Maryland Man Fined $50 for Picking Berries in Park

[nuhuh]

So what if a hundred people came to the park to pick berries, or pick flowers, or pick mushrooms, or anything else that looked free? There wouldn't be a whole lot of renewables with everyone taking a sample. The cops should have just warned him off, but the land is for mutual enjoyment not mutual shopping.

At some point, the berries would be exhausted for the moment, and the pickers would simply have to look elsewhere. Nobody suggested raspberries grow only in one spot in Montgomery County Maryland. If that were the case they could be protected as an endangered species, which would make sense.

But they're not. They're part of Nature. And as such prohibiting people from picking makes as much sense as prohibiting potheads from puffing.

Tackle this quesiton: what the fuck is Montgomery County protecting them for? Birds? Is Montgomery County Maryland responsible for feeding the birds of the air??

This is a power trip, nothing more. One guy claiming he's in charge of Nature, like some kind of religion. He ain't, so fuck him.

There's a spot down the road, part of the National Park Service in fact, where huckleberries grow wild and thrive. I've got some of them in my reefer right now. My supply is dwindling so I'll be going up to replenish soon. If I don't, they'll be eaten by birds and bears.

Think the National Park Service is going to be up there writing citations for birds and bears? Or for citizens?

Nature's bounty is literally, ripe for the pickin'. That's what it's there for.

I agree that this case is a law enforcement overreach and I agree large swaths of land which have no apparent ownership should be free to pick. What makes it different is that this is a public park that everyone enjoys. Picking berries excludes others from that opportunity and deprives others from the enjoyment of seeing them and providing teaching moments to kids. It is a selfish act that doesn't have a place where we all go to enjoy.

So if the man is hungry and eats a few berries he is selfish but if the birds eat the berries it is fine?

I don't have a problem with eating berries. I have a problem with someone filling a bag and taking it home while others remain law abiding.

Those are not mutually exclusive.

Nothing about picking berries is "destructive". WHAT does it "destroy"?

You can buy your berries like everyone else and shouldn't assume that because they are in a public park they are free for the taking. Those berries found in places like parks are likely wild and support an animal population that is increasingly dependent upon them for survival.The berries also depend upon those same animals to spread seeds ensuring the berry crop grows and is sustained. The jerk who got cited was holding three quarts of berries, saying they are blueberries, they run about 1 1/2 pounds to a quart and at todays prices Wild Organic Blueberries that makes three quarts or 4.5 lbs of blueberries at $88.00 a pound or $396.00 - half that price if they were raspberries.
All that aside let's get to the bottom line. The citation was to prevent the wanton destruction of public property. I am sure we can both agree that the public park is better enjoyed without everyone taking what they want out of it.

 

[Pogo]

At some point, the berries would be exhausted for the moment, and the pickers would simply have to look elsewhere. Nobody suggested raspberries grow only in one spot in Montgomery County Maryland. If that were the case they could be protected as an endangered species, which would make sense.

But they're not. They're part of Nature. And as such prohibiting people from picking makes as much sense as prohibiting potheads from puffing.

Tackle this quesiton: what the fuck is Montgomery County protecting them for? Birds? Is Montgomery County Maryland responsible for feeding the birds of the air??

This is a power trip, nothing more. One guy claiming he's in charge of Nature, like some kind of religion. He ain't, so fuck him.

There's a spot down the road, part of the National Park Service in fact, where huckleberries grow wild and thrive. I've got some of them in my reefer right now. My supply is dwindling so I'll be going up to replenish soon. If I don't, they'll be eaten by birds and bears.

Think the National Park Service is going to be up there writing citations for birds and bears? Or for citizens?

Nature's bounty is literally, ripe for the pickin'. That's what it's there for.

I agree that this case is a law enforcement overreach and I agree large swaths of land which have no apparent ownership should be free to pick. What makes it different is that this is a public park that everyone enjoys. Picking berries excludes others from that opportunity and deprives others from the enjoyment of seeing them and providing teaching moments to kids. It is a selfish act that doesn't have a place where we all go to enjoy.

So if the man is hungry and eats a few berries he is selfish but if the birds eat the berries it is fine?

