If these punk kids are as prone to threats and violence as you seem to believe, annoying them will only encourage them to retaliate more.
That is a good point, I know I can find the source of most high pitched sounds I hear as long as there isn’t multiple sources. Now here is the question, will they not care and just move to a different street, or will they walk to the device and break it? Id suggested putting the Mosquito in a very hard to reach area. Near nothing that is valuable.
Actually, I've had some success as a defense lawyer. I had a rape trial that I was particularly happy with because I believed the victim was lying and I saved my guy from spending twenty to life in prison.
So Joe, I have a case for you. I want you to represent me. My neighbor is using a machine that emits a noise that only people ages 25-32 can hear. We live right next to a public park and the noise extends out into the park. The noise is so annoying that I can no longer go to the park without severe aggravation. Do we have a case against my neighbor?
The first thing I'd want you to do is prove the existence and use of the machine.
I actually did have something somewhat similar to this. An older lady was sued for malicious prosecution because she continually called the cops on her neighbors complaining that her neighbors were playing loud music. She called so often the cops actually charged her with falsely reporting an incident. I had her evaluated by a psychiatrist. It turned out that she had really bad tinnitus but was in such deep denial about it that she was completely insane. Both the civil and criminal cases were dismissed because she was insane.
That's one appeal of the machine. I really don't think they will understand what's making the noise.
So it's ok to assault people if the source of the assault is undetectable?
So Joe, I have a case for you. I want you to represent me. My neighbor is using a machine that emits a noise that only people ages 25-32 can hear. We live right next to a public park and the noise extends out into the park. The noise is so annoying that I can no longer go to the park without severe aggravation. Do we have a case against my neighbor?
It looks like forty to sixty feet. I know, Jason, that's a really, really big imposition on the little darlings to saty forty feet away from my house. That's so, so terrible.
My neighbor told me in writing she had the machine. The investigating officer was 27 years old and heard the noise. When he knocked on the neighbor's door, he was given permission to search the premises for the origin of the noise and found the machine operating at full capacity. The woman identified the machine as hers and told the officer she was operating it to keep noisy 25-32-year-olds out of the park because she felt they were a threat to her safety and because they were making too much noise.
You sneaky Edmund-Bastard! So you feel it is okay to aggravate us, as long as we can't prove it was you? Teenager-hood (or in my case early twenties) is not the same as race (in that it is not permanent), however, like any of the other "protected classes" it is a state of being that is not voluntarily chosen. My problem with this device is that it punishes people based on age (over which they have no control) rather than behavior (which is the real root of the problem). If I were living next door to you, and I was a sweet, kind geek girl of tender years, your device would drive me up the wall and I, at least according to you, would have no manner in which to combat the noise. Perhaps it is not a physical assault by the legal definition, but it is an assault on the senses, profoundly obnoxious and indiscriminately (at least among the 0-25 set) annoying.
Actually, I've had some success as a defense lawyer. I had a rape trial that I was particularly happy with because I believed the victim was lying and I saved my guy from spending twenty to life in prison.
I know, Jason, that's a really, really big imposition on the little darlings to saty forty feet away from my house. That's so, so terrible.
If the distance from your door to the street is 30 feet and the city reserves an easement for a 10-foot public right-of-way, then the children have the right to be in a 20- to 40-foot area from your door. It doesn't really matter whether they're little darlings or serial rapists. They still have that right.
My neighbor told me in writing she had the machine. The investigating officer was 27 years old and heard the noise. When he knocked on the neighbor's door, he was given permission to search the premises for the origin of the noise and found the machine operating at full capacity. The woman identified the machine as hers and told the officer she was operating it to keep noisy 25-32-year-olds out of the park because she felt they were a threat to her safety and because they were making too much noise.
....
What is the range of the Mosquito?
It looks like forty to sixty feet.I know, Jason, that's a really, really big imposition on the little darlings to saty forty feet away from my house. That's so, so terrible.
What is the womens house in the middle of the playground? In the case your giving the women would be at fault here and should be prosecuted. But its not at all the case Joe presents.
I know, Jason, that's a really, really big imposition on the little darlings to saty forty feet away from my house. That's so, so terrible.
If the distance from your door to the street is 30 feet and the city reserves an easement for a 10-foot public right-of-way, then the children have the right to be in a 20- to 40-foot area from your door. It doesn't really matter whether they're little darlings or serial rapists. They still have that right.
