April 09, 2007
The Agony of Queen Elizabeth
Poor Elizabeth Edwards.
I'm quite certain that I, like Mrs. Edwards, wouldn't feel comfortable living with a neighbor who is quick to pull a firearm on trespassers. That is just one of many reasons why I wouldn't live anywhere near a contemporary of hers, Paul Hackett.
But the questionable (and perhaps illegal) use of a firearm by Edward's neighbor seems to be only part of her gripe against him.
Edwards seems far more concerned that Monty Johnson, a "rabid, rabid Republican," refuses to clean up his "slummy" property just to spite her lavish 28,000 square-foot mansion.
How terribly gauche of him.
It seems that it is Queen Elizabeth's opinion that nearby property owners have a duty to suitably improve the aesthetic appeal of the neighborhood now that she has graced them with her presence. That Johnson claims to be a working man with a limited income to spend on property improvements doesn’t seem a worthwhile excuse.
Perhaps the lack of proper deference by their neighbors is the reason that the other home for the Edwards family is a million-dollar beach house on private island, a gated community that won't allow blue collar riff raff like Monty Johnson to spoil the ocean views.
John and Elizabeth Edwards talk about two Americas. It's too bad they don't have enough room for working class people in either one of them.
Betcha Monty listens to Fox News too.
Posted by: Zhombre at April 9, 2007 02:26 PMIf the workers were on his property, it is probably legal for him to be carrying a gun when confronting them. Maybe not the wisest move, and certainly not what I'd do if they were properly uniformed and identifiable, but probably completely legal.
Posted by: old_daawg at April 9, 2007 02:44 PMIf Johnson's property was like that when the Edwards bought thier's, they have no room to complain.
Posted by: MikeM at April 9, 2007 04:47 PMAbsolutely great, Bob.
Sounds to me the Edwards moved-in and trashed a perfectly good neighborhood - it does happen, I've done it. Monty Johnson must be one pissed-off neighbor.
Posted by: Eg at April 9, 2007 04:54 PMI own a gun and I'm trained to use it. But I have to say that if I moved into a neighborhood with small children and found out my neighbor was confronting workers with a gun, I'd be a little wary of the dude, too. Maybe not as nancy as Ms. Edwards, but still.
As for Paul Hackett, what he did may be against the law, but I doubt if there's a jury in southwestern Ohio that would convict him. The men he held for the police rammed a truck into his [expletive] fence. Hackett is a public figure and has made enemies because of his politics so he couldn't be sure what sort of whack jobs were at the gate. He was defending his family according to this story. I say good for him.
Personally, I prefer a Remington 870, but that's a quibble.
Posted by: David Terrenoire at April 10, 2007 12:49 PM"If the workers were on his property, it is probably legal for him to be carrying a gun when confronting them. Maybe not the wisest move, and certainly not what I'd do if they were properly uniformed and identifiable, but probably completely legal."
Properly uniformed surveyors? Hmmm, I've been a surveyor for 26 yrs. and I've never worn a uniform. If they were decent folk, Queen Liz and 'The Hairdo' would have sought out their neighbor and exchanged phone numbers when they started building. Then they could have given him a call to let him know that a crew might need to access his property. THEN, the crew should have knocked on his door and let him know they were there. Common courtesy. Meeting tresspassing strangers on a rural property with a gun is normal and prudent.
Posted by: Tim H at April 11, 2007 07:21 PM