I don't have a problem with eating berries. I have a problem with someone filling a bag and taking it home while others remain law abiding.

Those are not mutually exclusive.

Nothing about picking berries is "destructive". WHAT does it "destroy"?

You can buy your berries like everyone else and shouldn't assume that because they are in a public park they are free for the taking. Those berries found in places like parks are likely wild and support an animal population that is increasingly dependent upon them for survival.The berries also depend upon those same animals to spread seeds ensuring the berry crop grows and is sustained. The jerk who got cited was holding three quarts of berries, saying they are blueberries, they run about 1 1/2 pounds to a quart and at todays prices Wild Organic Blueberries that makes three quarts or 4.5 lbs of blueberries at $88.00 a pound or $396.00 - half that price if they were raspberries.
All that aside let's get to the bottom line. The citation was to prevent the wanton destruction of public property. I am sure we can both agree that the public park is better enjoyed without everyone taking what they want out of it.

So you admit, picking berries is not "destruction".

Not everything is about money. Nature (or if you prefer, God) provides. It doesn't need to be "bought" and "sold" by some middleman. Now if these berries were on somebody's private property, intended for their use, that's a whole 'nother smoke. They ain't.

And trust me, birds are not gonna starve because somebody picks some berries.

 

[nuhuh]

I agree that this case is a law enforcement overreach and I agree large swaths of land which have no apparent ownership should be free to pick. What makes it different is that this is a public park that everyone enjoys. Picking berries excludes others from that opportunity and deprives others from the enjoyment of seeing them and providing teaching moments to kids. It is a selfish act that doesn't have a place where we all go to enjoy.

So if the man is hungry and eats a few berries he is selfish but if the birds eat the berries it is fine?

I don't have a problem with eating berries. I have a problem with someone filling a bag and taking it home while others remain law abiding.

Those are not mutually exclusive.

Nothing about picking berries is "destructive". WHAT does it "destroy"?

You can buy your berries like everyone else and shouldn't assume that because they are in a public park they are free for the taking. Those berries found in places like parks are likely wild and support an animal population that is increasingly dependent upon them for survival.The berries also depend upon those same animals to spread seeds ensuring the berry crop grows and is sustained. The jerk who got cited was holding three quarts of berries, saying they are blueberries, they run about 1 1/2 pounds to a quart and at todays prices Wild Organic Blueberries that makes three quarts or 4.5 lbs of blueberries at $88.00 a pound or $396.00 - half that price if they were raspberries.
All that aside let's get to the bottom line. The citation was to prevent the wanton destruction of public property. I am sure we can both agree that the public park is better enjoyed without everyone taking what they want out of it.

So you admit, picking berries is not "destruction".

Not everything is about money. Nature (or if you prefer, God) provides. It doesn't need to be "bought" and "sold" by some middleman. Now if these berries were on somebody's private property, intended for their use, that's a whole 'nother smoke. They ain't.

And trust me, birds are not gonna starve because somebody picks some berries.

It can be completely destructive if everyone did it. Nature also provides for you if you plant your own seeds without stealing from everyone else. Now if you're hungry, I wouldn't begrudge anyone from filling their belly, but in a world where you can buy your own very easily, it seems pointless.

 

[SmarterThanTheAverageBear]

A city park is planted and maintained. Those are certainly not wild raspberries. So that begs the question. Why plant an edible plant on public ground and then make it illegal to you know eat said plant?

 

[Rexx Taylor]

next thing, they will fine you for picking your, or someones else's nose in a public area.

 

[Pogo]

So if the man is hungry and eats a few berries he is selfish but if the birds eat the berries it is fine?

I don't have a problem with eating berries. I have a problem with someone filling a bag and taking it home while others remain law abiding.

Those are not mutually exclusive.

Nothing about picking berries is "destructive". WHAT does it "destroy"?

