The rights of gated communities

Miscellaneous General
1

Related to the thread about the barking dog. Does a gated community have a right to repossess a dog if the dog barks and it is against their policies? I would say no because they do not own the property, they are just a voluntary government imposing their rule on people who do not want to be ruled by their rules. I would think they would have to own the property and rent it out to have that kind of jurisdiction.

Even if someone moves to the neighborhood (purchases the property) then later decides not to abide by the rules, that should be alright given that enforcing those rules would be no different than a government enforcing rules on a non-compliant individual.

2

I’m still unsure how this new posting gadgets work, so pardon me for simplying using qoutation marks.

“…they are just a voluntary government imposing their rule on people who do not want to be ruled by their rules.”

How could they be voluntary governments if they rule over people who do not want to be ruled? It seems a bit odd to be truthful. I assume that this is merely a mishap in typing, but, if it isn’t, could you help me by clarifying how you reconcile the existence of a “voluntary” government under the given circumstance.

“Even if someone moves to the neighborhood (purchases the property) then later decides not to abide by the rules, that should be alright given that enforcing those rules would be no different than a government enforcing rules on a non-compliant individual.”

Before going on, I want to establish the following for the purpose of ensuring that we do not get lose mid-conversation. What I’ve listed below I infer from your post, but for the sakes of avoiding any mental traps I want to lay it all out. I hope you can humor me in this.

(a) Ludwig, if you will, purchased a house from Hayek legitimately.

(b) Hayek in turn acquired the house through legitimate means, i.e. he either homesteaded it (by building it) or buying it from Rothbard.

(c) B is true for any previous owners before Hayek.

(d) Either

------ 1. Hayek joined the Ruritania Gated Community via contract, and Ludwig in turn agreed to said contract as a requirement for acquiring the house from Hayek

or

------ 2. Ludwig joined the Ruritania Gated Community via contract himself.

Taking these into account, the gated community does have the power to enforce those issues within the jurisdiction of the signed contract. Ludwig has at all times the option to remove himself from Ruritania, but I imagine that the contract would include penalties to be paid if someone cancels it. This could be as minute as a small payment of three silver pieces. He too could refuse to pay this penalty, but his reputation amongst the local community would plummet for his inability to uphold contracts. Not to mention the possibility of the Ruritania Gated Community attempting to get the penalty through the use of coercion. Assuming of course that the penalty is substantial enough for it to be in their interested to exert resources to collect it from Ludwig.

The difference between this scenario and Ruritania being a State is that Ludwig neever agreed to the contract, i.e. the constitution, and so is under no obligation to follow the State of Ruritania’s rulings. In the former example he did enter the contract vonluntarily and so agreed on giving Ruritania influence on his actions in regard to keeping his pet dog Keynes quiet. In the latter case Ruritania, being an aggresive party, has no legitimate say on what Ludwig does with old Keynes. With the possible exception if the dog’s barking somehow violates the homesteading rights of the Ruritania members.

3

If a person signs a contract when entering the neighborhood, he obligates himself to abide by the rules in the contract.

So don’t let your dog bark too loudly, and think carefully before agreeing to do what you don’t actually want to do.

4

would a gated community matter if a dog began barking loudly??

5

Not necessarily. Gated or not, contractual or not, it would have to be dealt with eventually.

6

What if a blind man wanted to live there and needs a dog?

7

Those are well trained and not a problem.

8

Why does the situation have to be dealt with coercive force? To my understanding, it would gosh darn nice for the dog to be silenced but where is the line drawn? Kids can be practicing the saxophone. Nudity can be revolting. Or maybe you don’t like the eyesore of the neighbor’s dog-house made of beer cans. Or clothes drying on a clothes line.

The gated community has no power unless they own the land and are renting the land out. I use the word voluntary because one would have an option to opt-in or opt-out. Opting out alone should not require one to move. Else, how would that be different than the government of USA? Don’t like it, move?

There are many other ways the dog can be silenced, like asking the neighbor nicely. Or losing out on community perks, like garbage collection if they provide that (i’d imagine if done privately, the gated community can get a bulk discount). Or you could deal with the owner and pay him a sum of money to keep the dog quiet.