Looks like it could be any street in a small New England town....except the houses on the right are in Vermont and those on the left are in Quebec. Canusa Street runs east-west and is the US-Canada Border.
https://goo.gl/maps/z3dhQ2a5gTN2
I imagine at one time it wasn't a problem.... but in these times of heightened border security do Quebec residents have to drive westbound only? .....and those in Vermont....eastbound takes them further into Quebec? Even backing out of your driveway has you entering the other country illegally and it's probably a no-go just to walk across the street to visit your neighbor!
This view is interesting (below -looking west) Canada Customs is on the right and US on the left. "Arret" in Quebec...and "Stop" in Vermont. Do those Vermont residents on Canusa St drive west...pass through Canada's CBSA...drive across the street then go through US CBP to continue on?
https://goo.gl/maps/n5QhBfCXMXz
I found this Toronto Star article which talks about living Canusa Street. It does mention that crossing the street requires checking in with border security, though I wonder if someone else can give more details on this. For example, is a Canadian driving south from Canada, who heads east on the street before turning into their driveway, considered to have entered the US, or do they let this slide? If it does need customs, you would always want to make a right in-and-out of your driveway to avoid the hassle.
https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2016/06/01/quebec-vermont-towns-straddling-border-chafe-under-heightened-security.html (https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2016/06/01/quebec-vermont-towns-straddling-border-chafe-under-heightened-security.html)
QuoteQuebec-Vermont towns straddling border chafe under heightened security
Six Canadian and U.S. checkpoints service the four-kilometre stretch of frontier that cuts through the villages of Derby Line in Vermont, and the town of Stanstead, Que. But the heightened security doesn't sit well with all of the residents in these once close-knit cross-border communities.
STANSTEAD, QUE.–For some folks living in a cluster of small towns straddling the U.S.-Canadian border here, life could not feel more comfortably secure.
Six Canadian and U.S. checkpoints service the four-kilometre stretch of frontier that cuts through the villages of Derby Line and Beebe Plain, both in Vermont, and the town of Stanstead, in Quebec. Street cameras, satellite and sensor surveillance, vehicle patrols, and the occasional thumping helicopter overhead ensure that residents can't budge without someone watching.
It's no wonder that many don't bother to lock their doors.
"We really feel safe," said Laurie Dubois, 56, an American living on the Canadian side. With the cameras and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, she noted, "there's not a whole lot of bad stuff going on."
But the heightened security is a sign of the times that doesn't sit well with all of the residents in these once close-knit cross-border communities tucked into the northern highlands of the Appalachian Mountains.
"It's a pretty pain in the ass is what it is," said Patrick Boisvert, 75, a machinist in Beebe Plain.
Surveillance has grown stricter and more intrusive all along the 6,300-km lower-U.S.-Canadian frontier since Sept. 11, 2001, creating a continent-wide gulf that many argue reflects a political parting of ways, as well – American conservatism versus Canadian socialism, as defined by Canada's universal health care, maternity leave, tough gun laws, and subsidized day care and higher education.
But the burden borne by the Vermont-Quebec communities is unique. Residents linked by intermarriage, blood relations and, in many cases, dual citizenship are now separated by an invisible but hardening wall. Neighbourhoods that once shared schools, sports facilities, doctors and churches in a kind of free-flowing human commerce have retreated to their own sides of the border.
Nowhere is the divide more apparent than along the 570-metre stretch of Highway 247 – called Canusa Street in Vermont and Rue Canusa in Quebec – where Boisvert has lived all of his life.
On Canusa, the border runs east-west more or less right down the middle of the street. Drive on the north side, going west, and you are in Canada. Drive east and you are in the United States.
Boisvert's father was a Canadian born in the small town of Rock Island (now Stanstead) just across from Derby Line. He married an American and moved to the white clapboard house in Beebe Plain where Patrick Boisvert still lives with his wife, Louise.
Boisvert said that when he was a child, his best friend was a Canadian who lived across Canusa Street. "So, hell, we were back and forth across that road 100 times a day. We didn't think about it. Border? What border? And now this s--- that's going on."
What Boisvert means is that every time he or his wife cross the street or drive off on an errand, they have to report in at the U.S. or Canadian border posts. It's the same for all 23 families on the street.
The border stations are close by, but often there are lines. The fine for not checking in is a steep $5,000 and/or two years in jail on the American side and $1,000 on the Canadian side. And there's no escaping the surveillance, Boisvert said.
Louise said she no longer visits her Canadian neighbor Mylène.
"If we are going to talk to each other, she stands on her side, and I stand on mine," she said. One time, "there was some sort of little domesticated rat that was following Mylène around over there and she came over, she had her passport in her hand, and she said, "˜There's this rat, and I think it's somebody's pet.' She wanted to find the owner. But she had to go and report and come over here and then she was going to have to go to the Canadian side to report back. . . . I don't know what happened to the rat."
Metal gates now block the north-south streets that once connected Derby Line and Stanstead.
In at least two cases, the border runs through homes, restricting access to back yards and forcing owners to seal off doors.
The Haskell Free Library and Opera House famously straddles the Derby Line-Stanstead frontier. A row of flowerpots denotes the border traversing the street that leads to the front door, which is in the United States. Most of the rest of the building is in Canada. Inside, black tape tracing the border runs diagonally through the children's section.
Here the border rules fall away. Canadians and Americans are permitted to access to the century-old brick building without having to check in with the border guards. Children enchanted by Peter Pan find their own version of Neverland.
Dual citizenship is common – a result of marriages and also the fact that many Canadians were born just across the border at the hospital in Newport, thus acquiring U.S. citizenship.
Where these people opted to live often reflects the divergent political and social paths the two countries have chosen.
Laurie Dubois immigrated to Canada from Vermont in 1971, when her mother married a Canadian. Now she and her American husband operate a small cross-border business engraving tombstones. The area's granite quarries are a mainstay of the economically struggling region.
She said she would like to move back to the United States, because "Americans are more friendly," but stays because of Canada's social safety nets, particularly its universal health care.
"It covers a lot of stuff that my husband deals with," she said. "He has a heart problem, and he has an ileostomy. He has kidney problems."
For Louise Boisvert, Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders "is our babe" because he wants to bring Canada's subsidized higher education, single-payer universal health care, higher minimum wage and paid maternity leave to the United States.
"It's time we started looking after our citizens," she said.
But her husband says Sanders is "delusional" if he thinks the United States will adopt universal health coverage.
"I don't think you can change it," he said. "Everything is too entrenched."
With each generation, memories of a closer cross-border community have faded. Sylvain Matte, 43, is an engineer and machine designer who lives up the street from the Boisverts on the Canadian side.
He notes that he has had casual exchanges – barbecues and drinks around a bonfire – with his American neighbors, but nothing that approaches real friendship.
"For me, it's normal," he said of the street.
His 18-year-old daughter, Vladimire, added that she had an American friend when she was small, but not anymore.
"Americans are different," she said. "I can't really put my finger on why, but they are."
This is fucking insane, and reason #1 why border controls on the US/Canadian border are stupid.
Quote from: Brandon on March 16, 2017, 11:34:00 AM
border controls on the US/Canadian border are stupid.
FTFY.
Build a wall and beef up security along the southern border in the name of fighting terrorism, when a person can literally enter the USA by walking across the street on the northern border.
Quote from: kphoger on March 16, 2017, 12:50:44 PM
Quote from: Brandon on March 16, 2017, 11:34:00 AM
border controls on the US/Canadian border are stupid.
FTFY.
Build a wall and beef up security along the southern border in the name of fighting terrorism, when a person can literally enter the USA by walking across the street on the northern border.
There's a difference between the two. In spite of some differences (described above), the U.S. and Canada are reasonably wealthy nations. Not so at the border between the United States and Mexico (of course, many of those problems would go away if the U.S. Congress decided to terminate the so-called "War on Drugs").
Quote from: cpzilliacus on March 16, 2017, 02:00:12 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 16, 2017, 12:50:44 PM
Quote from: Brandon on March 16, 2017, 11:34:00 AM
border controls on the US/Canadian border are stupid.
FTFY.
Build a wall and beef up security along the southern border in the name of fighting terrorism, when a person can literally enter the USA by walking across the street on the northern border.
There's a difference between the two. In spite of some differences (described above), the U.S. and Canada are reasonably wealthy nations. Not so at the border between the United States and Mexico (of course, many of those problems would go away if the U.S. Congress decided to terminate the so-called "War on Drugs").
But that's about migration, not terrorism. Once you mention fighting terrorism (a.k.a. security), nobody can object. It's a trump card (pun intended). Like "what about the children."
Before this becomes political mudslinging, I'm going to slide a comment in here.
Honestly, there's no point. The nearest city is eight hours away, there's no towns around for miles, and do you really expect crime in a city that has a population under 1000?
Now, about Canusa Street, I'd imagine you'd follow US law. There was effectively nothing here for at least fifty years, and considering it was part of the US first, I'd say US driving laws would apply here.
Quote from: noelbotevera on March 16, 2017, 06:03:22 PM
Honestly, there's no point. The nearest city is eight hours away, there's no towns around for miles, and do you really expect crime in a city that has a population under 1000?
Now, about Canusa Street, I'd imagine you'd follow US law. There was effectively nothing here for at least fifty years, and considering it was part of the US first, I'd say US driving laws would apply here.
Actually the nearest city is Montreal....1 1/2 hrs away with a metro pop. of about 3.8 million
US driving laws would apply on the US side of the street....but the other side is rue Canusa and Canadian or Quebec law would apply.
QuoteHonestly, there's no point. The nearest city is eight hours away, there's no towns around for miles, and do you really expect crime in a city that has a population under 1000?
Aside from the border issue, that's an incredibly naive comment - these little towns do (on occasion) have some pretty bad crime, usually a lot of break-ins tied to meth/pills.
Quote from: noelbotevera on March 16, 2017, 06:03:22 PM
Now, about Canusa Street, I'd imagine you'd follow US law. There was effectively nothing here for at least fifty years, and considering it was part of the US first, I'd say US driving laws would apply here.
Then it would be the first street with a legal speed limit in km/h :awesomeface:
https://goo.gl/maps/anNWk6yZoDm
I wonder who would manage residential services along the street (garbage etc) as well as road maintenance. Does MTQ do the west bound lane and VDOT do the eastbound? :-D
Quote from: Brandon on March 16, 2017, 11:34:00 AM
This is fucking insane, and reason #1 why border controls on the US/Canadian border are stupid.
