Re: Overheard on the scanner

On May 2, 12:12=A0am, David Friedman <d...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> In article <mf0l149v7t0uc7jfjkrnt3kp561u726...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
> =A0Douglas Berry <penguin_...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > Let me get this straight.. you think you should be able to walk
> > through private property because a designed dead-end street doesn't
> > have a pedestrian pathway?
>
> Have you thought much about how one justifies the institution of
> property in land? It's not a trivial problem. At least some of the
> arguments depend on value given to the land by human effort--clearing,
> ploughing, and the like. In Locke's terminology, mixing your labor with
> the land.
>
> But before anyone owned the land it existed and could be walked over. So
> there is at least a possible argument against a blanket right to exclude
> trespassers who do no harm.

Indeed, the issue is complicated. The law on public footpaths is much
more developed in Britain; take a look at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Footpath_%28right_of_way%29#Footpaths

In the US, the practice is much less clear, and probably varies by
state.
In some Scandanavian countries, you can even camp on other's private
land without permission, modulo some conditions.

Peter Trei