:

In reply to irish44j :

You completely sidestepped the conversation. No one is asking for absolute freedom. You implied it is an all or nothing situation, not me. Prohibiting an act is taking away 100% of the freedom to do said act. Neighbor A wants to work on his car on his own property. Neighbor  B isn’t interested in working on cars, and doesn’t want Neighbor A to either. So Neighbor A is prohibited from not only working on cars, but from even owning the tools to do so. I don’t think I like what you consider compromise, or freedom for that matter. And compromise should not be to keep your head down and hope no one reports you.  

Here is a good test to see if a code is overly prohibitive. Tomorrow, EVERYONE in the county who is in violation gets a fine. Not such a trivial matter now, is it? How quickly does that law get changed now?

So, why is this not as important if it’s just Nimble? He’s a “bad neighbor,” so it’s okay? Taking away the freedom from one guy is no big deal, he probably deserved it, right? He should just shut up, “crawl under a rock,” and hope to be left alone?

 

  I mean, what even is the conversation at this point? We've established, beyond any doubt:

1. The Sacramento law, as worded, is absolutely idiotic (does anyone disagree?)

2. The way it is enforced - by taking the word of neighbors, or by a single overzealous official, is not in-line with due process (again, does anyone disagree?)

So the merits of the actual issue here have already been settled, and we are ALL in agreement on them. So, we can either just end this thread since we all agree, or we discuss peripheral issues (aka "sidestepping" I guess...). Because in the real world, peripheral issues matter. Only the internet is black and white. 

  I don't know Nimble, and I don't know whether 100% or 5% of what he says is true. I don't know if there is any other backstory to his issue with his neighbor or to anything else in the story. In the end, we only know what we wants to tell us about the situation (and everyone is always honest and impartial on internet forums)........So I just try to examine all aspects of the issue rather than jump on board the circle-jerk of brainless agreement that imagines that all things happen in a vacuum with no extenuating factors, and that since he's a "car guy" he must be 100% in the right. Some nameless government is an easy target, and never sympathetic............ 

 I'll keep doing major work on my cars in a place that certainly has laws out there that I am likely in violation of in one way or another. And I'll keep "keeping my head down" if that's what you want to call "respecting my neighbors" and "not painting a target on my back," You do what you feel you need to do to attain your type of freedom. YMMV. 

irish44j
irish44j MegaDork
7/12/19 8:42 p.m.
Boost_Crazy said:

. I did look up my local codes, and thankfully they are very reasonable. A nice balance between allowing people to work on their cars and keeping the neighborhoods looking nice. No restrictions in your garage, driveway allowed with time limits and stipulations that the car should look driveable when you are not actively working on it. Seems to work. 

In my opinion, this is a bad law that exists because it has been hidden in the dark and is rarely enforced. Shining a light on it may do some good in fixing it. 

All I see here are that you and I live in similar areas with similar laws and we agree the Sacramento law is dumb. So, what are we arguing about again? ;0

Boost_Crazy
Boost_Crazy HalfDork
7/12/19 10:19 p.m.

In reply to irish44j :

All I see here are that you and I live in similar areas with similar laws and we agree the Sacramento law is dumb. So, what are we arguing about again? ;0

I’m not really sure anymore. I said mostly the same things as your above post a couple pages ago. I think we are arguing because your not so subtle political digs show that while we agree on problem, we disagree on the root cause. I guess I was trying to tap dance around the political part by not being political. So let’s just agree on the problem, and let the rest be. Sound good? 

irish44j
irish44j MegaDork
7/12/19 10:53 p.m.
Boost_Crazy said:

In reply to irish44j :

All I see here are that you and I live in similar areas with similar laws and we agree the Sacramento law is dumb. So, what are we arguing about again? ;0

I’m not really sure anymore. I said mostly the same things as your above post a couple pages ago. I think we are arguing because your not so subtle political digs show that while we agree on problem, we disagree on the root cause. I guess I was trying to tap dance around the political part by not being political. So let’s just agree on the problem, and let the rest be. Sound good? 

Nah, it wasn't a political dig .... It was more a sarcastic comment referring to what I would imagine Limbaugh's angle on this would be, since someone mentioned that the story was talked about on his show, and he frequently runs out the "freedom" aspect of things in his broadcasts.

but yeah, let's let it be. 

 

SVreX
SVreX MegaDork
7/13/19 11:02 a.m.

In reply to Boost_Crazy :

I am SO NOT interested in participating in this pissing match. I will try to answer your questions as directly as possible, then be silent.

First off to be clear, THIS LAW IS POORLY WRITTEN. IT'S A E36 M3TY LAW. I've said that every single time I have mentioned it. There are hundreds of thousands of laws just like it, in every community in the country. Coping with surviving how those bad laws are enforced is much more important than whining about them.