So long as you have significant differences in policy (such as for gun ownership, or immigration) between the two countries, you need some kind of border controls.
There used to be no customs checkpoint between the neighboring towns Hyder AK and Stewart BC. There now is one just on the Canadian side. Hyder is very difficult to reach or leave except through Canada, so the U.S. isn't too worried about terrorists, etc. using Hyder as their point of entry into the U.S. Ditto for Canada, but they are worried about Stewart residents and other Canadians evading high alcohol and tobacco taxes by buying their stuff in Hyder. Until the customs checkpoint was established, Royal Canadian Mounted Police patrols kept a lookout for smugglers, as well as DUIs who didn't hang around Hyder long enough after getting "Hyderized" at a local bar.
Quote from: ghYHZ on March 16, 2017, 04:14:40 AM
I imagine at one time it wasn't a problem.... but in these times of heightened border security do Quebec residents have to drive westbound only? .....and those in Vermont....eastbound takes them further into Quebec? Even backing out of your driveway has you entering the other country illegally and it's probably a no-go just to walk across the street to visit your neighbor!
This view is interesting (below -looking west) Canada Customs is on the right and US on the left. "Arret" in Quebec...and "Stop" in Vermont. Do those Vermont residents on Canusa St drive west...pass through Canada's CBSA...drive across the street then go through US CBP to continue on?
Firstly, let's note here that the article describes the border as running "
more or less right down the middle of the street" (emphasis mine). This wording is deliberate, the precise location of the border doesn't follow the double yellow lines. The street itself does not run perfectly east-west and, due to old surveys by which the border is defined being imperfect, neither does the border. The houses on the north side of the street are unambiguously in Quebec and the houses on the south side of the street unambiguously in Vermont, but exactly at what point in crossing the street you cross the border probably varies up and down the block.
That said, it appears that anyone following QC 247 and just passing through is permitted to do so in either direction without clearing customs (note that the street view van did exactly this), and presumably this would apply to residents on the Canadian side of the street as well.
The issue more drastically affects the folks on the US side of the street, who are literally not allowed to leave their houses (by car at least) without checking in with a customs agent both on the way out and on the way back, because the US is more anal retentive about this than Canada is. At least the locals probably know all the agents there very well and clear customs easier than any of us would.
It's certainly a shining example of how absurd the current state of border security is. At the same time, though, it also presents a curious insight into how policy made on a high up level fails to consider these sorts of odd situations, leaving folks on the ground to sort it out. While both countries have their customs rules and breaking them is liable get you in trouble, it
is physically possible at this location to drive right around both the US and Canadian customs houses, creating an enforcement challenge.
One wonders if, at some point, the US government (or a lower jurisdiction, even) may seek to physically modify the area in order to solve this problem. If you built a new street behind the houses on the US side and had them redo their driveways to exit onto it, they would be able to come and go by car without leaving the country.
A couple other thoughts:
- I wonder what it would be like to try and buy or sell one of these houses? I imagine the folks living them might have a hard time, and a newcomer may face some odd scrutiny... although it sounds like there's a lot of the "this house has been in this family for generations and has never been sold" thing going on there (see the elderly resident in the article who has lived in the same house his entire life).
- Rue Canusa is not the only border-straddling road between the US and Canada. The Aroostook Valley Country Club, which has members from both countries, has similar drama with Russel Road (https://www.google.ca/maps/@46.8017597,-67.7884936,2032m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en). The golf course is in Canada but the parking lot is in the US. US customs didn't care until 2008, when they started telling everyone they had to take a signficant detour to clear customs at the nearest checkpoint in Fort Fairfield in order to go to the course from Canada. There's also the aptly-named Border Road (https://www.google.ca/maps/@48.9987012,-111.9503998,974m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=en) east of Sweet Grass, MT/Coutts, AB. This sign (https://www.google.ca/maps/@48.9976348,-111.7789438,3a,35y,292.53h,75.94t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szvxgcSopG0ixb8Vej6ji8Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) implies that turning onto this road from the Canadian side requires you check in with US customs (the nearest border crossing is at I-15/AB 4), although the street view van does not appear to have done so - so maybe that only applies if you take one of the turnoffs into the US.
The houses there can have some odd issues. Canada allows toilets that use more water than US-spec ones, so if your house straddles the border, you have to be careful what you put where. People are also careful about where they put their beds so as not to spend too many hours in the other country lest they run afoul of tax and other laws. As Duke87 says, it shows how stupid government inflexibility is.
And unfortunately, it will take a culture change to fix this. Government agencies encourage their workers to follow the letter of the law at all times, even if it causes problems, rather than bending the rules but following the spirit of the law while allowing for whatever peculiarities a situation has. We even have annual trainings to drill into us how wonderful bureaucracy is. That's why government forms are so long and seem to have so many irrelevant things: because flexibility is so discouraged, the form has to cover every conceivable situation possible, no matter how unlikely. If the person designing a form or procedure didn't think of a particular situation, stuff like this is the result.
Duke87 beat me to it and is more or less correct. I've been here and do not live all that far away (about 45min). Regarding some of the other questions that have been brought up:
- Street jurisdiction/maintenance is Canadian.
- If you're already on the Canadian side and are just driving through, there is no (further) need to call Customs.
- For those who live on the US side of the street, there is a Port of Entry right down the road at Beebe Rd (about 1/3 mile from the farthest house on the U.S. side.
Why would anybody build a street right on the border between two countries? That's what's stupid and absurd. Somebody's complete lack of common sense is what caused this problem.
Quote from: Brian556 on March 17, 2017, 10:59:20 PM
Why would anybody build a street right on the border between two countries? That's what's stupid and absurd. Somebody's complete lack of common sense is what caused this problem.
Wait, there's a common sense about building streets on international borders? I'm quite sure this is the only place I've ever even seen the topic arise.
Quote from: Brian556 on March 17, 2017, 10:59:20 PM
Why would anybody build a street right on the border between two countries? That's what's stupid and absurd. Somebody's complete lack of common sense is what caused this problem.
I'm guessing there's been a road there since the 1700's.... but the border probably didn't affect your day to day life until 9-11 happened. From the article above "Neighbourhoods that once shared schools, sports facilities, doctors and churches in a kind of free-flowing human commerce have retreated to their own sides of the border"
It also goes on to say some Quebec residents were born in the Newport VT Hospital as it was the closest. (Similar situation in northern Maine where the Hospital was in Edmundston, New Brunswick)
I grew up along the CAN/US Border. Most of the time no ID was even requested....neither a driver license or birth certificate....let alone a passport.
The border was there and you tolerated it but it didn't interfere with your life.......you might be back and forth a couple of time a day. The community on the US side had a McDonalds before we did and it was quite common to load us kids in the car and head over for a McHappy Meal or for a treat in the evening. We had the hockey rink on our side and our minor hockey team was about a 50/50 split of US/Canadian players. When we had practice at 7am on a Saturday morning they were here too except it was 6am to them........the Atlantic/Eastern Time Zone ran down the middle of the river. Even municipal services such as fire protection and the water supply were shared.
Ona similar note - I wonder what is the history over here?
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.9946774,-90.008524,18z
Quote from: ghYHZ on March 18, 2017, 09:31:50 AM
I grew up along the CAN/US Border. Most of the time no ID was even requested....neither a driver license or birth certificate....let alone a passport.
The border was there and you tolerated it but it didn't interfere with your life.......you might be back and forth a couple of time a day. The community on the US side had a McDonalds before we did and it was quite common to load us kids in the car and head over for a McHappy Meal or for a treat in the evening. We had the hockey rink on our side and our minor hockey team was about a 50/50 split of US/Canadian players. When we had practice at 7am on a Saturday morning they were here too except it was 6am to them........the Atlantic/Eastern Time Zone ran down the middle of the river. Even municipal services such as fire protection and the water supply were shared.
I recall the McDonald's in Calais, Maine, having double-width cash register drawers when we stopped there in 1989 on the way back from a Boy Scout trip to the jamboree on PEI. If you paid with Canadian money, that's what you got in change. Same for US money. Made sense to me.
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 18, 2017, 10:44:31 AM
I recall the McDonald's in Calais, Maine, having double-width cash register drawers .........
The Calais McDonalds ......that's the one I'm talking about!
Same in the cafeteria at Jays Peak VT (near Canusa St)..... Here you can almost cross the border if you get a good downhill speed up.
I remember crossing at North Troy VT/Highwater QC a few years ago .......a sleepy little Border Post on Route 243 (same # in both QC & VT) and a shortcut back to Autoroute 10 returning from Jay Peak.
Best way to describe the Canadian CBSA Officer was "Boarder Dude" as in "Snow Boarder". He saw our skis and was very professional in his questioning........but after that just wanted to talk skiing and that day's snow conditions until the next car showed-up in line behind us.
When we lived in Michigan in the early 1960s, Canadian and American coins were used interchangeably near the border. If you bought something you got change back with whichever country's coins came out of the register. Now, we discounted Canadian bills (and vice-versa), but coinage circulated at par.
Quote from: kalvado on March 18, 2017, 10:01:55 AM
Ona similar note - I wonder what is the history over here?
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.9946774,-90.008524,18z
Don't know about the history, but the Mississippi/Tennessee line (or state lines in general) just aren't nearly as big a deal as international borders.
The NV/UT line runs right through the Border Inn on US 50. There's a whole lot of nothing for miles around, so the site selection was not probably accidental. Gas pumps and most other services on the Utah side, slots and maybe a bar on the Nevada side. In Bristol TN/VA (site of a recent semi-amusing GEICO commercial), the state line used to run through the hospital, with patient beds on both sides of the line. I'm sure it was a PITA to be subject to the licensing regulations of two states, so no surprise that when the hospital had to be replaced, the new facility was built entirely within Tennessee.
Quote from: ghYHZ on March 18, 2017, 11:19:07 AM
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 18, 2017, 10:44:31 AM
I recall the McDonald's in Calais, Maine, having double-width cash register drawers .........
The Calais McDonalds ......that's the one I'm talking about!
Same in the cafeteria at Jays Peak VT (near Canusa St)..... Here you can almost cross the border if you get a good downhill speed up.
I remember crossing at North Troy VT/Highwater QC a few years ago .......a sleepy little Border Post on Route 243 (same # in both QC & VT) and a shortcut back to Autoroute 10 returning from Jay Peak.
Best way to describe the Canadian CBSA Officer was "Boarder Dude" as in "Snow Boarder". He saw our skis and was very professional in his questioning........but after that just wanted to talk skiing and that day's snow conditions until the next car showed-up in line behind us.
