kpk@gitpyr.UUCP (02/24/86)
I live in a high-density residential neighborhood. This makes me a target of much "un-mail" such as sales brochures, sample newspapers, local phone books, etc. The items are frequently rubber-banded to the side of my mailbox (to avoid conflicts with the P.O.) or are placed in plastic bags and thrown in my front yard (and every other front yard for miles). Since my neighborhood is primarily rental property, the residents are unenthusiastic about cleaning their yards, and the trash mounts. My question is this: How can this un-mail be effectively controlled? How is this practice different from simple littering in the eyes of the law? (What I really would like to see is an ordinance which requires un-mailers to collect any debris not removed by residents in 24 hrs.)
ron@hpfcla.UUCP (02/26/86)
I guess I don't see how un-mail is different from littering...
If you can declare that Radio Shack flyers are obscene material and
the Post Office has to stop delivery of such obscene material,
you surely should be able to make a case for littering.....
Or.... you might save the stuff and dump the large pile on the front lawn
of the outfit that dumped it on your lawn.......
Ron Miller
"Work on something long enough and eventually you will have two !"
Service Engineering (Hardware Support)
Hewlett-Packard Co.
Ft. Collins Systems Div. [ Home of the HP 9000 Series 200,300 & 500 ]
Ft. Collins, Colorado
303-226-3800
at: {ihnp4}hpfcla!ronwerner@ut-ngp.UUCP (Werner Uhrig) (02/26/86)
RE: > How can this un-mail be effectively > controlled? How is this practice different from simple > littering in the eyes of the law? Ah yes, one of my favorite problems, which seem to have no easy answer. What bothers me is that the US PO should be able to tell me who may or may not use my mail-box. Well, ok, there are a few good arguments for that set-up (don't anyone waste any time to follow-up or mail me with those), but everyone in this country seems to think that has to be that way - it doesn't and works well diffently in other countries. One solution to avoid wet newspapers and clutter in my yard was a second mail-box *NOT UNDER P.O. RESTRICTIONS* - now the only problem is how to get those folks to use them!! The newspaperboy, of course, would have to spend a lot more time to put the paper into my box, rather than just throwing it in the yard .... and I sympathize with the *little man* at the end of the distribution channel. I guess, maybe in the suburbs with "here a house, there another" density, I'll never convince them, short of a city-ordinance *with teeth and bite*; but in high-density housing like condos or townhouses with central mail-boxes, maybe a second set of "non-mail"-boxes would work. ---Werner
kanner@tymix.UUCP (Herb Kanner) (02/26/86)
In article <1465@gitpyr.UUCP> kpk@gitpyr.UUCP writes: >I live in a high-density residential neighborhood. This >makes me a target of much "un-mail" such as sales >brochures, sample newspapers, local phone books, etc. > >The items are frequently rubber-banded to the side of my >mailbox (to avoid conflicts with the P.O.) or are placed >in plastic bags and thrown in my front yard (and every other >front yard for miles). > >My question is this: How can this un-mail be effectively >controlled? How is this practice different from simple >littering in the eyes of the law? > And what can one do about the jokers who walk onto the company parking lot and place their leaflets under the windshield wipers of every car on the lot? -- Herb Kanner McDonnell Douglas (TYMNET) ...!hplabs!oliveb!tymix!kanner
root@pathfinder.UUCP (Operator) (03/03/86)
> RE: > > How can this un-mail be effectively > > controlled? How is this practice different from simple > > littering in the eyes of the law? > > Ah yes, one of my favorite problems, which seem to have no easy answer. > What bothers me is that the US PO should be able to tell me who may or may > not use my mail-box. Well, ok, there are a few good arguments for that > set-up (don't anyone waste any time to follow-up or mail me with those), > but everyone in this country seems to think that has to be that way - it > doesn't and works well diffently in other countries. > > One solution to avoid wet newspapers and clutter in my yard was a second > mail-box *NOT UNDER P.O. RESTRICTIONS* - now the only problem is how to get > those folks to use them!! The newspaperboy, of course, would have to spend > a lot more time to put the paper into my box, rather than just throwing it in > the yard .... and I sympathize with the *little man* at the end of the > distribution channel. I guess, maybe in the suburbs with "here a house, there > another" density, I'll never convince them, short of a city-ordinance *with > teeth and bite*; but in high-density housing like condos or townhouses > with central mail-boxes, maybe a second set of "non-mail"-boxes would work. > > ---Werner The "un-mail box" is available at all of your local stores (it goes by the name of "trash can") and should be installed under your mail box. You should also relabel it to read "occupant and resident". This "un-mail" box is then emptied once a week and provides enough paper to heat your house for the following week during the coldest winter (if you live in really cold climates, you may want to get on a few more junk mail lists). This is the ideal solution - the senders are happy, they have reached you, and you are happy 'cause your heating is now free (the only problem is you don't dare go on vacation!). If only I could figure out an answering machine for my mailbox! Mikey
obrien@randvax.UUCP (Michael O'Brien) (03/05/86)
Here at Rand, the guards routinely go out and snaffle such pamphleteers, and make them go around and take all the stuff off again. The alternative is arrest for trespass, so we almost never come out and find stuff on our cars. It's rather nice. It also tends to keep the car thieves away, though lately business in that department has been brisk.