Frazzled by fireworks, Part Two
And here’s an email that was sent to the Vancouver City Council:
Email from a man named Jeff who says fireworks should be declared a public nuisance:
Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council,
Another year and I sit in my residence subjected to BOMBS going off all around my neighborhood. As instructed by your previous emails, I called 911 at approximately 9:30 p,m. on Saturday night 7/2/11 to report illegal fireworks. Your dispatcher was rude on the telephone. As I was reporting the problem and interrupted me and stated fireworks were legal until 11:00. I told him that these were bombs. Firecrackers, M-80’s and what sound like pipe bombs. Your dispatcher indicated to me that there is not a clear definition of what is a legal and illegal fireworks. He reluctantly said he would send a police officer to investigate.
A) You need to instruct your public service employees the difference between legal and illegal fireworks are.
B) Fireworks in the City of Vancouver are a public nuisance. Below is text of basic nuisance law:
Legally, the term nuisance is traditionally used in three ways:
1.to describe an activity or condition that is harmful or annoying to others (e.g., indecent conduct, a rubbish heap or a smoking chimney)
2.to describe the harm caused by the before-mentioned activity or condition (e.g., loud noises or objectionable odors)
3.to describe a legal liability that arises from the combination of the two. However, the “interference” was not the result of a neighbor stealing land or trespassing on the land. Instead, it arose from activities taking place on another person’s land that affected the enjoyment of that land.
The law of nuisance was created to stop such bothersome activities or conduct when they unreasonably interfered either with the rights of other private landowners (i.e., private nuisance) or with the rights of the general public (i.e., public nuisance)
A public nuisance is an unreasonable interference with the public’s right to property. It includes conduct that interferes with public health, safety, peace or convenience. The unreasonableness may be evidenced by statute, or by the nature of the act, including how long, and how bad, the effects of the activity may be.
A private nuisance is simply a violation of one’s use of quiet enjoyment of land. It doesn’t include trespass.
To be a nuisance, the level of interference must rise above the merely aesthetic. For example: if your neighbor paints their house purple, it may offend you; however, it doesn’t rise to the level of nuisance. In most cases, normal uses of a property that can constitute quiet enjoyment cannot be restrained in nuisance either. For example, the sound of a crying baby may be annoying, but it is an expected part of quiet enjoyment of property and does not constitute a nuisance.
Any affected property owner has standing to sue for a private nuisance. If a nuisance is widespread enough, but yet has a public purpose, it is often treated at law as a public nuisance. Owners of interests in real property (whether owners, lessors, or holders of an easement or other interest) have standing only to bring private nuisance suits.
In my opinion, the City of Vancouver perpetuates a public nuisance. I would like to have the City of Vancouver legal counsel explain to me, in writing, why fireworks in Vancouver are NOT a public nuisance.
Having lived in many different parts of the USA, the fact that explosives are allowed to be used as a form of entertainment in the City of Vancouver is beyond insane. Remember, last year a church in the county was destroyed by fireworks. Just wait for some major damage or even a death results from this nonsense.