My family used the same border crossing twice when we took day trips to Jay Peak from Eastman, QC. We found the border guards nice too. Being allowed to used CAD at Jay Peak with proof of Canadian citizenship is also a big plus (we might not have gone otherwise with the exchange rate).
Quote from: oscar on March 18, 2017, 11:30:05 AM
Quote from: kalvado on March 18, 2017, 10:01:55 AM
Ona similar note - I wonder what is the history over here?
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.9946774,-90.008524,18z
Don't know about the history, but the Mississippi/Tennessee line (or state lines in general) just aren't nearly as big a deal as international borders.
Which is exactly why it's so interesting. At first, I figured folks were using those streets as cut-throughs - but I can't imagine traffic on Millbranch and Town & Country is that bad.
My only theory is that the homes on the Mississippi side are multifamily and possibly newer than the single family residences on the Tennessee side. The Tennessee folks probably didn't want that type of housing there, but since it's outside of Memphis and in an entirely different state, they likely had little opportunity to comment on whatever proposed development (or planned land uses generally on the other side of the state line). I'd guess they didn't want poor people living in and cutting through "their" neighborhood and asked Memphis to put up a barrier - hence the prominent neighborhood watch signs. At this point, neither side of the state line is in great shape, but there could have been a much greater socio-economic (possibly race too) gap when it was built.
While the Mississippi side wouldn't be subject to Memphis zoning, it IS under the same Metropolitan Planning Organization, so planning isn't entirely independent. I don't think developers would have thought of the state line as something of a barrier, to be developed across only to subvert zoning. Why would they? People and goods can move freely across state lines. It seems like a situation that commonly exists on city/town lines (though my understanding may be influenced by the fact that annexation is essentially impossible for cities in NY). It is interesting that not many streets cross, though. I would have thought that the streets would cross the lines freely.
Quote from: vdeane on March 18, 2017, 04:47:58 PM
While the Mississippi side wouldn't be subject to Memphis zoning, it IS under the same Metropolitan Planning Organization, so planning isn't entirely independent. I don't think developers would have thought of the state line as something of a barrier, to be developed across only to subvert zoning. Why would they?
MPOs (with the exceptions of Portland, Oregon (http://www.oregonmetro.gov/) and to some extent Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota (https://metrocouncil.org/)) do
not generally tell their member DOTs and local governments how to regulate land use or involve themselves in zoning matters.
As for crossing state lines to avoid certain (usually strict) land use regulation, it has happened repeatedly in Maryland. The Maryland suburbs of D.C. have lost thousands of jobs to nearby areas of Virginia in part because zoning in Maryland is tough and expensive to deal with (and in some places there are hyperactive citizens that come out to oppose anything and everything new).
Similar story in metropolitan Baltimore, where development is severely restricted in Baltimore County, which has resulted in "leapfrog" development across the state line in York County, Pennsylvania, especially near the state line in places like Shrewsbury Township and the boroughs of Glen Rock and New Freedom, these having morphed into suburbs of Baltimore without the Maryland land use controls and high housing prices that come with that.
Quote from: vdeane on March 18, 2017, 04:47:58 PM
While the Mississippi side wouldn't be subject to Memphis zoning, it IS under the same Metropolitan Planning Organization, so planning isn't entirely independent. I don't think developers would have thought of the state line as something of a barrier, to be developed across only to subvert zoning. Why would they? People and goods can move freely across state lines. It seems like a situation that commonly exists on city/town lines (though my understanding may be influenced by the fact that annexation is essentially impossible for cities in NY). It is interesting that not many streets cross, though. I would have thought that the streets would cross the lines freely.
What CPZ said re: MPOs. But more generally, this sort of thing happens sometimes even within city limits, due to politics and efforts to make existing homeowners happy, sometimes as a concession by developers.
I'm not arguing that they were trying to "subvert" zoning - merely that, especially in the 70s (?) when it looks like this neighborhood was built, there were likely conflicting land use plans in Memphis and in Mississippi, and the developer chose to develop property in the way it was zoned. There's no subversion - under this theory the developer would have been doing something perfectly above board in Mississippi that the neighbors in Tennessee disliked. The neighbors in Tennessee, being in Tennessee, wouldn't have had much recourse as long as the law in Mississippi was followed. That's not something unusual at all.
As far as gates in roads - it happens sometimes:
I can think of two instances of this in Boise alone where neighbors didn't want multi-family traffic and some commission decided to grant this gate as a concession to the existing neighbors-
https://goo.gl/maps/4Wki3fz47Ns
and this one, where a gate was put up to keep the new subdivision out of the old subdivision - they were eventually forced to leave the gate open, but it was there for years.
https://goo.gl/maps/P7BbnqpgP5R2
Returning to the border between Canada and the U.S., no discussion is complete (and I think it has been the subject of debate here on AARoads before) without the perhaps even-more ridiculous border situation at Estcourt Station, Maine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estcourt_Station,_Maine) and its neighbors in Pohénégamook, Québec (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poh%C3%A9n%C3%A9gamook) (Google map here (https://www.google.com/maps/place/47%C2%B027'35.5%22N+69%C2%B013'28.4%22W/@47.4539747,-69.2351756,15z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d47.459867!4d-69.22455?hl=en)).
Quote from: cpzilliacus on March 18, 2017, 06:18:11 PM
Returning to the border between Canada and the U.S., no discussion is complete (and I think it has been the subject of debate here on AARoads before) without the perhaps even-more ridiculous border situation at Estcourt Station, Maine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estcourt_Station,_Maine) and its neighbors in Pohénégamook, Québec (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poh%C3%A9n%C3%A9gamook) (Google map here (https://www.google.com/maps/place/47%C2%B027'35.5%22N+69%C2%B013'28.4%22W/@47.4539747,-69.2351756,15z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d47.459867!4d-69.22455?hl=en)).
Look-up the phone for US CBP there...and it has a Quebec number. Power also comes from Hydro Quebec.
The Wikipedia article on Southaven (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southaven,_Mississippi) has some details on the politics involved (and in fact is more detailed in this respect than the typical Wikipedia small town/CDP article that regurgitates Census data). Apparently it is also John Grisham's hometown.
worst known mess of this type was with India-Bangladesh enclaves on the border: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India%E2%80%93Bangladesh_enclaves
As far as I know, situation is more or less getting resolved, with land swaps and people are allowed to choose if they move to other locations within the country of residence or stay with land and change their citizenship...
Isn't zoning more a municipal thing than a state thing?
Quote from: kalvado on March 18, 2017, 06:54:43 PM
worst known mess of this type was with India-Bangladesh enclaves on the border: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/India%E2%80%93Bangladesh_enclaves
As far as I know, situation is more or less getting resolved, with land swaps and people are allowed to choose if they move to other locations within the country of residence or stay with land and change their citizenship...
That would explain why they don't show up on Google Maps any more.
Quote from: cpzilliacus on March 18, 2017, 06:18:11 PM
Returning to the border between Canada and the U.S., no discussion is complete (and I think it has been the subject of debate here on AARoads before) without the perhaps even-more ridiculous border situation at Estcourt Station, Maine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estcourt_Station,_Maine) and its neighbors in Pohénégamook, Québec (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poh%C3%A9n%C3%A9gamook) (Google map here (https://www.google.com/maps/place/47%C2%B027'35.5%22N+69%C2%B013'28.4%22W/@47.4539747,-69.2351756,15z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d47.459867!4d-69.22455?hl=en)).
This area has an interesting history:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_Madawaska
Quote from: cpzilliacus on March 18, 2017, 06:18:11 PM
Returning to the border between Canada and the U.S., no discussion is complete (and I think it has been the subject of debate here on AARoads before) without the perhaps even-more ridiculous border situation at Estcourt Station, Maine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estcourt_Station,_Maine) and its neighbors in Pohénégamook, Québec (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poh%C3%A9n%C3%A9gamook) (Google map here (https://www.google.com/maps/place/47%C2%B027'35.5%22N+69%C2%B013'28.4%22W/@47.4539747,-69.2351756,15z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d47.459867!4d-69.22455?hl=en)).
The Michel Jalabert case underscores the absurdity.
QuoteIsn't zoning more a municipal thing than a state thing?
Yes either municipal or county, authorized by state enabling laws - I just wasn't sure of what the municipality in Mississippi was called and was too lazy to google it so I used "Mississippi" for simplicity's sake.
I'm pretty sure Roosevelt Way in Point Roberts (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.0021414,-123.0887834,3a,75y,143.9h,63.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sn3BMhuqOG6JbVKwF0eND9A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) was once kind of like this. By the way, I love using that street view picture to demonstrate the stupidity of border crossing stuff...
Quote from: kalvado on March 18, 2017, 10:01:55 AM
Ona similar note - I wonder what is the history over here?
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.9946774,-90.008524,18z
I've posed the question to my father, who retired a few years ago after 30 years at in the Memphis/Shelby County planning department.
Quote from: jay8g on March 18, 2017, 11:08:03 PM
I'm pretty sure Roosevelt Way in Point Roberts (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.0021414,-123.0887834,3a,75y,143.9h,63.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sn3BMhuqOG6JbVKwF0eND9A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) was once kind of like this. By the way, I love using that street view picture to demonstrate the stupidity of border crossing stuff...
I'm partial to this example, a bit further east: https://goo.gl/maps/LyqNQovY2K92
Quote from: jay8g on March 18, 2017, 11:08:03 PM
I'm pretty sure Roosevelt Way in Point Roberts (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.0021414,-123.0887834,3a,75y,143.9h,63.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sn3BMhuqOG6JbVKwF0eND9A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) was once kind of like this. By the way, I love using that street view picture to demonstrate the stupidity of border crossing stuff...
Does anyone know what this sign says?
https://www.google.com/maps/@49.0021414,-123.0887834,3a,15y,159.01h,86.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sn3BMhuqOG6JbVKwF0eND9A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Also, this is probably the closest signal to the US/Canadian border, as the border is just about 6 feet to the south of it according to Google Maps:
https://www.google.com/maps/@49.0023163,-122.4857161,3a,75y,123.89h,106.19t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s-vQyLTDK00LWbRHq5-weCA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D-vQyLTDK00LWbRHq5-weCA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D98.922646%26pitch%3D0%26thumbfov%3D100!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Bet you never thought you'd see campaign signs for senators on a Canadian street. Yes, those were the 2012 Sanders campaign signs. https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.0058524,-72.1401953,3a,26y,113.9h,83.51t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sstaa7FP5LlH517jMWECrQQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Quote from: freebrickproductions on March 18, 2017, 11:57:00 PM
Quote from: jay8g on March 18, 2017, 11:08:03 PM
I'm pretty sure Roosevelt Way in Point Roberts (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.0021414,-123.0887834,3a,75y,143.9h,63.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sn3BMhuqOG6JbVKwF0eND9A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) was once kind of like this. By the way, I love using that street view picture to demonstrate the stupidity of border crossing stuff...
