It's worth noting her home is currently valued on zillow for 2.2 million dollars. Increasing 49k in value over the last 30 days. And yet, she complains.

I know of no rule that states easements can only be applied to critical infrastructure. While I have never practiced in property law, so I admit my knowledge is limited, the classic example of easements in law school is a footpath. You have every right to disagree with the concept of easements, but the fact is it was written into her deed, she either knew, or should have know about this before she purchased the property. Essentially she went into this with her eyes open and now is trying to change the rules for everyone else.

Not a bad point, my reply would be that until and unless the court sides with her, there was no need for rockport to take any such action as there were already provisions in her deed allowing public use. So basically, why would they waste money buying property the public ALREADY had a right to use, money that could be used on other park projects.

Edit: clarity

Amen, I will see you there!!!

She even looks like a villain in the photo. If she doesn't like the easement she should move to a place she does like instead of trying to ruin 146 year old public path for everyone else.

The people who would make these kinds of rules are the same people who wanted to be hall monitor in elementary school.

Just so you know, I don't think there are any coffee shops on main street in North Attleboro (where most foot traffic is), but there is a bakery that serves coffee that has a pretty good local following (Whisk and Paddle, their cinnamon buns are LEGIT). Depending on your business model you may find yourself in competition with them.

While I can't speak to the specific offenders in these cases, I can say that statistically murder victims of all races are overwhelmingly killed by members of their own race. So blacks tend to kill blacks, whites tend to kill whites, etc. Of course these are general trends, not hard and fast rules but I see no evidence to suggest that Boston is some sort of outlier.

https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-factcheck-data-racial-murder/fact-check-false-data-on-u-s-racial-murder-rates-idUSKCN24I2A9

From the article:

According to the FBI’s Expanded Homicide data from 2018, the most recent report of this kind Reuters was able to find ( here ), 80.7% of the murders of white people were committed by white offenders (2,677 of a total of 3,315) while 15.5% of the murders of white people were committed by Black offenders (514).

The social media post also alleges white offenders committed 2% of the murders of Black victims. According to the FBI’s data, 8% of the reported murders of Black people were committed by white offenders (234 of a total of 2,925) and 88.9% by Black offenders (2,600).

FBI data from 2017 also follows this trend: 80.2% of white victims were killed by white offenders, 8.9% of Black victims were killed by whites, 88.5% of Black victims were killed by Blacks, and 16.1% of whites were killed by Blacks ( here ).

The .4 percent is actually the higher of the two numbers I found, the other number of 30-39 was .2 percent, but considering that I'm at the top of that range I chose to take the higher of the two numbers, which is still miniscule.

As far as other people: yes, adults get to make their own decisions for their own health. That's not a radical concept but a normal part of free society, but you people seem to have a deep disdain of the ideas of personal, assessment and choice. If you are really concerned about COVID, wear an N95 everywhere you go for the rest of time, it's really no concern of mine if you do, what is a concern is when you try to force your cowardice on other people. If you choose not to, it's an assumption of the risk, the same way that I assume the risk of heart disease when I have a greasy burger or I assume the risk of an accident when I get behind the wheel.

Honestly you sound like a hypochondriac who is trying to mask their hypochondria with fake virtue.

Edit: it's also worth noting that the .4 percent death rate is since the begining of the pandemic so is not entirely accounting for vaccinated people, as there were many casualties before the vaccines, so that rate is likely high for vaccinated people considering the CDC says it reduces you death chances by approximately 90 percent.

While it's true millions have died globally (in a world of almost 8 billion people), that's an appeal to emotion without context, because if you put it in context it's not concerning and I am not "lucky" as the last person was saying.

Context: I'm a fit 39 year old man. For my age range, total us deaths are 19,224. Out of around 45 million people in said age range. This gives a death rate around .4 percent. Further that's not factoring in vaccinations which the CDC estimates reduces omicron hospitalization risk by a FURTHER 90 percent.

There is no such thing as a risk free life, if a disease with a .4 percent chance of death is "dangerous", you might want to reexamine your tolerance for risk.

Edit: clarity

It's not really luck. The chances of hospitalization were always low even with middle aged people, but if you are triple vaccinated your odds of hospitalization are EXCEPTIONALLY low. As such it's misleading to call me "lucky" for not suffering a bad outcome.

A segment of the population is always going to die from diseases that are broadly innocuous, that's just the human condition, but that doesn't mean the diseases are broadly dangerous to a vaccinated population.

I've got COVID right now, I'm a vaccinated, middle aged guy and honestly it's not that big of a deal. It felt like the flu for 2 days (take Aleve for the fever) and it's been a cold since.

It's not worth the mask hysteria.

Pure curiosity; was his advice about the army correct in your case?