BB
You miss the point. Obviously you do not need a permit to play a
causal game of football in a park. All parks, or portions thereof,
are not created equal. Go to any great city park (Central, Prospect)
and certain areas are limited to certain uses. Any organized sport
league playing in a public park should get a permit/permission. I
think the real question that began this is that the specific parks
had historic uses as formal gardens. They were not sport fields,
which do take a beating. I don;t think Bradley should be a sports
field, you do, end of debate.
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "bluebishop82"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I would like to make clear that I completely enjoyed the Monster
> Truck ride and I hope they bring it back again this July 4th. Of
all
> the attractions that were there that day, it is the only one I
> remember.
>
> When historians look back at us today and research what
> the "histirical uses" of the parks were, they will have to concede
> that Monster Truck rides was a permitted use. I couldn't be
happier
> about that.
>
> Furthermore, I refuse to get a permit, be bonded or buy insurance
to
> play in football game at a park.
>
> Why should my uses for a public park be constrained by what others
> think is acceptable? Shouldn't we all be permitted to enjoy the
uses
> we like? Exactly what uses do you folks wish for the park to be
> restricted to - walking about in loafers with parasols enjoying
the
> colors of the imaginary flowers?
>
>
> --- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "dfsavgny" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > Now we're arguing about parks, our public assets and should
there
> be
> > absolutely no safeguard for them. Come on folks, let's give a
> > little! Don't read everything as an absolute. I think we can all
> > agree that certain public areas need to be properly maintained
and
> > perhaps, limited to certain activities. Those activites that are
> > limited can be accommodated elsewhere, and any events held on
> public
> > land should be permitted, bonded and appropriately administered.
> BB,
> > be reasonable, if we followed your line of thought each of us
> should
> > be able to do whatever we wanted regardless of the consequences.
> > That is not freedom. Freedom is not absolute and free from
> > responsibility. How about if we wanted to hold a monster truck
> event
> > on your lawn, or play touch football in your house? Does it
matter
> > if its privately or publically owned? The latter is just shared
by
> > us all, thus, we all share interest and responsibility for the
> > property.
> >
> > JoeD, you and I have butted heads here before, but be
reasonable.
> > Surely you can admit that Fishman's people have not been the
> models
> > care and concern in their performance. While I assume Fishman
> didn;t
> > personally set up the tent, he is responsible for the actions of
> his
> > workers. Whether in a family, company, school, etc., attitudes
are
> > set from the top down. That goes for this city government as
well.
> > If they permit such behavior and carelessness, it will be
> repeated.
> > You give them an inch and they will take a yard. I think we can
> all
> > agree that that whoever we have on the council that they must
act
> > shortly to improve the performance of the master developer. They
> > must also safeguard our public assets, and in regard to events
on
> > public land, use appropriate measures to safeguard OUR property.
> No
> > one is asking for draconian measures, just proper oversight.
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
