Freedom to Roam(en.wikipedia.org) |
Freedom to Roam(en.wikipedia.org) |
Very different approaches, but both coming from the feeling you quickly get that you can not be truly free if you're surrounded by fenced off land once you're used to it.
The other effect is that there is - ironically in a country with extremely high government ownership of other things - less pressure in the government to own land.
We don't need national parks (we still have some) to make land accessible to the public, because it all is.
It would also be very expensive for me if someone hurt themselves and then sued me since they are on my property.
I’m going to get downvoted for this but Europe is relatively community minded and frankly a little naive. The US is hardcore when it comes to individualism and will frankly exploit everything up to the very edge of the law. You would have tours of private lands set up within the week especially if you have anything interesting on there. My last point is that Europe is a relatively small place so there isn’t a lot of land to roam but the US isn’t like that. There is plenty of public land to roam so we don’t really need this law.
Put succinctly I would simply say that there are fewer degenerates. One bus or subway journey in NY and one in Stockholm is enough to see that.
I used to walk through privately owned forests on the way to and from school and sometime go off walkthrough them with friends as a kid without once having to think about who the owner was, because it was irrelevant.
There are many possible tradeoffs there other than specifically the Norwegian or Swedish variants to allow most activities unhindered without affecting landowners much.
Sweden has similar restrictions.
That said, if we don’t companies engaging in those kinds of practices, it seems more practical to ban those practices than to remove all rights to access entirely.
>Norway, where I grew up anyone shooting at someone
In Arizona you can shoot these people with ak47, thankfully and get charges dropped after a deadlocked jury. As recently happened.
I'm pretty happy with Norway doing their Norway thing and Arizona doing how we handle it here. Not interested in making the US Norway.
Though you are also speaking as if people camping on your land away from your dwelling are necessarily threatening. If that is something you believe, you might want to reflect and ask yourself why.
Nobody is asking you to allow others to do violence against you. But that you want to be free to deprive others of life and liberty on the basis of guesses strikes as a brutally authoritarian attitude.
In short, I got priced out most everywhere and had to go where land is cheap and I was allowed to DIY a shack. Strong property rights and practically unrestricted gun laws here though mean there is at least some protection despite basically no law enforcement.