You can buy your berries like everyone else and shouldn't assume that because they are in a public park they are free for the taking. Those berries found in places like parks are likely wild and support an animal population that is increasingly dependent upon them for survival.The berries also depend upon those same animals to spread seeds ensuring the berry crop grows and is sustained. The jerk who got cited was holding three quarts of berries, saying they are blueberries, they run about 1 1/2 pounds to a quart and at todays prices Wild Organic Blueberries that makes three quarts or 4.5 lbs of blueberries at $88.00 a pound or $396.00 - half that price if they were raspberries.
All that aside let's get to the bottom line. The citation was to prevent the wanton destruction of public property. I am sure we can both agree that the public park is better enjoyed without everyone taking what they want out of it.

So you admit, picking berries is not "destruction".

Not everything is about money. Nature (or if you prefer, God) provides. It doesn't need to be "bought" and "sold" by some middleman. Now if these berries were on somebody's private property, intended for their use, that's a whole 'nother smoke. They ain't.

And trust me, birds are not gonna starve because somebody picks some berries.

It can be completely destructive if everyone did it. Nature also provides for you if you plant your own seeds without stealing from everyone else. Now if you're hungry, I wouldn't begrudge anyone from filling their belly, but in a world where you can buy your own very easily, it seems pointless.

And I repeat --- not everything MUST have a price tag.

The park didn't make those raspberries. Nature made 'em. If Nature wants to tell me I can't eat 'em -- that is when I listen. Nobody else has a say in it.

 

[nuhuh]

A city park is planted and maintained. Those are certainly not wild raspberries. So that begs the question. Why plant an edible plant on public ground and then make it illegal to you know eat said plant?

It's a 538 acre park so they certainly could be wild, it's also a public park not a public supermarket.

 

[Pogo]

A city park is planted and maintained. Those are certainly not wild raspberries. So that begs the question. Why plant an edible plant on public ground and then make it illegal to you know eat said plant?

It's a 538 acre park so they certainly could be wild, it's also a public park not a public supermarket.

You seem to be entirely obsessed with money.

Why is that?

If an apple falls off the tree in a federal forest, do you not eat it because some moneychanger didn't make it into a commodity? I mean that's a little weird.

 

[nuhuh]

I don't have a problem with eating berries. I have a problem with someone filling a bag and taking it home while others remain law abiding.

Those are not mutually exclusive.

Nothing about picking berries is "destructive". WHAT does it "destroy"?

You can buy your berries like everyone else and shouldn't assume that because they are in a public park they are free for the taking. Those berries found in places like parks are likely wild and support an animal population that is increasingly dependent upon them for survival.The berries also depend upon those same animals to spread seeds ensuring the berry crop grows and is sustained. The jerk who got cited was holding three quarts of berries, saying they are blueberries, they run about 1 1/2 pounds to a quart and at todays prices Wild Organic Blueberries that makes three quarts or 4.5 lbs of blueberries at $88.00 a pound or $396.00 - half that price if they were raspberries.
All that aside let's get to the bottom line. The citation was to prevent the wanton destruction of public property. I am sure we can both agree that the public park is better enjoyed without everyone taking what they want out of it.

So you admit, picking berries is not "destruction".

Not everything is about money. Nature (or if you prefer, God) provides. It doesn't need to be "bought" and "sold" by some middleman. Now if these berries were on somebody's private property, intended for their use, that's a whole 'nother smoke. They ain't.

And trust me, birds are not gonna starve because somebody picks some berries.

It can be completely destructive if everyone did it. Nature also provides for you if you plant your own seeds without stealing from everyone else. Now if you're hungry, I wouldn't begrudge anyone from filling their belly, but in a world where you can buy your own very easily, it seems pointless.

And I repeat --- not everything MUST have a price tag.

The park didn't make those raspberries. Nature made 'em. If Nature wants to tell me I can't eat 'em -- that is when I listen. Nobody else has a say in it.

Well as we have already seen from the OP pay the fine, you're breaking the law.

 

[nuhuh]

A city park is planted and maintained. Those are certainly not wild raspberries. So that begs the question. Why plant an edible plant on public ground and then make it illegal to you know eat said plant?

It's a 538 acre park so they certainly could be wild, it's also a public park not a public supermarket.

You seem to be entirely obsessed with money.

Why is that?

If an apple falls off the tree in a federal forest, do you not eat it because some moneychanger didn't make it into a commodity? I mean that's a little weird.