Exactly the point I was going to make. Because you do not like somebody does mean it is suddenly ok to infringe upon their rights. Your machine is just as wrong as keeping a pet skunk in the front yard.
What is the womens house in the middle of the playground? In the case your giving the women would be at fault here and should be prosecuted. But its not at all the case Joe presents.
You're right, Jay. Jason is making a lot of self-serving, self-righteous assumptions. I'll bite Jason: Sure, I'll take your case. You've set it up so well for me! What's that? I've just proven how wrong I was? NO! Hoisted by my own petard! I never saw that coming!
And you're absolutely right! My house is next to a public easement! How do you know so much about my house?!!
Seriously, though. No one is going to be driven out of any park. Our front lawn is a little over thirty feet square. This machine might keep kids off the sidewalk in front of our house, but, mostly it will keep them off our lawn. Do I have the right to do that, Jason? You seem to favor their interests over mine, bigot that I am.
I know, Jason, that's a really, really big imposition on the little darlings to saty forty feet away from my house. That's so, so terrible.
If the distance from your door to the street is 30 feet and the city reserves an easement for a 10-foot public right-of-way, then the children have the right to be in a 20- to 40-foot area from your door. It doesn't really matter whether they're little darlings or serial rapists. They still have that right.
Exactly the point I was going to make. Because you do not like somebody does mean it is suddenly ok to infringe upon their rights. Your machine is just as wrong as keeping a pet skunk in the front yard.
…you both just dropped your moral arguments or the references to why the case occurred completely. This is a device being used to protect Joes rights that are upheld by the law due to the fact the police are unable or unwilling to do so. The device is no more wrong then punching someone in the face for trying to mug me. It’s not excessive force, it doesn’t cover an unreasonable area, the sound from the kids going on Joes property just as the sound from the device is going onto public property. As long as its used in response to the kids and not just kept on all day (just like its used at the store fronts to break up bands of kids) then why is it legally or morally wrong?
Because you do not like somebody does mean it is suddenly ok to infringe upon their rights. Your machine is just as wrong as keeping a pet skunk in the front yard.
You guys seems pretty concerned with rights. What about our right to quiet enjoyment of our house? What about our right to sleep at night? What about our right not to be threatened? What about my wife's right not to be scared? What about our right not to have our property damaged?
Oh, I see. OUR rights don't matter so much because we're not cool like the kids.
If you can limit the noise to keep it on your yard -- not the part that falls in the public right-of-way, of course -- you can have the machine. If you're broadcasting a nuisance noise that drives people away from the sidewalk or road, you should be forced to turn the machine off.
However, since the lawn is only 30 feet square and the broadcast range is 40 to 60 feet in radius, it would seem you would be broadcasting the noise into public. If the noise is enough to drive a person away, I would constitute that as a nuisance.
As for the easement, it's typical for municipal corporations to reserve 10 to 15 feet of public right-of-way along private property frontage. That allows officials to install sidewalks or add lanes to roadways as traffic necessitates. That's how I know so much about your house.
Really, Joe, you're just coming off as bitter now. Honestly, it sounds like your real problem is with lack of police enforcement. The Mosquito sounds a lot like vigilanteism.
Really, Joe, you're just coming off as bitter now. Honestly, it sounds like your real problem is with lack of police enforcement. The Mosquito sounds a lot like vigilanteism.
No, I'm not bitter at all. I think you might be feeling a bit of the bitter because you wanted to cast me into the role of an old bigot and it didn't quite work out the way you planned.
Why do I think you might be the bitter? The Mosquito = Punisher argument takes you well into the bitter range. This is not the same as this. Maybe I'll write a graphic novel titled Mosquito War Journal.
1. Joe, were you a kid? Didn't you play on the street at night? Unless they are actually doing damage to your property, then you are being an ass.
2. People, come on, comparing it to racism? That argument is so shallow, it's the same as saying "well, saying that you can't drink till you are 21 is the same as saying you can't drink because you are black"
3. I really don't think he is breaking the law.
4. If I were one of those kids and found out, or at least kinda figured it out, then I'd buy earplugs and loiter around your house to the limit of the law, making as much noise and ruckus as possible.
5. And a question, If I were to get into an accident nearby your house because of any distraction caused by said artifact, would they be able to sue yo?
You still didn't address my above point, though. As long as the range doesn't extend onto others or public property, I suppose I have no problem with it (it's like a childproof lock on your yard. Grumpy though you may be about teenagers, it's like putting a invisible annoying-fence up.). If the noise goes out onto the street, however, or into neighboring yards, how do you feel about that situation? What if I was your neighbor? In that case, I have done nothing wrong, but am still punished for my age.