Does anyone know what this sign says?
https://www.google.com/maps/@49.0021414,-123.0887834,3a,15y,159.01h,86.05t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sn3BMhuqOG6JbVKwF0eND9A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
WARNING!
If you are entering the United States
without presenting yourself to an immigration officer
YOU MAY BE ARRESTED AND PROSECUTED
for violating U.S. Immigration and Customs Laws.
Quote from: vdeaneIsn't zoning more a municipal thing than a state thing?
Usually, yes. In the case of the Twin Cities (since CPZ brought that area up), Minnesota state law gives the Metropolitan Council authority on sewer expansion, which doesn't influence specific developments but does influence local zoning decisions/changes.
Quote from: corco on March 18, 2017, 07:55:50 PM
Yes either municipal or county, authorized by state enabling laws - I just wasn't sure of what the municipality in Mississippi was called and was too lazy to google it so I used "Mississippi" for simplicity's sake.
I understand that state law in Texas forbids county governments from zoning their land (but municipalities can, though Houston has famously declined to impose a city zoning ordinance).
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 18, 2017, 07:39:56 PM
The Michel Jalabert case underscores the absurdity.
Absolutely - a huge waste of federal taxpayer dollars on the U.S. side because he wanted to visit the Gulf station and fill his tank.
Quote from: 7/8 on March 16, 2017, 07:37:18 AM
Quote...American conservatism versus Canadian socialism...
Yes, Vermont: That bastion of American conservatism.
Quote from: ghYHZ on March 18, 2017, 06:41:32 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on March 18, 2017, 06:18:11 PM
Returning to the border between Canada and the U.S., no discussion is complete (and I think it has been the subject of debate here on AARoads before) without the perhaps even-more ridiculous border situation at Estcourt Station, Maine (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estcourt_Station,_Maine) and its neighbors in Pohénégamook, Québec (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poh%C3%A9n%C3%A9gamook) (Google map here (https://www.google.com/maps/place/47%C2%B027'35.5%22N+69%C2%B013'28.4%22W/@47.4539747,-69.2351756,15z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x0:0x0!8m2!3d47.459867!4d-69.22455?hl=en)).
Look-up the phone for US CBP there...and it has a Quebec number. Power also comes from Hydro Quebec.
Funny! Wonder if the U.S. Department of Homeland Security makes the CBP agents assigned to Estcourt Station learn French? Probably not.
I would not put it past someone in the U.S. federal government making a demand that a telephone landline be strung across the Maine woods so the customs station can have an area code 207 phone number.
Quote from: briantroutman on March 19, 2017, 03:48:58 PM
Quote from: 7/8 on March 16, 2017, 07:37:18 AM
Quote...American conservatism versus Canadian socialism...
Yes, Vermont: That bastion of American conservatism.
Vermont (and a good portion of rural eastern New York) is a strange place. They're not typical city liberals, as almost everyone owns a gun, but they don't give a damn what you look like or what you do (unlike many conservatives).
Quote from: cl94 on March 19, 2017, 12:06:07 AM
Bet you never thought you'd see campaign signs for senators on a Canadian street. Yes, those were the 2012 Sanders campaign signs. https://www.google.ca/maps/@45.0058524,-72.1401953,3a,26y,113.9h,83.51t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sstaa7FP5LlH517jMWECrQQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
Considering it's Bernie Sanders, I'm not that surprised.
Quote from: cl94 on March 19, 2017, 04:24:14 PM
They're not typical city liberals, as almost everyone owns a gun, but they don't give a damn what you look like or what you do (unlike many conservatives).
Do you actually know many conservatives?
Quote from: jbnv on March 19, 2017, 10:24:54 PM
Quote from: cl94 on March 19, 2017, 10:21:41 PM
Quote from: jbnv on March 19, 2017, 10:20:21 PM
Quote from: cl94 on March 19, 2017, 04:24:14 PM
They're not typical city liberals, as almost everyone owns a gun, but they don't give a damn what you look like or what you do (unlike many conservatives).
Do you actually know many conservatives?
Yes, they're all quite racist and ethnocentric. but that's beside the point.
So you don't actually know any conservatives.
Gentlemen, relax. A quote attributed to many wise people says,
"If You Are Not a Liberal at 25, You Have No Heart. If You Are Not a Conservative at 50 You Have No Brain"... And no need for insults, this is not an election...
Quote from: kphoger on March 16, 2017, 02:32:14 PM
Quote from: cpzilliacus on March 16, 2017, 02:00:12 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 16, 2017, 12:50:44 PM
Quote from: Brandon on March 16, 2017, 11:34:00 AM
border controls on the US/Canadian border are stupid.
FTFY.
Build a wall and beef up security along the southern border in the name of fighting terrorism, when a person can literally enter the USA by walking across the street on the northern border.
There's a difference between the two. In spite of some differences (described above), the U.S. and Canada are reasonably wealthy nations. Not so at the border between the United States and Mexico (of course, many of those problems would go away if the U.S. Congress decided to terminate the so-called "War on Drugs").
But that's about migration, not terrorism. Once you mention fighting terrorism (a.k.a. security), nobody can object. It's a trump card (pun intended). Like "what about the children."
It would seem easy enough to teach a Southwest Asian terrorist who looks Mexican or Central American enough to speak more Spanish than the Ukrainian immigrant who takes my order at Taco Bell and get into the USA by whatever means is currently employed by the Mexican and Central Americans who come in illegally and cause all sorts of havoc. The kind of trouble that, most Mexicans and Central Americans who enter the country whether legally or illegally rarely cause.
From Canada we have a county that works just as hard as we do to avoid illegal crossings and legal crossings by those who mean harm to the other and that doesn't see that much of an advantage in having its citizens move to the USA. Mexico, however, would just as soon some of its people go to the USA. If I were them, I am sure that I would feel the same way. You can only expect your neighbor to cooperate when your interests are the same.
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on March 18, 2017, 11:24:39 PM
Quote from: jay8g on March 18, 2017, 11:08:03 PM
I'm pretty sure Roosevelt Way in Point Roberts (https://www.google.com/maps/@49.0021414,-123.0887834,3a,75y,143.9h,63.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sn3BMhuqOG6JbVKwF0eND9A!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en) was once kind of like this. By the way, I love using that street view picture to demonstrate the stupidity of border crossing stuff...
I'm partial to this example, a bit further east: https://goo.gl/maps/LyqNQovY2K92
I'm surprised there isn't even a small fence along the border here.
Quote from: kalvado on March 20, 2017, 05:16:58 AM
Gentlemen, relax. A quote attributed to many wise people says, "If You Are Not a Liberal at 25, You Have No Heart. If You Are Not a Conservative at 50 You Have No Brain"... And no need for insults, this is not an election...
Generalizations like that which prompted this off-topic deviation really bother me. If I said that all liberals want to let men pee in womens' restrooms and want to kill all babies before they're born, that would be as egregious -- and as incorrect -- as the gross mischaracterization about all conservatives.
Quote from: hbelkins on March 20, 2017, 10:28:00 AM
Quote from: kalvado on March 20, 2017, 05:16:58 AM
Gentlemen, relax. A quote attributed to many wise people says, "If You Are Not a Liberal at 25, You Have No Heart. If You Are Not a Conservative at 50 You Have No Brain"... And no need for insults, this is not an election...
Generalizations like that which prompted this off-topic deviation really bother me. If I said that all liberals want to let men pee in womens' restrooms and want to kill all babies before they're born, that would be as egregious -- and as incorrect -- as the gross mischaracterization about all conservatives.
I'm a conservative, and I want to let men pee in women's restrooms. Laissez-faire, baby.
You can't kill something that's not alive.
Quote from: NE2 on March 20, 2017, 11:08:09 AM
You can't kill something that's not alive.
except zombies
Abortion needs to be reframed as self defense. Assclowns have no problem killing real live people who "threateningly" bump into them in a crowded street, so what's the problem with getting rid of a not-yet-person all up in your insides?
Quote from: NE2 on March 20, 2017, 11:08:09 AM
You can't kill something that's not alive.
What is dead cannot die.
Quote from: Brandon on March 20, 2017, 11:16:41 AM
Quote from: NE2 on March 20, 2017, 11:08:09 AM
You can't kill something that's not alive.
What is dead cannot die.
Should viruses be considered live or dead? You know, those bugs which cause HIV, flu, different flavors of hepatitis.
Politically correct term for securing virus contamination is "inactivation"...
Quote from: jbnv on March 20, 2017, 11:35:37 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 20, 2017, 10:55:42 AM
I'm a conservative, and I want to let men pee in women's restrooms. Laissez-faire, baby.
Let them pee next to my daughter and I'm coming after you.
Heh. I guess you are very particular about porta-potties then:
"You can't use that one, dear daughter, a man went into the one next to it."
Quote from: jbnv on March 20, 2017, 11:35:37 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 20, 2017, 10:55:42 AM
I'm a conservative, and I want to let men pee in women's restrooms. Laissez-faire, baby.
Let them pee next to my daughter and I'm coming after you.
I'm also in favor of floor-to-ceiling walls and doors for every toilet stall as is fairly common in Europe, but I doubt that'll happen here.
I personally see no point in having to wait in line at a crowded restroom, when the other sex's restroom is empty–especially when the restrooms are single-occupant, but also when each toilet is enclosed.
Quote from: kphoger on March 20, 2017, 11:41:18 AM
Quote from: jbnv on March 20, 2017, 11:35:37 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 20, 2017, 10:55:42 AM
I'm a conservative, and I want to let men pee in women's restrooms. Laissez-faire, baby.
Let them pee next to my daughter and I'm coming after you.
I'm also in favor of floor-to-ceiling walls and doors for every toilet stall as is fairly common in Europe, but I doubt that'll happen here.
I personally see no point in having to wait in line at a crowded restroom, when the other sex's restroom is empty–especially when the restrooms are single-occupant, but also when each toilet is enclosed.
This. Unisex restrooms are common in the rest of the world. Make one double-size restroom with fully-enclosed cubicles.