I am already on record that food on unowned land should be free to take, food on property owned by all the people is just that it is mine as much as it is yours. Your right to eat it does not usurp my rights to enjoy it. That's why if you eat it you will pay a fine.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Because "Land of the Free!"

Can't say I'm surprised this happened in the People's Republic of Montgomery County, though. It's an authoritarian leftists cesspool.

Maryland Man Fined $50 for Picking Berries in Park

More law and order liberalism......

 

[Pogo]

A city park is planted and maintained. Those are certainly not wild raspberries. So that begs the question. Why plant an edible plant on public ground and then make it illegal to you know eat said plant?

It's a 538 acre park so they certainly could be wild, it's also a public park not a public supermarket.

You seem to be entirely obsessed with money.

Why is that?

If an apple falls off the tree in a federal forest, do you not eat it because some moneychanger didn't make it into a commodity? I mean that's a little weird.

I am already on record that food on unowned land should be free to take, food on property owned by all the people is just that it is mine as much as it is yours. Your right to eat it does not usurp my rights to enjoy it. That's why if you eat it you will pay a fine.

And who gives you the "right" to watch good food rot?

Rights, schmights. If the berry's in my hand, I eat it. If it's in yours, you do. Not that complex.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Obviously this is harassment, more about police overreach than city ordinances. Clearly picking raspberries, which are there for the picking, isn't "destroying" anything. And if they birds don't get 'em they'll die anyway. It sounds like he can easily get this dismissed, though the harassment shouldn't be going on in the first place.

So tell me, how does a poster in Lost Wages Nevada, over two thousand miles away, know Montgomery County Maryland is an "authoritarian leftists [sic] cesspool"? I'm a hell of a lot closer to it than you and I would never go out on a limb like that.

I did the same thing about a month ago -- found a patch of raspberries growing on the side of the road, in full fruit. Not only did I pick a bagful to take home, I dug up a couple of them and brought them to the front yard where I transplanted them so I'll have nice raspberries for the pickin' in the future. They took, too, so I expect they'll be fruiting for me next year.

Come and get me, copper.

Because Montgomery County is bought and paid for by liberal activists and the democrat party machine.

 

[thereisnospoon]

Moochers need to go to the store and pay for their berries like everyone else. Berries in a public park should go to the homeless or the poor, not to some freeloader.

Fuck off. Jackass

 

[Missourian]

Obviously this is harassment, more about police overreach than city ordinances. Clearly picking raspberries, which are there for the picking, isn't "destroying" anything. And if they birds don't get 'em they'll die anyway. It sounds like he can easily get this dismissed, though the harassment shouldn't be going on in the first place.

So tell me, how does a poster in Lost Wages Nevada, over two thousand miles away, know Montgomery County Maryland is an "authoritarian leftists [sic] cesspool"? I'm a hell of a lot closer to it than you and I would never go out on a limb like that.

I did the same thing about a month ago -- found a patch of raspberries growing on the side of the road, in full fruit. Not only did I pick a bagful to take home, I dug up a couple of them and brought them to the front yard where I transplanted them so I'll have nice raspberries for the pickin' in the future. They took, too, so I expect they'll be fruiting for me next year.

Come and get me, copper.

Regardless of where he lives, he's exactly right...authoritarian liberal cesspool.

 

[Pogo]

Obviously this is harassment, more about police overreach than city ordinances. Clearly picking raspberries, which are there for the picking, isn't "destroying" anything. And if they birds don't get 'em they'll die anyway. It sounds like he can easily get this dismissed, though the harassment shouldn't be going on in the first place.

So tell me, how does a poster in Lost Wages Nevada, over two thousand miles away, know Montgomery County Maryland is an "authoritarian leftists [sic] cesspool"? I'm a hell of a lot closer to it than you and I would never go out on a limb like that.

I did the same thing about a month ago -- found a patch of raspberries growing on the side of the road, in full fruit. Not only did I pick a bagful to take home, I dug up a couple of them and brought them to the front yard where I transplanted them so I'll have nice raspberries for the pickin' in the future. They took, too, so I expect they'll be fruiting for me next year.

Come and get me, copper.

Regardless of where he lives, he's exactly right...authoritarian liberal cesspool.

