What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Hypothetical question regarding wild plants and trespassing

  • #21
They may experience electrical impulses but I believe it ends there. It's a stretch even to say they "feel" them. Without a brain to interpret them it is simply an impulse and a reaction from the plant. There is nothing to convert the impulse into emotion or feeling as you said. Certainly not the way the human brain can do so. Anyways, like you said you'll argue till the cows come home and I'm in no mood to do so.

To stay on topic. No, I would never steal plants without permission. Not just because of property rights, which I completely agree with. But because of things that happen like the link Warren provided. There's a lot of nutty people out there and they don't all stop to ask questions before pulling the trigger. Besides, like katya said, the golden rule. I wouldn't want some crazy plant fanatic running around on my newly purchased property digging holes if I didn't know what was going on. If they're choosing to clear the lot they probably won't be object to someone taking something beforehand.
 
  • #22
Translation: you respect the property rights of others as long as you agree with how those others exercise said rights.

I believe that conservation and saving species for future generations to enjoy is of far greater importance than the desires of one person concerning their land. Should we let orangutans and certain nepenthes species go extinct so that palm oil producers can exploit land and profit from it?
 
  • #23
I agree with Axelrod12 here actually, it is just a matter of perception. Your brain is what makes all the difference and puts humans at the tops of the food chain for that reason. Thank you for explaining :) and no I wasn't saying I wanted to argue, just that the argument about wether or not "love" is reason can go on forever.

I also whole heartedly agree with the second part of his post as I said a human will put your in jail or just shoot you. It's not that hard to ask and they will probably say yes anyways. If they say no then cut your losses. One can't cry over every ant that dies.
 
  • #24
There is no situation in which it is reasonable to skip the part of the process where some effort is made to obtain permission. While it may turn out that you cannot contact the property owner to obtain said permission, choosing to simply skip that part because the impulse to act is strong is not reasonable - it's an act of selfishness, ultimately.
 
  • #25
I believe that conservation and saving species for future generations to enjoy is of far greater importance than the desires of one person concerning their land. Should we let orangutans and certain nepenthes species go extinct so that palm oil producers can exploit land and profit from it?

If it's that important you should buy the land, individually or as a part of a conservation group. I wonder what your feelings would be if you were prevented from using your property in some way you wished because of the presence of an endangered species?
 
  • #26
Like most debates that get heated here, this one boils down to one issue. Whether or not others should be forced into acting the way we think they should. I doubt that many here understand the true nature of force.....
 
  • #27
So is it wrong of us to say not to trespass..?
 
  • #28
I wonder what your feelings would be if you were prevented from using your property in some way you wished because of the presence of an endangered species?

better yet - I hope someone identifies some very rare and endangered species on your property and decides not to ask you for some, choosing instead to just help themselves to the plants under cover of night, "to save it"!
 
  • #29
Someone might just slip in through your window because hey, they plants need saving right?
 
  • #30
Someone might just slip in through your window because hey, they plants need saving right?

That's a very good point!If it's ok to remove something from someone's yard, why not their house?
 
  • #31
Plants are supposed to be outside after all?
 
  • #32
Good point guys, I usually leave my back door open so swing by anytime!
 
  • #33
I truly can't imagine someone saying "No, you can't relocate the plants I'm about to destroy" unless they had some sort of delusional vendetta against carnivorous plants. I mean, it would be ridiculous, wouldn't it? As a matter of fact, if I were ever in a position to develop a large tract of land, I'd probably want to have it examined for plants worth saving and ask someone with the expertise to do so, to come collect them. Probably only because I'm conscious of the danger many CPs are in from habitat destruction.
 
  • #34
just ask, at the very worst they say no and just move on. At best they say yes have at it, or they may want a small fee at that point you just decide if these plants are really worth it... But stealing is stealing wether its from ones home or property I don't see a distinction...
 
  • #35
I truly can't imagine someone saying "No, you can't relocate the plants I'm about to destroy"

No? I can! I have no difficulty imagining some surly oaf shouting "Get off my land you Greenpeace hippy weirdo or I'll call the cops!"
 
