THE LEGAL BASIS OF THE RIGHT TO QUIET

“…the CIA suspended self-described “enhanced interrogation techniques.” “Enhanced interrogation techniques,” according to an unnamed CIA official, are… “light and noise bombardment,” “sleep deprivation…”
Mark Semmel, Assistant Professor Department of Criminal Justice Sacred Heart University.

Citizen’s arrest
Definition: an arrest made not by a law officer but by any citizen who derives the authority to arrest from the fact of being a citizen Under common law, a citizen may make an arrest for any felony actually committed, or for a breach of the peace committed in his or her presence.

Also see the American bar Association site for more information,
abanet.org
This, from Google’s Legal dictionary,
“The two types of nuisance are private nuisance and public nuisance. A private nuisance is a civil wrong; it is the unreasonable, unwarranted, or unlawful use of one’s property in a manner that substantially interferes with the enjoyment or use of another individual’s property, without an actual Trespass or physical invasion to the land. A public nuisance is a criminal wrong; it is an act or omission that obstructs, damages, or inconveniences the rights of the community.
Public Nuisance
The term public nuisance covers a wide variety of minor crimes that threaten the health, morals, safety, comfort, convenience, or welfare of a community. Violators may be punished by a criminal sentence, a fine, or both. A defendant may also be required to remove a nuisance or to pay the costs of removal. … A public nuisance interferes with the public as a class, not merely one person or a group of citizens. No civil remedy exists for a private citizen harmed by a public nuisance, even if his or her harm was greater than the harm suffered by others; a criminal prosecution is the exclusive remedy…Some nuisances can be both public and private in certain circumstances where the public nuisance substantially interferes with the use of an individual’s adjoining land….
Private Nuisance
A private nuisance is an interference with a person’s enjoyment and use of his land. The law recognizes that landowners, or those in rightful possession of land, have the right to the unimpaired condition of the property and to reasonable comfort and convenience in its occupation.
Examples of private nuisances abound. Nuisances that interfere with the physical condition of the land include vibration or blasting that damages a house; destruction of crops; raising of a water table; or the pollution of soil, a stream, or an underground water supply. Examples of nuisances interfering with the comfort, convenience, or health of an occupant are foul odors, noxious gases, smoke, dust, loud noises, excessive light, or high temperatures. Moreover, a nuisance may also disturb an occupant’s mental tranquility, such as a neighbor who keeps a vicious dog, even though an injury is only threatened and has not actually occurred.
An attractive nuisance is a danger likely to lure children onto a person’s land. For example, an individual who has a pool on his property has a legal obligation to take reasonable precautions, such as erecting a fence, to prevent foreseeable injury to children.
Trespass is sometimes confused with nuisance, but the two are distinct. A trespass action protects against an invasion of one’s right to exclusive possession of land. If a landowner drops a tree across her neighbor’s boundary line she has committed a trespass; if her dog barks all night keeping the neighbor awake, she may be liable for nuisance.
Legal Responsibility
A private nuisance is a tort, that is, a civil wrong. To determine accountability for an alleged nuisance, a court will examine three factors: the defendant’s fault, whether there has been a substantial interference with the plaintiff’s interest, and the reasonableness of the defendant’s conduct.
Fault Fault means that the defendant intentionally, negligently, or recklessly interfered with the plaintiff’s use and enjoyment of the land or that the defendant continued her conduct after learning of actual harm or substantial risk of future harm to the plaintiff’s interest. For example, a defendant who continues to spray chemicals into the air after learning that they are blowing onto the plaintiff’s land is deemed to be intending that result. Where it is alleged that a defendant has violated a statute, proving the elements of the statute will establish fault.
Substantial Interference The law is not intended to remedy trifles or redress petty annoyances. To establish liability under a nuisance theory, interference with the plaintiff’s interest must be substantial. Determining substantial interference in cases where the physical condition of the property is affected will often be fairly straightforward. More challenging are those cases predicated on personal inconvenience, discomfort, or annoyance. To determine whether an interference is substantial, courts apply the standard of an ordinary member of the community with normal sensitivity and temperament. A plaintiff cannot, by putting his or her land to an unusually sensitive use, make a nuisance out of the defendant’s conduct that would otherwise be relatively harmless.
Reasonableness of Defendant’s Conduct If the interference with the plaintiff’s interest is substantial, a determination must then be made that it is unreasonable for the plaintiff to bear it or to bear it without compensation. This is a Balancing process weighing the respective interests of both parties. The law recognizes that the activities of others must be accommodated to a certain extent, particularly in matters of industry, commerce, or trade. The nature and gravity of the harm is balanced against the burden of preventing the harm and the usefulness of the conduct.
The following are factors to be considered:
Extent and duration of the disturbance;
Nature of the harm;
Social value of the plaintiff’s use of his or her property or other interest;
Burden to the plaintiff in preventing the harm;
Value of the defendant’s conduct, in general and to the particular community;
Motivation of the defendant;
Feasibility of the defendant’s mitigating or preventing the harm;
Locality and suitability of the uses of the land by both parties.
Zoning boards use these factors to enact restrictions of property uses in specific locations. In this way, zoning laws work to prohibit public nuisances and to maintain the quality of a neighborhood.
Defenses
In an attempt to escape liability, a defendant may argue that legislation (such as zoning laws or licenses) authorizes a particular activity. Legislative authority will not excuse a defendant from liability if the conduct is unreasonable.
A defendant may not escape liability by arguing that others are also contributing to the harm; damages will be apportioned according to a defendant’s share of the blame. Moreover, a defendant is liable even where his or her actions without the actions of others would not have constituted a nuisance.
Defendants sometimes argue that a plaintiff “came to a nuisance” by moving onto land next to an already operating source of interference. A new owner is entitled to the reasonable use and enjoyment of his or her land the same as anyone else, but the argument may be considered in determining the reasonableness of the defendant’s conduct. It may also have an impact in determining damages because the purchase price may have reflected the existence of the nuisance.
Remedies
Redress for nuisance is commonly monetary damages. An Injunction or abatement may also be proper under certain circumstances. An injunction orders a defendant to stop, remove, restrain, or restrict a nuisance or abandon plans for a threatened nuisance. In public nuisance cases, a fine or sentence may be imposed, in addition to abatement or injunctive relief.
Injunction is a drastic remedy, used only when damage or the threat of damage is irreparable and not satisfactorily compensable only by monetary damages. The court examines the economic hardships to the parties and the interest of the public in allowing the continuation of the enterprise.
A Self-Help remedy, abatement by the plaintiff, is available under limited circumstances. This privilege must be exercised within a reasonable time after learning of the nuisance and usually requires notice to the defendant and the defendant’s failure to act. Reasonable force may be used to employ the abatement, and a plaintiff may be liable for unreasonable or unnecessary damages. For example, dead tree limbs extending dangerously over a neighbor’s house may be removed by the neighbor in danger, after notifying the offending landowner of the nuisance. In cases where an immediate danger to health, property, or life exists, no notification is necessary.