Based on.... what?
Can't be geography.

Or are you gonna tell us in a Tina Fey-as-Sarah Palin voice that you can see Montgomery County Maryland from your house?

 

[nuhuh]

A city park is planted and maintained. Those are certainly not wild raspberries. So that begs the question. Why plant an edible plant on public ground and then make it illegal to you know eat said plant?

It's a 538 acre park so they certainly could be wild, it's also a public park not a public supermarket.

You seem to be entirely obsessed with money.

Why is that?

If an apple falls off the tree in a federal forest, do you not eat it because some moneychanger didn't make it into a commodity? I mean that's a little weird.

I am already on record that food on unowned land should be free to take, food on property owned by all the people is just that it is mine as much as it is yours. Your right to eat it does not usurp my rights to enjoy it. That's why if you eat it you will pay a fine.

And who gives you the "right" to watch good food rot?

Rights, schmights. If the berry's in my hand, I eat it. If it's in yours, you do. Not that complex.

If you eat you break the law, very simple thing to understand. We are going to have to disagree on this.

 

[Pogo]

Obviously this is harassment, more about police overreach than city ordinances. Clearly picking raspberries, which are there for the picking, isn't "destroying" anything. And if they birds don't get 'em they'll die anyway. It sounds like he can easily get this dismissed, though the harassment shouldn't be going on in the first place.

So tell me, how does a poster in Lost Wages Nevada, over two thousand miles away, know Montgomery County Maryland is an "authoritarian leftists [sic] cesspool"? I'm a hell of a lot closer to it than you and I would never go out on a limb like that.

I did the same thing about a month ago -- found a patch of raspberries growing on the side of the road, in full fruit. Not only did I pick a bagful to take home, I dug up a couple of them and brought them to the front yard where I transplanted them so I'll have nice raspberries for the pickin' in the future. They took, too, so I expect they'll be fruiting for me next year.

Come and get me, copper.

Because Montgomery County is bought and paid for by liberal activists and the democrat party machine.

Amazin'.
Lost Wages Nevada...
Missouri...
"mid-South"...

Homes of the geography-defying psychics.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

Obviously this is harassment, more about police overreach than city ordinances. Clearly picking raspberries, which are there for the picking, isn't "destroying" anything. And if they birds don't get 'em they'll die anyway. It sounds like he can easily get this dismissed, though the harassment shouldn't be going on in the first place.

So tell me, how does a poster in Lost Wages Nevada, over two thousand miles away, know Montgomery County Maryland is an "authoritarian leftists [sic] cesspool"? I'm a hell of a lot closer to it than you and I would never go out on a limb like that.

I did the same thing about a month ago -- found a patch of raspberries growing on the side of the road, in full fruit. Not only did I pick a bagful to take home, I dug up a couple of them and brought them to the front yard where I transplanted them so I'll have nice raspberries for the pickin' in the future. They took, too, so I expect they'll be fruiting for me next year.

Come and get me, copper.

Regardless of where he lives, he's exactly right...authoritarian liberal cesspool.

Based on.... what?
Can't be geography.

Or are you gonna tell us in a Tina Fey-as-Sarah Palin voice that you can see Montgomery County Maryland from your house?

I can see it from my office window

 

[thereisnospoon]

A city park is planted and maintained. Those are certainly not wild raspberries. So that begs the question. Why plant an edible plant on public ground and then make it illegal to you know eat said plant?

It's a 538 acre park so they certainly could be wild, it's also a public park not a public supermarket.

You seem to be entirely obsessed with money.

Why is that?

If an apple falls off the tree in a federal forest, do you not eat it because some moneychanger didn't make it into a commodity? I mean that's a little weird.

I am already on record that food on unowned land should be free to take, food on property owned by all the people is just that it is mine as much as it is yours. Your right to eat it does not usurp my rights to enjoy it. That's why if you eat it you will pay a fine.

How is a plant bearing fruit which is edible and nutritious "contributing to your enjoyment" if the fruit is left in place only for the fauna of the region to consume it?
Do animals have more rights than people?
Ya know what? I think you are demonstrating your innate ability to be a controversial asshole and are just spewing a whole lot of shit.