My issue with this thread is that it is sensationalist BS. Mr Nimble came here for sympathy, and is working hard to perpetuate that. You are assisting him. We don't actually know that the lot has been cleaned up (although I do believe Mr. N). The only picture he has shown is a different camera angle than most of the video. Doesn't matter. It's totally not the point.

My reference to posting on other sites was directly referring to Mr. Nimble. His last post in this thread was when he came to update us all about Driving.ca having picked up the story, and posting the link. Grandstanding.

The thread title is incorrect.  The law absolutely does NOT say it is illegal to work on your car in your garage.  (although the enforcement of the law DOES imply several things most of us disagree with). Every time we post here or it gets picked up by another site, we are ALL helping perpetuate the falsehoods (and loosing credibility for legit discussions).

You asked me for examples of the exaggerations you have perpetuated. This is hard, because I don't want to argue with you. I am trying to respect you, and answer your question. So here's a few things for you to consider:

 

Boost_Crazy said :

He wasn't cited for a messy yard, he was cited for doing major repairs on vehicles

He was issued a violation, for junk, major repairs, and commercial vehicle on a residence. 

Boost_Crazy said :

...I got more involved (in cars) as a hobby- also outlawed under this regulation.

No it's not.  

Boost_Crazy said :

The problem I have with this situation is that most people living under these rules did not choose them

That's true, but couldn't that be said of EVERY law?

Boost_Crazy said :

Neighbor A is prohibited from not only working on cars, but from owning the tools to do so

The law doesn't say that.

For the record, I completely agree with you.  I do not like bad laws.  I just don't think this thread is addressing that.  It is making car guys look like whiners who get quoted on Rush and Jalopnik, and who could be very bad neighbors.  The reaction of "normal" people (like my wife when she saw that video), is "That's awful.  We should have more laws against that".  Well THAT sucks...

The moral high road of "opposing bad law" (which I completely agree with) is still just an internet pissing match. Have you called your representative yet, or been to a City Council meeting? Or just posted here?

You have posted a lot in this thread, mostly with conjecture and examples, not the actual facts. I understand you are opposed to bad laws (like all of us), but by opposing them in THIS thread, you are also perpetuating the myth that has been created and has gone virile. You are defending Mr Nimble, whether you intend to or not.

I understand we may not agree.  That's ok.  I am going to do my best to not post in this thread anymore, even if we disagree.  Thank you for your thoughtful insights.

Every time we post here, it repeats over and over again across the globe, and I have now done it again.  I strongly feel this thread presents the wrong message about our hobby.

 

 

 

AnthonyGS
AnthonyGS HalfDork
7/13/19 11:28 a.m.

Is it even a law if it is never voted on?  Isn’t this just a policy or procedure put into effect by an over zealous bureaucrat in order to please a few and generate revenue and provide jobs?

If you can’t see how that is an infringement on personal freedom in violation of every rule of common law, you need to study civics.

People in TX recently had such a procedure written by the dept of transportation voted legal by the state reps.  Yes I made a few phone calls.  

The fact is a lot of this stuff is administrative, punitive, and not the law.  Laws are voted on.  I don’t think this is a law, and that’s my major issue here.  You don’t get to infringe on my freedom and due process without a vote.  Even then, I have a right to an appeal.  

The fact that some of you think this is all okay is the real problem.  Our entire country and freedoms are being destroyed by stupid uninformed people, but it’s okay because bad neighbor.....  or it’s okay because it’s not my county.  Or it’s okay because some city council bureaucrat acted unilaterally.  

IT’S NOT OKAY.  It is in fact an infringement on personal freedom.  Denying that is to deny the founding principles of this country. 

This is exactly why a lawyer educated in the law walked away from this issue when confronted.  

The hard part now is finding a reasonable judge that understands rule of law too.  I feel sorry for anyone in that position today.  

Mark my words, you’ll need a license to buy lubricants in my lifetime at this rate.

 

 

sleepyhead the buffalo
sleepyhead the buffalo Mod Squad
7/13/19 11:31 a.m.

Alright, I probably should have done this a while ago, but I’ve updated the thread title to reflect a number of comments about the thread title being sensationalistic.

I also feel like SVrex’s post really hits the capstone of this particular thread.  I’m not sure there’s much to gain from keeping it open much longer..

I reckon that discussing this further, here, is nothing more than a great gnashing of teeth; if Nimble makes any advances in changing things / fighting the code violation, it’d probably be better to start a new thread.

If you disagree with my decision to locks this down, take it up with Tom.

1 ... 10 11 12

This topic is locked. No further posts are being accepted.

Our Preferred Partners
uij1gmfLn7rZQ4GOeKuVgF1XaaZidAD3sC9iYpWTPsq8VaPiuB6rGiGFdAewabee