Quote from: jbnv on March 20, 2017, 11:35:37 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 20, 2017, 10:55:42 AM
I'm a conservative, and I want to let men pee in women's restrooms. Laissez-faire, baby.
Let them pee next to my daughter and I'm coming after you.
This is a completely serious question: why? I mean, if I had a daughter and I took a wiz next to her, I don't know what injury or danger she'd suffer. Not that it would ever come up, but I assume that'd be the same with any other person–peeing isn't inherently dangerous.
(Figured I may as well ask before the inevitable thread locking.)
Quote from: empirestate on March 20, 2017, 12:08:12 PM
Quote from: jbnv on March 20, 2017, 11:35:37 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 20, 2017, 10:55:42 AM
I'm a conservative, and I want to let men pee in women's restrooms. Laissez-faire, baby.
Let them pee next to my daughter and I'm coming after you.
This is a completely serious question: why? I mean, if I had a daughter and I took a wiz next to her, I don't know what injury or danger she'd suffer. Not that it would ever come up, but I assume that'd be the same with any other person—peeing isn't inherently dangerous.
(Figured I may as well ask before the inevitable thread locking.)
Chances are, you wouldn't know who you're next to anyway.
Quote from: kalvado on March 20, 2017, 11:22:03 AM
Quote from: Brandon on March 20, 2017, 11:16:41 AM
Quote from: NE2 on March 20, 2017, 11:08:09 AM
You can't kill something that's not alive.
What is dead cannot die.
Should viruses be considered live or dead? You know, those bugs which cause HIV, flu, different flavors of hepatitis.
Politically correct term for securing virus contamination is "inactivation"...
Obviously some folks here have not seen
Game of Thrones nor read the
A Song of Ice and Fire books.
Quote from: cl94 on March 20, 2017, 12:02:20 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 20, 2017, 11:41:18 AM
Quote from: jbnv on March 20, 2017, 11:35:37 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 20, 2017, 10:55:42 AM
I'm a conservative, and I want to let men pee in women's restrooms. Laissez-faire, baby.
Let them pee next to my daughter and I'm coming after you.
I'm also in favor of floor-to-ceiling walls and doors for every toilet stall as is fairly common in Europe, but I doubt that'll happen here.
I personally see no point in having to wait in line at a crowded restroom, when the other sex's restroom is empty–especially when the restrooms are single-occupant, but also when each toilet is enclosed.
This. Unisex restrooms are common in the rest of the world. Make one double-size restroom with fully-enclosed cubicles.
I'd LOVE that. It's incredibly awkward to do one's business in a room where the privacy is minimal, to the extent that I avoid public restrooms like the plague. Heck, why not extend it to locker rooms and showers too? Who really wants to do any of that stuff in front of other people? Old Forge water park has private changing stalls in their locker rooms and pretty much everyone used them; I wish more places had them (heck, they should be mandatory). Wasn't it the Supreme Court that said that "separate but equal" is inherently unequal? The concept applies here too.
I personally have no problem with showering or changing clothes or peeing in mixed-sex company, but I fully understand I'm in the minority there. But can anybody give me one good reason why two single-occupant public restrooms should be designated men's and women's?
Quote from: kphoger on March 20, 2017, 01:11:16 PM
I personally have no problem with showering or changing clothes or peeing in mixed-sex company, but I fully understand I'm in the minority there.
Meanwhile, I'm as modest as most people about that sort of thing, and I'd be just as modest about any children that might be in my care. But it seems there's an assumed link between the presence of adult men and young girls–or any other combination of age and sex–in the same room as each other, and I don't know that that link holds up logically.
Quote from: empirestate on March 20, 2017, 12:08:12 PM
Quote from: jbnv on March 20, 2017, 11:35:37 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 20, 2017, 10:55:42 AM
I'm a conservative, and I want to let men pee in women's restrooms. Laissez-faire, baby.
Let them pee next to my daughter and I'm coming after you.
This is a completely serious question: why? I mean, if I had a daughter and I took a wiz next to her, I don't know what injury or danger she'd suffer. Not that it would ever come up, but I assume that'd be the same with any other person–peeing isn't inherently dangerous.
(Figured I may as well ask before the inevitable thread locking.)
+1. How is the whole bathroom thing even an issue? I honestly can't understand it.
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on March 20, 2017, 02:02:46 PM
Quote from: empirestate on March 20, 2017, 12:08:12 PM
Quote from: jbnv on March 20, 2017, 11:35:37 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 20, 2017, 10:55:42 AM
I'm a conservative, and I want to let men pee in women's restrooms. Laissez-faire, baby.
Let them pee next to my daughter and I'm coming after you.
This is a completely serious question: why? I mean, if I had a daughter and I took a wiz next to her, I don't know what injury or danger she'd suffer. Not that it would ever come up, but I assume that'd be the same with any other person–peeing isn't inherently dangerous.
(Figured I may as well ask before the inevitable thread locking.)
+1. How is the whole bathroom thing even an issue? I honestly can't understand it.
It's an issue because there's not really a legal distinction between restrooms, shower rooms, or changing rooms. People who might not care about mixed sexes in wall-divided restrooms might have a totally different take on mixed sexes in a shared high school shower room.
Quote from: empirestate on March 20, 2017, 01:29:12 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 20, 2017, 01:11:16 PM
I personally have no problem with showering or changing clothes or peeing in mixed-sex company, but I fully understand I'm in the minority there.
Meanwhile, I'm as modest as most people about that sort of thing, and I'd be just as modest about any children that might be in my care. But it seems there's an assumed link between the presence of adult men and young girls–or any other combination of age and sex–in the same room as each other, and I don't know that that link holds up logically.
That's the threat for the bogeyman argument. Now think about the public restrooms in your local restaurant, mall, department store, university, etc. Let me know whether you think a state law prevents a malicious adult man from entering the women's room to do harm to a young girl.
Quote from: kphoger on March 20, 2017, 01:11:16 PM
But can anybody give me one good reason why two single-occupant public restrooms should be designated men's and women's?
Women don't have the mental capacity to look whether the seat is up before sitting down. No wonder they voted overwhelmingly for a strong man rather than a cuck woman.
Quote from: kphoger on March 20, 2017, 01:11:16 PMI personally have no problem with showering or changing clothes or peeing in mixed-sex company, but I fully understand I'm in the minority there. But can anybody give me one good reason why two single-occupant public restrooms should be designated men's and women's?
I personally don't have a problem either, but then we are both male. My late mother was very uncomfortable using mixed-sex bathrooms even when the toilet cubicles were completely enclosed with occupancy indicators and full visual sealing, features that are also common in Europe but are largely absent in the US.
It would not surprise me to find that the transgender bathroom debate was deliberately engineered to drive a wedge between women (especially white women without college educations) and feminists trying to sell the concept of the Republican "war on women," and between traditional feminists focused on equality issues and a segment of postmodern feminism that sees the trans rights movement as an attempt by males-at-birth to gain access to women's spaces.
As for gender assignments for single-occupancy bathrooms in small restaurants and the like, I think that developed to accommodate customer expectations of not encountering bathroom issues associated with the opposite sex, like pee on the floor (dribble/bad aim) in the men's or menstrual blood on the toilet seat in the women's, and has persisted because of tradition or inertia. It would not surprise me to see most of these single-occupancy bathrooms relabeled unisex once the trans bathroom debate has run its course.
Quote from: empirestate on March 20, 2017, 12:08:12 PM
(Figured I may as well ask before the inevitable thread locking.)
I think we're still on topic.
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on March 20, 2017, 02:02:46 PM
Quote from: empirestate on March 20, 2017, 12:08:12 PM
Quote from: jbnv on March 20, 2017, 11:35:37 AM
Quote from: kphoger on March 20, 2017, 10:55:42 AM
I'm a conservative, and I want to let men pee in women's restrooms. Laissez-faire, baby.
Let them pee next to my daughter and I'm coming after you.
This is a completely serious question: why? I mean, if I had a daughter and I took a wiz next to her, I don't know what injury or danger she'd suffer. Not that it would ever come up, but I assume that'd be the same with any other person–peeing isn't inherently dangerous.
(Figured I may as well ask before the inevitable thread locking.)
+1. How is the whole bathroom thing even an issue? I honestly can't understand it.
The problem is that, if you are going to make a bathroom law, it needs to read almost exactly the way that the North Carolina law does. It is completely silly to write a law that says "you can use whatever restroom you want" What kind of a law is that? Why not just not have a law?
If you just leave it unregulated and leave it to the cops to enforce other laws (peeping, flashing, sexual assault, whatever) as they relate to restrooms (as they have ever since we have had public restrooms), probably have the right answer. But this often requires that you work out a person's intent. Some people are uncomfortable with the concept of intent.
I was given to understand (from reading various magazines) that it was proper to use the restroom of the sex that you portray. If you are a man (or are trying to be one), use the men's. If you are a woman (or are trying to be one), use the women's. I have absolutely no idea how many women who were trying to be men may have been in the men's room with me. I frankly don't care.
The problem with single occupant restrooms is that they require more space and some places have regulations as to the number of restrooms that are required for a building to serve the number of people. It also defeats the trough or dense-packed urinals that are possible and convenient at sporting events.
Single-occupant restrooms also decrease throughput because you can't multiplex people who are going and washing their hands. They turn the "20-second tinkle" into a 90-second wait for the next person. That's not so bad, if you just have to wait behind one person at the AM-PM, but it makes the line intractable at the seventh inning stretch. No solution fits everything. But, sometimes, no law is better than any law!
Quote from: kphoger on March 20, 2017, 02:29:54 PM
It's an issue because there's not really a legal distinction between restrooms, shower rooms, or changing rooms. People who might not care about mixed sexes in wall-divided restrooms might have a totally different take on mixed sexes in a shared high school shower room.
Do people shower in high school though? They didn't when I was there, at least not after PE. Teenagers generally don't like changing/showering in front of each other.
Age is key:
http://theoatmeal.com/pl/minor_differences2/locker_room
Quote from: vdeane on March 20, 2017, 06:04:25 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 20, 2017, 02:29:54 PM
It's an issue because there's not really a legal distinction between restrooms, shower rooms, or changing rooms. People who might not care about mixed sexes in wall-divided restrooms might have a totally different take on mixed sexes in a shared high school shower room.
Do people shower in high school though? They didn't when I was there, at least not after PE. Teenagers generally don't like changing/showering in front of each other.
Where and when I went, it was required after PE class.