Land-Use Control; Tort Law.
Sources=Sources 8388608;weal()
West’s Encyclopedia of American Law, edition 2. Copyright 2008 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
nuisance n. the unreasonable, unwarranted and/or unlawful use of property, which causes inconvenience or damage to others, either to individuals and/or to the general public. Nuisances can include noxious smells, noise…. If a nuisance interferes with another person’s quiet or peaceful or pleasant use of his/her property, it may be the basis for a lawsuit for damages and/or an injunction ordering the person or entity causing the nuisance to desist (stop) or limit the activity.
A Law Dictionary, Adapted to the Constitution and Laws of the United States. By John Bouvier. Published 1856.How to thank TFD for its existence? Tell a friend about us, add a link to this page, add the site to iGoogle, or visit webmaster’s page for free fun content.
SocialNetworks(‘Link to this page:’)

Link to this page:


UPDATE
The mayor tells me that he is on the job. He and the po-po have spoken sternly to the hooligans. Problem is that they have not been able to collect evidence, therefore no arrests have been made.
My representative says it ain’t his jurisdiction. Thhat leaves the Huffpo, the Washpo, the Right to Quiet Organisation, The Ggeorgetown Center for Social Justice, and the Noise Pollution Clearing House.

Yo, Homeland Security! Any interest in catching a bunch of noisy jocks? You can use them to torture enemy aliens. I will sell my house cheaply, if you need a torture center, the jocks can shatter the decibel meter, enemies will cave, I will get money. It is all good, no?

A town is only as good as its citizens. Restore the social contract!


ALL THE NEWS

The world has gone crackers. Spain, the country that gave us the Inquisition–along with France, Portugal and Italy–is threatening to prosecute officials from the Bush administration for the allegedly authorising torture at Guantanamo. While I do condone the use of torture under any circumstances, it seems to me that Spain should tend to its own paella. We are dealing with Pinochet here. We talking about people who were appointed by a democratically elected body–so we were led to believe, anyway. This is in-house work and it needs to be dealt with in house. I vote to ask the Spaniards’ help whenever they solve their problems with the Basques. Until then, stick to flamenco dancing, guys.
European self-righteousness is not the only indication that the world has gone crackers–I mean, what can one do but laugh when the British threaten to seize Israelis who allegedly took part in war crimes? They will do that as soon as they abolish racism and anti-Semitism in their own little island, give back the Falklands, find an Indian replacement for Queen Elizabeth and a Guianese replacement for Prince Phillip. look, I don’t care much for netspeak, but, muwahahah is the only appropriate response to this sudden–or is it?–Euro passion to neaten up other folks’ houses. What is troubling about it is that there is no question bad things are happening all ver, though not much seems to be done about the janjaweed in Darfur of the Chinese killers of Tibetan monks. There are houses that need to be neatened up and ours is one of them. But the day I would agree that European Union should be in charge of solving our domestic problems is when hell freezes over.
While seething about the silliness of puffed up European officials it is good to find something positive to do. Making crackers from scratch is my choice. mark Bittman, of The New York Times provides a very easy recipe for utterly delicious Cheese crackers. He recommends grated Parmesan cheese. I think an herbed cheese would work as well. I intend to experiment with cream cheese and Israeli olive oil instead of butter for the dough and rosemary for the topping. The photo above shows Bittman’s crackers topped with za’atar. If only global politics were that simple and good.