Saturday, May 2, 2009

Gas blast victims want to save their past

From the Daily News:

Stanley and Vita Barth lived in their Floral Park home for 57 years until a gas explosion next door turned their house into a hazard on Friday.

Now, the Barths are in a race against time to get back inside their charred home to salvage what they can - including photo albums and 200-year-old Jewish artifacts - before it's demolished.

The city had previously refused to let them in, saying the house is structurally unsafe and should be razed immediately.

However, the city has consented to meet with the family today and coordinate sending representatives - or the Barths - in to retrieve the family's belongings.


ew-3 said...

"The city had previously refused to let them in, saying the house is structurally unsafe and should be razed immediately."

There was a time when a man's home was his; and he had say over it. Now it seems the government is in charge of everything.

If he wants to go in then let him. It's his property; it's his posessions; it's his risk to take.

Anonymous said...

The family should be allowed in, after taking some safety precautions,
so that they can remove their possessions that are dear to them before NYC
"representatives" (FDNY, DOB, etc.) rifles through them and some get...ahem..."lost"!

ew-3 said...

why should cops, firemend, DOB etc even be allowed into the structure? It's his property?
One of the pillars of the US is the right to PRIVATE proterty and its' protection from the government.

Anonymous said...

The Building on your Head party supports this excellent example of proactive work by Consolidated Edison.

Thanks to the forward-thinking men of Con Ed, a beautiful new lot for redevelopment has been created.

Keep the vermin out of their former hovel. This property belongs to their betters.

Vote Bloomberg and Monserrate on the Ceiling on Your Head Party Line.
Remember, a Vote for Ceiling on Your Head is a Vote for property rights!

Jeff said...

When Con Ed doesn't evacuate a family from their home fast enough, they are "negligent." When the city won't let someone in their house because it isn't safe, they're trampling on the "right to private property." You can't have it both ways.

Anonymous said...

Sure you can. It's called an informed choice. If you've been warned, you can't hold the city or Con Ed liable. When you are not warned, it's on them.

ew-3 said...

Jeff - it might be having it both ways if the same person had said it.
But you raise an interesting point. Does Con Ed have the right or ability to force people evacuate people from their own homes? Thought a court order might be needed to force people from their own homes.
If the homeowner is warned then it's his call whether to vacate or not.

"God save me from all the do-gooders"

PizzaBagel said...

Hopefully they are camped right outside their home, each one sleeping with one eye open. Looters don't give a hoot about yellow "caution" tape. Remember what happened to the tenants of the building hit by the collapsed crane last year? Invariably in these situations, prized possessions mysteriously "disappear."