Quote from: Big John on March 20, 2017, 06:13:11 PM
Quote from: vdeane on March 20, 2017, 06:04:25 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 20, 2017, 02:29:54 PM
It's an issue because there's not really a legal distinction between restrooms, shower rooms, or changing rooms. People who might not care about mixed sexes in wall-divided restrooms might have a totally different take on mixed sexes in a shared high school shower room.
Do people shower in high school though? They didn't when I was there, at least not after PE. Teenagers generally don't like changing/showering in front of each other.
Where and when I went, it was required after PE class.
People definitely didn't shower when I was in high school. And again, there's a solution: enclosed stalls. We were required to swim for a few weeks. We all found ways to change without exposing ourselves. This meme was us:
Quote from: AsphaltPlanet on March 20, 2017, 06:05:57 PM
Age is key:
http://theoatmeal.com/pl/minor_differences2/locker_room
Of course, the year my class was lopsided to be 3 men and 15 women, it was faster to just change in the locker room stall.
Quote from: Brandon on March 20, 2017, 11:16:41 AM
Quote from: NE2 on March 20, 2017, 11:08:09 AM
You can't kill something that's not alive.
What is dead cannot die.
Sure, bring Drowned God into this mess. Some of us prefer to know the Stallion Who Mounts The World will eventually rule (or screw us over).
Quote from: vdeane on March 20, 2017, 06:04:25 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 20, 2017, 02:29:54 PM
It's an issue because there's not really a legal distinction between restrooms, shower rooms, or changing rooms. People who might not care about mixed sexes in wall-divided restrooms might have a totally different take on mixed sexes in a shared high school shower room.
Do people shower in high school though? They didn't when I was there, at least not after PE. Teenagers generally don't like changing/showering in front of each other.
In my school we did occasionally (well, at least the guys; I don't know about the girls), but we generally avoided it. Most guys I knew didn't so much care about other guys seeing us nude so much as we didn't want to see other guys nude, whereas women I know have said the female viewpoint is very much the opposite where they don't mind seeing other women but they don't want to be seen themselves. (I recall my mother saying that when she and my father visited the Blue Lagoon in Iceland she was very uncomfortable with the very open locker room environment for that reason even though it was single-sex.)
Regarding unisex restrooms, I thought the one I encountered in Stockholm was a very sensible design with the booth walls and doors going all the way down to the floor and going up quite high. They had red and green lights on the doors to indicate whether they were occupied. Seemed like a sensible enough system to me except that I don't recall there being any urinals. I understand why some women might be uncomfortable with urinals being in there, but really, they are far more efficient for men's needs and they eliminate the very big problem of slobs who whiz on the toilet seat or splatter on the rim (I'm sure most posters here have encountered that at some point, especially in stadium or arena men's rooms). It wouldn't be that hard to have an area off the unisex restroom, perhaps behind a second door, with urinals.
It was a little bit weird to come out of the booth to the sinks and find women there, but that's just because I'm not used to it in this country (and of course I've been to rock concerts when there were more women in the men's room than there were men simply because our lines were shorter). It was no big deal.
I do think there are a fair number of people who would object to some of the noises you hear, even though everybody farts. The men's room at my office is not always a pleasant place to go because some of those guys are astonishingly loud farters. Makes me wonder what the heck they're eating. One of the women who sits near me has grumbled about regularly finding "bloodbaths" on the toilets in the ladies' room. I really wouldn't care to walk in and find that because I wouldn't want to clean that up before I sat down. (But then, earlier this year we had a problem in the men's room where someone took a dump on the floor! That's nasty, period.)
I'm sure I may have mentioned this before: When I was in law school, some of the women complained (justifiably, I think) that in the law library there were two men's rooms (one on the second floor with two shitters and two urinals, one on the fourth floor) but only one ladies' room (on the fourth floor). They had a legitimate beef that they were expected to go upstairs every time. I recall one woman, a very smart lady who later clerked for a Supreme Court justice, routinely used that men's room because it was more convenient. Anyway, the administrators decided the complaint was reasonable and they converted the second-floor men's room into a unisex restroom. But in doing so, they removed the booth walls and doors, one shitter, and one urinal. I asked about that and they said Duke's rules required that if there is a unisex restroom, it must be set up so only one person can use it at a time. They didn't have a response to my point that TWO people could still use it at the same time, but a few weeks later a second sign appeared on the door next to the "Unisex" sign saying "Remember to Lock Door Behind You." I've always wondered whether that was a response to my point or whether someone literally got caught with her pants down.
We never showered after gym in high school, though we did change into and out of gym clothes. Apparently the showers were used by athletes after sporting events or practices but I was never one of them.
I have also encountered the phenomenon of women using the men's room in college because our dorms were gender-segregated by floor and there was only one bathroom per floor, so any visiting girls would need to go upstairs to use their own bathroom, it was simply more convenient for them to use ours, and the guys did not mind. The girls ranged from insisting on having someone guard the door to make sure they were alone in the bathroom until they were done to nonchalantly walking in like it's theirs (seeing a woman's shoes enter the stall next to yours and then hearing all her noises while you're in the process of taking a shit is an interesting experience). Guys visiting the girls floors, of course, were expected to take the stairs to their own bathroom - we were not permitted to use theirs like they were permitted to use ours because they were not comfortable with that.
Now the real question is, how would it work if you had a row of stalls in the women's room whose doors opened into the men's room? Would the women have to clear bathroom customs twice to exit and enter them? Clearly this would be an absurdity created by bathrooms being laid out before we had all of the current security procedures for crossing the walls between them. :spin:
Heh. Duke87 prompts me to recall my first-year dorm, which was, as you describe, single-sex floors with one bathroom facility at the center of each floor and a hall on either side. However, every bathroom, whether on a male floor or a female floor, had five urinals as well as five booths. That's because when those dorms were built in the 1950s, UVA was all-male (at least the undergraduate programs were, other than the School of Nursing), and they never removed the urinals because leaving them there allowed the university more flexibility in allocating housing in any given year. So sometimes we men would use the urinals on the women's floors. Some of them seriously did not appreciate that; others didn't care.
I remember one time some guy's girlfriend visiting from out of town showered in the men's room because she didn't want to bother to go upstairs. I walked out of the shower to take my towel off the hook (the showers were simply separated by shower curtains and there was nowhere in there to hang a towel other than over the curtain rail) and I encountered her emerging from one of the other showers to get her towel. That was a little bit weird since we had never met before and the first time we saw each other we were both stark naked, but I also didn't especially care because she didn't live in my dorm and we weren't going to see each other all that often. She certainly didn't care since she was showering in a men's room with minimal privacy. (I'm reminded of something a female friend said once was I was back visiting after I'd graduated and I had to change my trousers in a hurry, so I simply changed–I was wearing boxers–in front of her. She said, "It wouldn't matter if you weren't wearing boxers. If you've seen one dick, you've seen them all." To me that comment underscores a difference between the male mind and the female mind, because a more typical view most college-age men I knew would have been, "Well, I've seen tits, but I haven't seen YOURS." I did not say that, BTW. I sort of wish I had because it might have led to an interesting conversation!)
Quote from: 1995hoo on March 20, 2017, 08:25:59 PMI do think there are a fair number of people who would object to some of the noises you hear, even though everybody farts. The men's room at my office is not always a pleasant place to go because some of those guys are astonishingly loud farters. Makes me wonder what the heck they're eating. One of the women who sits near me has grumbled about regularly finding "bloodbaths" on the toilets in the ladies' room.
I can't hear the sounds, but often the smells are enough to create a sense of uncomfortable intimacy. For example, costive stools have a very distinctive stewed-coffee smell, so you can just imagine the groaning and grunting taking place on the other side of the divider.
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on March 18, 2017, 11:19:48 PM
Quote from: kalvado on March 18, 2017, 10:01:55 AM
Ona similar note - I wonder what is the history over here?
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.9946774,-90.008524,18z
I've posed the question to my father, who retired a few years ago after 30 years at in the Memphis/Shelby County planning department.
Got a response back.
When the school site immediately to the north was originally developed (as "Memphis Prep", a private junior/senior high school), one of the conditions of approval was that those streets would be blocked to avoid them from becoming thoroughfares for folks wanting to take a back way out of the school (Buxton Road wasn't originally blocked at the school property line).
I'm somewhat disappointed that I wasn't aware of this, seeing as how I went to one of the elementary schools that fed into Memphis Prep. (That elementary school and Memphis Prep have both since closed).
This was, of course, before my days in college, which saw me spend some time in a dorm with unofficially coed showers, and in an apartment where I had three female roommates...both of which were rather educational experiences. :)
Quote from: spooky on March 20, 2017, 02:37:23 PM
Quote from: empirestate on March 20, 2017, 01:29:12 PM
Quote from: kphoger on March 20, 2017, 01:11:16 PM
I personally have no problem with showering or changing clothes or peeing in mixed-sex company, but I fully understand I'm in the minority there.
Meanwhile, I'm as modest as most people about that sort of thing, and I'd be just as modest about any children that might be in my care. But it seems there's an assumed link between the presence of adult men and young girls–or any other combination of age and sex–in the same room as each other, and I don't know that that link holds up logically.
That's the threat for the bogeyman argument. Now think about the public restrooms in your local restaurant, mall, department store, university, etc. Let me know whether you think a state law prevents a malicious adult man from entering the women's room to do harm to a young girl.
Well, that's the whole points–it does; it's against the law in, I assume, all states, to do harm to a young girl. But entering a bathroom doesn't itself harm anyone, nor does it appear to especially facilitate harming anyone. So if you're going to write laws on the subject, you have to rationally show a) what the harm is, and b) how entering certain bathroom elevates that risk (and c) why the state has an interest in mitigating that harm). I've just never had it explained to me, specifically, what the concern is; it's always just "common sense". So it may be, and I have no objection to that, but you can't write a law on common sense, which is what they seem to be doing.
And that's just the first basic step; we haven't even come close to exploring whether a certain subset of men needs to be specifically regulated.
Let's get this thread back on track- anyone know of any other roads that run along international borders?
Quote from: cl94 on March 21, 2017, 12:38:29 AM
Let's get this thread back on track- anyone know of any other roads that run along international borders?
Not running along the border but crossing it at Easton Maine It's a dirt road with a US CBP post.
https://goo.gl/maps/6WHxUMBJDtn
https://goo.gl/maps/sMtjvm3S6gr
You can see the Canadian office in the distance......and it's called Smuggler's Road on the New Brunswick side!