Then again, maybe I just can't relate. Something like this (and the possessiveness over "lawn") is a distinctly suburban problem. Living in an apartment in NY I am used to listening to noise at night and locking my door.
Also, make sure it doesn't bother the darling poodle-dogs. They have very good ears. (^_^)
Honestly, it sounds like your real problem is with lack of police enforcement. The Mosquito sounds a lot like vigilanteism.
…Did everyone block me, what am I invisible? The Mosquito is just as vigilantism as
The device is no more wrong then punching someone in the face for trying to mug me.
which I just said!
and as stated before, the kids are, presumably, already breaking the law by causing noise disturbances that are not being dealt with. He has a right to defend his rights if the institutions are unable to/unwilling. Morally and legally.
You guys seems pretty concerned with rights. What about our right to quiet enjoyment of our house? What about our right to sleep at night? What about our right not to be threatened? What about my wife's right not to be scared? What about our right not to have our property damaged?
None of those are rights except for the right not to be threatened, and the right not to have your property damaged. If you are threatened, or your property is damaged, call the police. If they don't do anything, use your lawyery powers to get the police in trouble for not doing their jobs.
People have a right to be teenagers, they have a right to talk, and they have a right to stand on public property without being assaulted. If people exercising their rights scares you, we call that tough shit.
If the kids come onto your property and start vandalizing, go out there and beat the shit out of them, or call the police. If they're hanging out in the street having a good time, deal with it.
Just because someone is infringing on your rights doesn't suddenly mean it is ok to retaliate in kind. If the kids were vandalizing you, and you didn't retaliate, we would be giving you sympathy. Because you choose to retaliate against them, you are no better than they are, and that is why you are meeting so much opposition here. Because you are retaliating we see you in the same light you see the annoying kids. As soon as you start to fight back, you give up your victim status.
You guys seems pretty concerned with rights. What about our right to quiet enjoyment of our house? What about our right to sleep at night? What about our right not to be threatened? What about my wife's right not to be scared? What about our right not to have our property damaged?
None of those are rights except for the right not to be threatened, and the right not to have your property damaged.
If the kids come onto your property and start vandalizing, go out there and beat the shit out of them, or call the police. If they're hanging out in the street having a good time, deal with it.
Wouldn't beating them up be assaulting them? Wouldn't that be vigilantism? According to you people, I would even question my right to do that since the teens rights seems to trump every one of mine.
1. Joe, were you a kid? didn't you play on the street at night?, unless they are actually doing damage to your property, then you are being an ass.
Did you read where they smeared crap all over our door and threatened to hurt us?
People have a right to be teenagers, they have a right to talk, and they have a right to stand on public property without being assaulted. If people exercising their rights scares you, we call that tough shit.
If the kids come onto your property and start vandalizing, go out there and beat the shit out of them, or call the police. If they're hanging out in the street having a good time, deal with it.
If they were just talking and having a good time, there's be no problem. Believe me, if you heard them out there, you'd want to do something too.
You still didn't address my above point, though. As long as the range doesn't extend onto others or public property, I suppose I have no problem with it (it's like a childproof lock on your yard. Grumpy though you may be about teenagers, it's like putting a invisible annoying-fence up.). If the noise goes out onto the street, however, or into neighboring yards, how do you feel about that situation? What if I was your neighbor?
We have older neighbors on either side of us. Neither of them have children.
If the kids come onto your property and start vandalizing, go out there and beat the shit out of them . . . Because you choose to retaliate against them, you are no better than they are, and that is why you are meeting so much opposition here. Because you are retaliating we see you in the same light you see the annoying kids. As soon as you start to fight back, you give up your victim status.
So, I should beat them up or . . . but if I start to fight back I'm no good . . .
Beating them up is better than playing a sound that doesn't hurt them and simply makes them go away. Yeah, I can see that.
Yes. The punk kids cause noise that keeps us awake. We have asked them nicely to leave us alone. They won't. One time, we called the cops. We told the kids the cops were on their way, and they left. The next day we found dog crap smeared all over our front door. That night, the kids returned and were just as loud as ever.
These kids, these oppressed little darlings that Jason loves so much, have threatened to kill our dogs. They've threatened to burn our house down. They've threatened to hurt us. Carole is going to be alone in that house next weekend and she wants to use the machine to keep the little dears away. I don't see any problem with that at all.
