Land rights and responsibilities
Speaking as a riparian landowner who just won an expensive lawsuit to protect my rights to the land and water I purchased, I would like to point out a few of the issues that I felt made the suit worthwhile. While this happened in Florida, the premise holds true anywhere and serves as a counterpoint to your June 19 editorial’s (“Give kayakers and canoeists the right to paddle on small Illinois waterways”) view.
Perhaps the number one issue is liability. In this country, landowners have been successfully sued when someone injures themselves while trespassing. Even though I won my suit, I can still be sued by another trespasser. So I am compelled to carry liability insurance to mitigate the costs — which isn’t cheap — and the carrier requires I exercise my property rights by denying entrance to trespassers. In short, according to statute and case law, if I allow someone on my property then I am responsible for their well-being and safety.
The second issue, and what generated the lawsuit, is that some people show no respect or courtesy for the privilege to use something that does not belong to them. To them it has no value. Beyond the litter and pollution some people caused, a few were downright disrespectful to my paying guests and to my offers to use my property if they agreed to follow a few simple rules and sign a liability release. This is a case of a few bad apples ruining it for the many.
Some readers may argue that I show no compassion for the “many” by excluding them due to the few, but I say they should direct their anger to the U.S. court system and the judges that shift responsibility from the perpetrator to the deeper pockets. These types of judicial rulings hurt everyone, and until the citizenry shifts to accepting personal responsibility again, nothing is going to change.
I suspect half of readers will be vehemently opposed to these views and the other half will totally agree. If you really think about it, this is the underlying issue.
Gary Haring, Fort Myers, Florida