Probably lots of these little obscure crossings from coast to coast.
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on March 20, 2017, 11:05:47 PM
Quote from: MikeTheActuary on March 18, 2017, 11:19:48 PM
Quote from: kalvado on March 18, 2017, 10:01:55 AM
Ona similar note - I wonder what is the history over here?
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.9946774,-90.008524,18z
I've posed the question to my father, who retired a few years ago after 30 years at in the Memphis/Shelby County planning department.
Got a response back.
When the school site immediately to the north was originally developed (as "Memphis Prep", a private junior/senior high school), one of the conditions of approval was that those streets would be blocked to avoid them from becoming thoroughfares for folks wanting to take a back way out of the school (Buxton Road wasn't originally blocked at the school property line).
I'm somewhat disappointed that I wasn't aware of this, seeing as how I went to one of the elementary schools that fed into Memphis Prep. (That elementary school and Memphis Prep have both since closed).
This was, of course, before my days in college, which saw me spend some time in a dorm with unofficially coed showers, and in an apartment where I had three female roommates...both of which were rather educational experiences. :)
So blocking at state line is more or less arbitrary -it was probably easier to do so at state line ( for maintenance reasons, if nothing else), but would be done anyway.. I wonder if unblocking those was considered after Buxton was blocked, or everyone feels good with just one outlet street anyway....
Quote from: cl94 on March 21, 2017, 12:38:29 AM
Let's get this thread back on track- anyone know of any other roads that run along international borders?
I doubt there would be many such situations.
In general, border drawn over the ground is prioritized over border drawn in the document. US-Canada border is one of few cases where border was drawn in the treaty before the border drawn on the ground, and that is done while no accurate maps exited. That leads to a few weird situations when chunks of land are cut off from where they should logically be. There are few other straight line borders, but mostly through unpopulated areas.
Another source of weird situations is border drawn on water (river), and said river changing the path at later time
There was remotely similar situation in Africa, where ferry running between 2 countries may (or may not, depending on who you ask) cross the third country...
Quote from: cl94 on March 21, 2017, 12:38:29 AM
Let's get this thread back on track- anyone know of any other roads that run along international borders?
Crossing between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland is mostly a non-event, and the border is poorly marked, but it looks like this country lane (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Northern+Ireland,+UK/@54.9669079,-7.4028141,3a,66.8y,248.1h,75.82t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sWYniZeeMJWwjgOYXrtE38g!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x485e10ca99a69975:0xf7e528ef6eb7e3d8) travels along (or at least very close to) one stretch of that line.
Quote from: kalvado on March 18, 2017, 10:01:55 AM
Ona similar note - I wonder what is the history over here?
https://www.google.com/maps/@34.9946774,-90.008524,18z
My favorite part is that the street view car managed to go through the closed street with no problem. Notice on Lochnivar Rd., the same two boys are visible playing basketball on both sides of the state line!
Quote from: cl94 on March 21, 2017, 12:38:29 AM
Let's get this thread back on track- anyone know of any other roads that run along international borders?
I'm pretty sure there are examples in the Benelux countries, since historically they were all under the same king and there was never any serious effort to put in place border controls between them once Belgium and Luxembourg became fully independent.
Here are some examples involving the rather famous enclave Baarle-Hertog (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Baarle-Nassau,+Netherlands/@51.4399745,4.9135599,13.85z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x47c6a5342570ab1d:0x808696d1e9939744!8m2!3d51.4451366!4d4.9295231) of Belgium in the Netherlands, while here's an example involving an enclave of Germany within Switzerland (https://www.google.com/maps/place/Baarle-Nassau,+Netherlands/@47.6870394,8.6629412,17.78z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x47c6a5342570ab1d:0x808696d1e9939744!8m2!3d51.4451366!4d4.9295231). I'd imagine there are quite a few others.
In terms of streets right along borders, I've never been there, but I believe Nogales has parallel streets along the border, although with a fence between them. Not the same situation as rue Canusa.
You could probably find something involving Italy and the Vatican (including Castel Gandolfo), although the borders have changed over the years so I'd call that historical accident.
Quote from: empirestate on March 21, 2017, 10:18:56 AM
My favorite part is that the street view car managed to go through the closed street with no problem. Notice on Lochnivar Rd., the same two boys are visible playing basketball on both sides of the state line!
Somehow I doubt the car drove through the fence. However considering it is but a drive around the block from one side of the fence to the other, the two images could easily have been taken within a few minutes of each other. Plenty close together for the same game of 1 on 1 to still be going.
Quote from: Duke87 on March 21, 2017, 09:41:39 PM
Quote from: empirestate on March 21, 2017, 10:18:56 AM
My favorite part is that the street view car managed to go through the closed street with no problem. Notice on Lochnivar Rd., the same two boys are visible playing basketball on both sides of the state line!
Somehow I doubt the car drove through the fence. However considering it is but a drive around the block from one side of the fence to the other, the two images could easily have been taken within a few minutes of each other. Plenty close together for the same game of 1 on 1 to still be going.
Well, my thinking was more that they cut through the dirt area that goes around and alongside the barrier.
I have talked to people who grew up along the Texas/Mexico border in Laredo. It wasnt really a big deal to cross over even up to the 1980s. My friend said they used to go to mexico to dri k when they were in high school almost every weekend.
Canada/US and most of European the difference economically from side to side isnt that much.
Mexico to US the economic difffernce is much greater
LGMS428
Quote from: empirestate on March 22, 2017, 09:54:31 AM
Quote from: Duke87 on March 21, 2017, 09:41:39 PM
Quote from: empirestate on March 21, 2017, 10:18:56 AM
My favorite part is that the street view car managed to go through the closed street with no problem. Notice on Lochnivar Rd., the same two boys are visible playing basketball on both sides of the state line!
Somehow I doubt the car drove through the fence. However considering it is but a drive around the block from one side of the fence to the other, the two images could easily have been taken within a few minutes of each other. Plenty close together for the same game of 1 on 1 to still be going.
Well, my thinking was more that they cut through the dirt area that goes around and alongside the barrier.
I doubt a car would do that. on the other hand. there are backpack mounted versions of google maps cameras...
Quote from: kalvado on March 22, 2017, 11:21:17 AM
Quote from: empirestate on March 22, 2017, 09:54:31 AM
Well, my thinking was more that they cut through the dirt area that goes around and alongside the barrier.
I doubt a car would do that.
Your observation of cars and their drivers differs widely from mine, then. ;-)
Quote from: empirestate on March 23, 2017, 12:37:53 AM
Quote from: kalvado on March 22, 2017, 11:21:17 AM
Quote from: empirestate on March 22, 2017, 09:54:31 AM
Well, my thinking was more that they cut through the dirt area that goes around and alongside the barrier.
I doubt a car would do that.
Your observation of cars and their drivers differs widely from mine, then. ;-)
That could possibly explain Lochinvar Drive, but not Loch Lomond Drive (without driving right through the middle of a grassy lawn, that is).
Quote from: kphoger on March 23, 2017, 01:40:21 PM
Quote from: empirestate on March 23, 2017, 12:37:53 AM
Quote from: kalvado on March 22, 2017, 11:21:17 AM
Quote from: empirestate on March 22, 2017, 09:54:31 AM
Well, my thinking was more that they cut through the dirt area that goes around and alongside the barrier.
I doubt a car would do that.
Your observation of cars and their drivers differs widely from mine, then. ;-)
That could possibly explain Lochinvar Drive, but not Loch Lomond Drive (without driving right through the middle of a grassy lawn, that is).
But is there anything to suggest that Loch Lomond was taken in one go? There's no boys playing ball there.
Considering it's only a few blocks' drive to get from one side of the fence to the other, I think it's more likely the Google car did all the south dead-ends, then did all the north dead-ends, or vice versa. A basketball game takes longer than that, so it's very probable the same kids would be there for both snapshots.
Quote from: kphoger on March 24, 2017, 01:06:01 PM
Considering it's only a few blocks' drive to get from one side of the fence to the other, I think it's more likely the Google car did all the south dead-ends, then did all the north dead-ends, or vice versa. A basketball game takes longer than that, so it's very probable the same kids would be there for both snapshots.
Oh, I'm perfectly well sure that's what happened. I was talking about the appearance of things. Picture...another picture a few feet farther along...another picture a few feet farther along...two kids playing basketball, metal barricade...few feet farther along...whoops, now we're on the other side of the barricade, and there's the same two kids. It's just funny, see.
It took me this entire topic to realize the street name was "Can-USA." I kept reading it as something like "Cah-noose-a."
Quote from: Quillz on April 06, 2017, 12:24:26 AM
It took me this entire topic to realize the street name was "Can-USA." I kept reading it as something like "Cah-noose-a."
Oh wow, you're right! I was thinking the same thing.
I have no idea how they pronounce it, but I'd say "cuh-noose-uh." The name's origin is obvious, but I still read it as a word.
I would say can-you-SAH, just to be different. Sometimes I like to put that emPHASis on the wrong sylLABle.
Quote from: spooky on April 06, 2017, 10:59:11 AM
I would say can-you-SAH, just to be different. Sometimes I like to put that emPHASis on the wrong sylLABle.
If it were in Upstate NY, that would be totally apt. ;-)
This is certainly an interesting read!
Quote from: oscar on March 16, 2017, 08:55:12 PM
Quote from: Brandon on March 16, 2017, 11:34:00 AM
This is fucking insane, and reason #1 why border controls on the US/Canadian border are stupid.
So long as you have significant differences in policy (such as for gun ownership, or immigration) between the two countries, you need some kind of border controls.
There used to be no customs checkpoint between the neighboring towns Hyder AK and Stewart BC. There now is one just on the Canadian side. Hyder is very difficult to reach or leave except through Canada, so the U.S. isn't too worried about terrorists, etc. using Hyder as their point of entry into the U.S. Ditto for Canada, but they are worried about Stewart residents and other Canadians evading high alcohol and tobacco taxes by buying their stuff in Hyder. Until the customs checkpoint was established, Royal Canadian Mounted Police patrols kept a lookout for smugglers, as well as DUIs who didn't hang around Hyder long enough after getting "Hyderized" at a local bar.