Oh, geez. You must have added that part. Scott would agree that this is not just noisy punks (whom we all have to deal with) but people infringing upon your rights. This changes things a bit. From what you were saying I thought it was "keep the young'uns out of the neighborhood!" or something to that effect.
Wouldn't beating them up be assaulting them? Wouldn't that be vigilantism? According to you people, I would even question my right to do that since the teens rights seems to trump every one of mine.
Yeah, but if you do it to someone who is actively and presently engaged in threatening you or your property, we won't begrudge you for it. I can tolerate some amount of reactive vigilantism depending on the circumstances, but you are talking about pre-emptive vigilantism. That is not cool. There's a difference between beating someone up who is currently mugging you and beating someone up because they were standing in an alley that you know muggers like to hide in.
Did you read where they smeared crap all over our door and threatened to hurt us?
How do you know these are the exact same kids? What about the other kids around? What about older people who didn't ruin their hearing like you did? If they smeared crap on your door, that's one incident which you should have taken care of. Even with multiple past instances, you can't go around pre-emptively assaulting every kid in the neighborhood because a few harassed you in the past.
If they were just talking and having a good time, there's be no problem. Believe me, if you heard them out there, you'd want to do something too.
Why don't you go out and hang out with them? They could probably teach you a thing or two about having a good time.
Let me interrupt the delicious idealism for a moment...I happen to be bored at work.
Let me preface this by saying I am 23 and have great hearing, and this particular tone drives me crazy. However, I have never felt the need to go hang out in someone else's yard within the easement by the street. Just so you know where I'm coming from.
Some of you guys seem to have missed the point that Joe isn't concerned with ALL teenagers...just the ones that are being a nuisance. He's not discriminating against teenagers...he's discriminating against assholes. If they're trespassing with noise onto his property and they're doing it through all hours of the night, then THEY are being assholes. Are you a bigot if you treat someone who spits on you with the same disdain right back? Frankly, the kids that AREN'T being a nuisance probably aren't going to be in range of the device. Sure, they have a right to. And if they wanted to stand there and shut the hell up, then driving them away would be wrong. How likely do you think that is to be the case? It's NOT difficult to restrict your noisy activities to reasonable hours (say, 9 AM to 9 PM, as my city's ordinance dictates?). They are just disregarding courtesy and POSSIBLY law because they can get away with it.
In the case of a neighbor being bothered by it...it would be courteous to let your neighbors know ahead of time so that if they do have an issue they know where the noise originates. They can bring it to you and you can act accordingly. If it is going to extend into their property, they have the right to have a say in the matter. However, if you let 'em know the source of the noise and that you're willing to work out any problems, then they get no sympathy from me if they're just too lazy to let you know when they do have one.
Maybe it makes me a giant douche, but I say play hardball. If somebody is going to fuck with me because they can get away with breaking the law, I'm not going to pull my punches when it comes to exploiting the same. I WILL try to make sure that innocent bystanders aren't penalized by my actions, but I'm not going to be made miserable and take it lying down.
And for the record, police calls do not generally work for noise violations for several reasons:
1) The police often take so long to GET there that the noise keeps you up anyway 2) It may stop once the police get there, but it is easy enough for them to return to noise-making when the police leave. What are you gonna do, call the cops again? By the time they get back there in an hour, the kids may have disbursed. It doesn't MATTER because the noise is still a problem. 3) It doesn't stop the noisemakers from doing it the next night, or the next. If the kids are already being assholes, they won't care about a police complaint and they're likely to ignore the "Oh gee, I could get a ticket" situation that a more law-conscious person would care about.
Can you tell I have loud upstairs neighbors? And no...they're not punk kids. But they ARE assholes. And I have to complain and/or call the police on a regular basis. If I call the police, I am still generally up until 1 AM waiting for them to get there. I'm fairly familiar with trespass law and have the AMAZING ability to look up our noise ordinances on the internet. However, what I find more effective is a certain lack of fear and abundance of rage. I use those things against them because I CAN and it WORKS, much more than my phone call to the police ever did. Sure, threatening people in certain ways might be illegal...guess what? I don't feel bad about doing it if the people I'm threatening are doing something (also illegal) that hurts me.
If Joe were willing to be a Martyr and suffer for absolute idealist morals, then maybe most of the arguments here would be valid. As it is, the only ones I find valid are the innocent bystander problems, which could be mitigated by communication.
Okay, people, you've heard our closing arguments. What saith the jury of our peers?
You're both crazy.