  • #36
No? I can! I have no difficulty imagining some surly oaf shouting "Get off my land you Greenpeace hippy weirdo or I'll call the cops!"

Cutting your damned hair could prevent that!
 
  • #37
Interesting discussion, albeit a little hidden under a lot of bluster. I 100% agree with asking a landowner first, in every instance, though after that I think things potentially get murkier, depending perhaps on what plants are present, their ecological importance, and other questions even harder to answer or even ask in the first place. Yes, I am a landowner, and no, I don't like when anyone else does, or tells me to do, things with my land without my advance knowledge and informed consent. Some questions I think could help elucidate part of what's being discussed here:

--What ARE 'property rights'? What do they mean? Are they positive, negative, or combination rights (I'm defining here positive rights as rights TO do something, negative as being the ability to prevent others from doing something; other sensible definitions exist but this is what I'm asking about)?

--Where do property (or any other) rights come from? Does it matter? Do their sources potentially affect their boundaries and exercise?

--Where do property rights begin and end? Do I have a right to do something on my property that my neighbors view as a nuisance? Who gets to define what 'nuisance' is?

--Do the people of the US (or any smaller but included collectives like citizens of a state, town, corporation, etc.) as a whole have 'property rights' to any spaces? Designated common spaces? Public lands? When do, or should, the rights of trans-individual collectives (if you acknowledge such rights to exist) be allowed to interfere with or intrude on the rights of individuals?

--Will I get any serious, thoughtful, non-aggressive responses to these sincere questions, or am I just fanning the flames/feeding the trolls? :)

PS has anyone else read the Kelo v City of New London case, and what are your thoughts on it? What if the development was of, eg, a hospital the area needed, rather than the (IMO) boondoggle it ended up being?
 
Last edited:
  • #38
There is no diffinitive proof if sentient plant life, however,
There ARE a number of studies poiinting in that direction.

One in particular, there was a group of scientists hooking up electrographs and
All those sticky pads they use in hospitals for body readings and such, to plants.
The scientists thought about harming the plants, hit them, and so forth.

The readings came up similar each time, a pattern Was hidden in the reaction. Not all the same, but similar.
The one that surprised me the most is when the scientists thought about harming the plants,
The electrographs clearly showed activity from the plants. Ill see if i can finnd it. Either way,
He plants are probably concious, but just not in the sense that people think about it. They are living afterall
 
Last edited:
  • #39
Interesting discussion, albeit a little hidden under a lot of bluster. I 100% agree with asking a landowner first, in every instance, though after that I think things potentially get murkier, depending perhaps on what plants are present, their ecological importance, and other questions even harder to answer or even ask in the first place. Yes, I am a landowner, and no, I don't like when anyone else does, or tells me to do, things with my land without my advance knowledge and informed consent. Some questions I think could help elucidate part of what's being discussed here:

--What ARE 'property rights'? What do they mean? Are they positive, negative, or combination rights (I'm defining here positive rights as rights TO do something, negative as being the ability to prevent others from doing something; other sensible definitions exist but this is what I'm asking about)?

--Where do property (or any other) rights come from? Does it matter? Do their sources potentially affect their boundaries and exercise?

--Where do property rights begin and end? Do I have a right to do something on my property that my neighbors view as a nuisance? Who gets to define what 'nuisance' is?

--Do the people of the US (or any smaller but included collectives like citizens of a state, town, corporation, etc.) as a whole have 'property rights' to any spaces? Designated common spaces? Public lands? When do, or should, the rights of trans-individual collectives (if you acknowledge such rights to exist) be allowed to interfere with or intrude on the rights of individuals?

--Will I get any serious, thoughtful, non-aggressive responses to these sincere questions, or am I just fanning the flames/feeding the trolls? :)

PS has anyone else read the Kelo v City of New London case, and what are your thoughts on it? What if the development was of, eg, a hospital the area needed, rather than the (IMO) boondoggle it ended up being?

The nature of rights is inextricably intertwined with the nature of force. Stay tuned for an explanation of both.
 
  • #40
Whoa, this exploded fast. Thread closed until I can look through it, and then it will be opened again.
 
Back
Top