Speaking of smuggling, the St. Regis/Akwesasne Indian Reserve was a place where cigarette smuggling pass from the US to Canada.
http://news.nationalpost.com/health/contraband-capital-the-akwesasne-mohawk-reserve-is-a-smuggling-conduit-police-say
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/akwesasne-area-an-ecstasy-smuggling-hotbed-1.1053124
Quote from: Stephane Dumas on April 11, 2017, 04:33:38 PM
Quote from: oscar on March 16, 2017, 08:55:12 PM
Quote from: Brandon on March 16, 2017, 11:34:00 AM
This is fucking insane, and reason #1 why border controls on the US/Canadian border are stupid.
So long as you have significant differences in policy (such as for gun ownership, or immigration) between the two countries, you need some kind of border controls.
There used to be no customs checkpoint between the neighboring towns Hyder AK and Stewart BC. There now is one just on the Canadian side. Hyder is very difficult to reach or leave except through Canada, so the U.S. isn't too worried about terrorists, etc. using Hyder as their point of entry into the U.S. Ditto for Canada, but they are worried about Stewart residents and other Canadians evading high alcohol and tobacco taxes by buying their stuff in Hyder. Until the customs checkpoint was established, Royal Canadian Mounted Police patrols kept a lookout for smugglers, as well as DUIs who didn't hang around Hyder long enough after getting "Hyderized" at a local bar.
Speaking of smuggling, the St. Regis/Akwesasne Indian Reserve was a place where cigarette smuggling pass from the US to Canada.
http://news.nationalpost.com/health/contraband-capital-the-akwesasne-mohawk-reserve-is-a-smuggling-conduit-police-say
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/akwesasne-area-an-ecstasy-smuggling-hotbed-1.1053124
Heh. It has been some years since I first heard about the tension between the Akwesasne and the federal government and State of NY, but at some point they were just blowing through any customs booth up there, putting the workers in danger. This is because back in the 18th Century, a treaty was signed where they were guaranteed free movement into their lands by the Feds.
I forget what boneheaded move NY or the Feds made back then (about 10 years ago), but it ticked them off and caused them to start the protest by just driving through any customs checkpoint -- without hardly slowing down.
They have plenty of tension with Canada too. Roughly a decade ago there was an incident over Harper's decision to arm customs agents. The ensuing riot was severe enough that the customs agents on Cornwall Island had to be evacuated to the US, and a "temporary" booth was established on the mainland (severing Brookdale Ave northbound until a couple years ago when the new northern bridge was built). Now, traffic going between the island and the US is required to go to the mainland to clear customs and then turn around - making a previously free movement cost over six dollars. The government even went so far as to move the toll booth to the mainland, even though it was not part of the dispute.
It's possible that Canada may one day operate their customs on the US side here, but I suspect the "temporary" arrangements that exist now are here to stay. The "temporary" arrangements built with the new bridge don't look very temporary - in fact, were they to be removed, a good chunk of the surrounding roadway would have to be torn up and rebuilt!
https://www.google.com/maps/@45.0103248,-74.7378731,430m/data=!3m1!1e3
Quote from: vdeane on April 12, 2017, 11:50:31 AM
It's possible that Canada may one day operate their customs on the US side here, but I suspect the "temporary" arrangements that exist now are here to stay. The "temporary" arrangements built with the new bridge don't look very temporary - in fact, were they to be removed, a good chunk of the surrounding roadway would have to be torn up and rebuilt!
https://www.google.com/maps/@45.0103248,-74.7378731,430m/data=!3m1!1e3
I have to wonder how this dam's situation works...
https://www.google.com/maps/@45.0064218,-74.7949396,721m/data=!3m1!1e3
Quote from: freebrickproductions on April 12, 2017, 04:12:33 PM
I have to wonder how this dam's situation works...
https://www.google.com/maps/@45.0064218,-74.7949396,721m/data=!3m1!1e3
Here's some info:
http://www.opg.com/generating-power/hydro/ottawa-st-lawrence/Pages/rh-saunders-station.aspx
http://www.stl.nypa.gov/power.html
Regarding the pronunciation....according to a friend-of-a-friend who lives in Derby, it's pronounced Ka-new-saw
Quote from: froggie on April 18, 2017, 07:19:25 AM
Regarding the pronunciation....according to a friend-of-a-friend who lives in Derby, it's pronounced Ka-new-saw
You mean like Arkansas (Ar-ken-saw)?
Ka, not ken.
Phonetically: kə-nu-sɔ
Quote from: froggie on April 18, 2017, 01:09:32 PM
Ka, not ken.
Phonetically: kə-nu-sɔ
Yeah, I'm OK on the "ka" part; so it's "canoe saw" rather than "canoosa"? Or is it "can you saw", as in the sentence "Go back and grab that can you saw"? (I guess it's not the last one, if you have that schwa in the first syllable.)
Had to bump this. One of the border houses is for sale.
http://www.wfsb.com/story/35636049/ever-wanted-to-live-in-two-countries-at-once-heres-your-chance
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on June 10, 2017, 09:37:29 PM
Had to bump this. One of the border houses is for sale.
http://www.wfsb.com/story/35636049/ever-wanted-to-live-in-two-countries-at-once-heres-your-chance
"So I have to go through customs every single time I leave and go to my house?"
"Well, yes"
*crosses off house on list*
This is one of those houses that will be on the market for years.
If I bought that house, I guess I would have to build an extension to the back of the house and use that as a border crossing--part of it in the USA and the other part in Canada. The guards could stay there and work their shifts. Also, we could make them breakfast/lunch/dinner or go out for take-out as long as we pass through that room with our IDs and passports.
Anyway............, I guess the kids couldn't play kickball in the front yard. A kid would kick the ball off the side of his/her foot or kick the ball too far, watch it bounce or fly across the street, and not get the ball back because you just could not simply walk across the street and pick it up. I wonder if there is any ordinance/law/mandate that says the neighbor (or neighbour in Canada) couldn't throw it back across the street?
Canusa Street is crazier than the two streets side-by-side in Washington and British Columbia. I really could not live there--too much hassle and paperwork involved--even for backing out of your own driveway!
Quote from: froggie on April 18, 2017, 07:19:25 AM
Regarding the pronunciation....according to a friend-of-a-friend who lives in Derby, it's pronounced Ka-new-saw
Probably meant to be "can you essay?"
Quote from: roadguy2 on June 17, 2017, 12:27:49 AM
Quote from: jp the roadgeek on June 10, 2017, 09:37:29 PM
Had to bump this. One of the border houses is for sale.
http://www.wfsb.com/story/35636049/ever-wanted-to-live-in-two-countries-at-once-heres-your-chance
"So I have to go through customs every single time I leave and go to my house?"
"Well, yes"
*crosses off house on list*
This is one of those houses that will be on the market for years.
And frankly, I'd bet CBP wants it that way - I'm almost certain they want these homes to go unsold and go away through attrition so as not to have to deal with these abnormalities. They can't overtly kick folks out and have to accommodate the people that live there, but they can make it miserable enough that nobody new wants to move in.
I want to live there just to stick it to the man.
Quote from: corco on June 18, 2017, 03:01:33 PMAnd frankly, I'd bet CBP wants it that way - I'm almost certain they want these homes to go unsold and go away through attrition so as not to have to deal with these abnormalities. They can't overtly kick folks out and have to accommodate the people that live there, but they can make it miserable enough that nobody new wants to move in.
This is surely a practise employed on the highways? Certainly it was policy implemented on the A406 North Circular near Wembley in London: a 1930s arterial that was gradually widened to a 6-lane road that they wanted to make access controlled, so bought up housing as it became available and rented it out while they waited to get the set. About 5 years ago, they gave up and the houses are now far less grotty looking.
PS: is the MS/TN line barrier actually traffic calming? like this in Southampton, UK (https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.9215393,-1.4016928,3a,39.3y,71.98h,80.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHu_9p_myLz8NPrUUd7VoWw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) - there was a plan to make the whole city have a firm hierachy of streets with no through roads outside of the distributor ones and existing streets stopped up mid-way like this. They did a few and then left it alone.
Quote from: english si on June 18, 2017, 04:29:55 PM
Quote from: corco on June 18, 2017, 03:01:33 PMAnd frankly, I'd bet CBP wants it that way - I'm almost certain they want these homes to go unsold and go away through attrition so as not to have to deal with these abnormalities. They can't overtly kick folks out and have to accommodate the people that live there, but they can make it miserable enough that nobody new wants to move in.
This is surely a practise employed on the highways? Certainly it was policy implemented on the A406 North Circular near Wembley in London: a 1930s arterial that was gradually widened to a 6-lane road that they wanted to make access controlled, so bought up housing as it became available and rented it out while they waited to get the set. About 5 years ago, they gave up and the houses are now far less grotty looking.
PS: is the MS/TN line barrier actually traffic calming? like this in Southampton, UK (https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.9215393,-1.4016928,3a,39.3y,71.98h,80.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sHu_9p_myLz8NPrUUd7VoWw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656) - there was a plan to make the whole city have a firm hierachy of streets with no through roads outside of the distributor ones and existing streets stopped up mid-way like this. They did a few and then left it alone.
It may be legal but would be a political nightmare. I would think that a total taking of a property for the sole purpose of making it vacant/building a border fence wouldn't pass most legal muster. In the case of places where there is a border wall on the southern border, existing landowners get gate access to access their property on the other side of the fence, instead of an outright buyout of that land. I'm not an expert on takings law though, so I could be totally off base on that.
Quote from: corco on June 18, 2017, 04:36:57 PMIt may be legal but would be a political nightmare. I would think that a total taking of a property for the sole purpose of making it vacant/building a border fence wouldn't pass most legal muster. In the case of places where there is a border wall on the southern border, existing landowners get gate access to access their property on the other side of the fence, instead of an outright buyout of that land. I'm not an expert on takings law though, so I could be totally off base on that.
My general sense (based on the example English Si cites, and also the example of long-stalled I-710 through South Pasadena, where most of the properties in the way had already been purchased by Caltrans before the deadlock developed) is that CBP would not start with a "purposeful blight" policy. Instead, at some point it would be announced that, to simplify frontier control, the properties would be purchased either through normal sale or through eminent domain; protests would develop; deadlock would result; and then any properties that CBP bought would be either rented out (caused considerable diminution in physical condition and economic value when Caltrans tried it with I-710) or demolished with the land left vacant (might be a less safe course since it could be argued that gap-toothing the neighborhood would damage the value of the remaining properties and prejudge any decision as to the appropriateness of clearing the area next to the border).
IANAL, but as a general rule the compensation that is payable for a taking is based on the difference in value with and without the taking. It could be argued that the Canusa properties already experience diminished value as a result of difficult access to areas further within the US.
Bumping this because this video just turned up.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EocJm3Dry4E