Either way, I think Hungryjoe should just use the machine to keep teenagers of his lawn. However, the device should not be reaching all the way across the street just because it can. As Scott said, if they are on public property and they make some noise, sorry but you'll have to deal with that. Personally I'd get a camera instead of this device for it costs more, causes unnecessary annoyance for some people and proofs nothing if those teenagers go berserk because of the noise. You shouldn't be playing judge yourself.
Also, Hungryjoe, you seem to think that those teenagers are too stupid to know where the noise comes from, however it's a very simple task to just follow ones senses. We have two ears, that way we can locate sources of sounds.
I actually didn't read the crap part. But if you really think they are going to burn your house, or kill your dogs, then if they do find out what is happening, wouldn't that piss them even more?
And, I will, say, if it comes to property damage, I'd really setup a camera on the porch and catch them doing something, call the cops, have them arrested. And if they actually killed one of my dogs, its "say hello to my little friend" next time they even put a foot on my property.
But then again, violence begets violence and it always ends badly for all.
Apreche, given the arguments and given what Joe said is true, you’ve now stated that no matter the noise violation Joe has no right to stop it? Is that the case? If that’s not the case please state what level of noise should be allowed before it is considered an infringement on others rights.(im not talking decibels or anything here just a general idea) What amount of noise is necessary to deem it allowable, in your eyes, to do something about it beyond phoning the police, which Nuri just pointed out, probably will result in nothing.
Also, Hungryjoe, you seem to think that those teenagers are too stupid to know where the noise comes from, however it's a very simple task to just follow ones senses. We have two ears, that way we can locate sources of sounds.
I'm not saying that all teenagers are stupid. I'm saying these teenagers are stupid. Believe me, I know these kids. I've talked to these kids. Trust me. They are very stupid. That's part of the reason they're hanging around until after midnight on the street and on our lawn. Oh, yeah - I guess it's their right to hang out on our lawn at midnight.
Apreche, given the arguments and given what Joe said is true, you’ve now stated that no matter the noise violation Joe has no right to stop it?
Of course not. I am no longer in my 20s. Therefore I am teh suxxor. Those kids are bright, shining, happy examples of how to have a good time. They are teh win. Their rights trump mine every time and in every way.
Comments
I actually did have something somewhat similar to this. An older lady was sued for malicious prosecution because she continually called the cops on her neighbors complaining that her neighbors were playing loud music. She called so often the cops actually charged her with falsely reporting an incident. I had her evaluated by a psychiatrist. It turned out that she had really bad tinnitus but was in such deep denial about it that she was completely insane. Both the civil and criminal cases were dismissed because she was insane. It's not assault.
And you're absolutely right! My house is next to a public easement! How do you know so much about my house?!!
Seriously, though. No one is going to be driven out of any park. Our front lawn is a little over thirty feet square. This machine might keep kids off the sidewalk in front of our house, but, mostly it will keep them off our lawn. Do I have the right to do that, Jason? You seem to favor their interests over mine, bigot that I am.
Oh, I see. OUR rights don't matter so much because we're not cool like the kids.
However, since the lawn is only 30 feet square and the broadcast range is 40 to 60 feet in radius, it would seem you would be broadcasting the noise into public. If the noise is enough to drive a person away, I would constitute that as a nuisance.
As for the easement, it's typical for municipal corporations to reserve 10 to 15 feet of public right-of-way along private property frontage. That allows officials to install sidewalks or add lanes to roadways as traffic necessitates. That's how I know so much about your house.
Really, Joe, you're just coming off as bitter now. Honestly, it sounds like your real problem is with lack of police enforcement. The Mosquito sounds a lot like vigilanteism.
Why do I think you might be the bitter? The Mosquito = Punisher argument takes you well into the bitter range. This is not the same as this. Maybe I'll write a graphic novel titled Mosquito War Journal.
1. Joe, were you a kid? Didn't you play on the street at night? Unless they are actually doing damage to your property, then you are being an ass.
2. People, come on, comparing it to racism? That argument is so shallow, it's the same as saying "well, saying that you can't drink till you are 21 is the same as saying you can't drink because you are black"
3. I really don't think he is breaking the law.
4. If I were one of those kids and found out, or at least kinda figured it out, then I'd buy earplugs and loiter around your house to the limit of the law, making as much noise and ruckus as possible.
5. And a question, If I were to get into an accident nearby your house because of any distraction caused by said artifact, would they be able to sue yo?
Then again, maybe I just can't relate. Something like this (and the possessiveness over "lawn") is a distinctly suburban problem. Living in an apartment in NY I am used to listening to noise at night and locking my door.
Also, make sure it doesn't bother the darling poodle-dogs. They have very good ears. (^_^)
and as stated before, the kids are, presumably, already breaking the law by causing noise disturbances that are not being dealt with. He has a right to defend his rights if the institutions are unable to/unwilling. Morally and legally.
People have a right to be teenagers, they have a right to talk, and they have a right to stand on public property without being assaulted. If people exercising their rights scares you, we call that tough shit.
If the kids come onto your property and start vandalizing, go out there and beat the shit out of them, or call the police. If they're hanging out in the street having a good time, deal with it.
Just because someone is infringing on your rights doesn't suddenly mean it is ok to retaliate in kind. If the kids were vandalizing you, and you didn't retaliate, we would be giving you sympathy. Because you choose to retaliate against them, you are no better than they are, and that is why you are meeting so much opposition here. Because you are retaliating we see you in the same light you see the annoying kids. As soon as you start to fight back, you give up your victim status.
Beating them up is better than playing a sound that doesn't hurt them and simply makes them go away. Yeah, I can see that.
Give us an update if that device works. I'm totally with you on this. Personally, I would have a paintball gun sniping at those aholes.
Let me preface this by saying I am 23 and have great hearing, and this particular tone drives me crazy. However, I have never felt the need to go hang out in someone else's yard within the easement by the street. Just so you know where I'm coming from.
Some of you guys seem to have missed the point that Joe isn't concerned with ALL teenagers...just the ones that are being a nuisance. He's not discriminating against teenagers...he's discriminating against assholes. If they're trespassing with noise onto his property and they're doing it through all hours of the night, then THEY are being assholes. Are you a bigot if you treat someone who spits on you with the same disdain right back? Frankly, the kids that AREN'T being a nuisance probably aren't going to be in range of the device. Sure, they have a right to. And if they wanted to stand there and shut the hell up, then driving them away would be wrong. How likely do you think that is to be the case? It's NOT difficult to restrict your noisy activities to reasonable hours (say, 9 AM to 9 PM, as my city's ordinance dictates?). They are just disregarding courtesy and POSSIBLY law because they can get away with it.
In the case of a neighbor being bothered by it...it would be courteous to let your neighbors know ahead of time so that if they do have an issue they know where the noise originates. They can bring it to you and you can act accordingly. If it is going to extend into their property, they have the right to have a say in the matter. However, if you let 'em know the source of the noise and that you're willing to work out any problems, then they get no sympathy from me if they're just too lazy to let you know when they do have one.
Maybe it makes me a giant douche, but I say play hardball. If somebody is going to fuck with me because they can get away with breaking the law, I'm not going to pull my punches when it comes to exploiting the same. I WILL try to make sure that innocent bystanders aren't penalized by my actions, but I'm not going to be made miserable and take it lying down.
And for the record, police calls do not generally work for noise violations for several reasons:
1) The police often take so long to GET there that the noise keeps you up anyway
2) It may stop once the police get there, but it is easy enough for them to return to noise-making when the police leave. What are you gonna do, call the cops again? By the time they get back there in an hour, the kids may have disbursed. It doesn't MATTER because the noise is still a problem.
3) It doesn't stop the noisemakers from doing it the next night, or the next. If the kids are already being assholes, they won't care about a police complaint and they're likely to ignore the "Oh gee, I could get a ticket" situation that a more law-conscious person would care about.
Can you tell I have loud upstairs neighbors? And no...they're not punk kids. But they ARE assholes. And I have to complain and/or call the police on a regular basis. If I call the police, I am still generally up until 1 AM waiting for them to get there. I'm fairly familiar with trespass law and have the AMAZING ability to look up our noise ordinances on the internet. However, what I find more effective is a certain lack of fear and abundance of rage. I use those things against them because I CAN and it WORKS, much more than my phone call to the police ever did. Sure, threatening people in certain ways might be illegal...guess what? I don't feel bad about doing it if the people I'm threatening are doing something (also illegal) that hurts me.
If Joe were willing to be a Martyr and suffer for absolute idealist morals, then maybe most of the arguments here would be valid. As it is, the only ones I find valid are the innocent bystander problems, which could be mitigated by communication.
Either way, I think Hungryjoe should just use the machine to keep teenagers of his lawn. However, the device should not be reaching all the way across the street just because it can. As Scott said, if they are on public property and they make some noise, sorry but you'll have to deal with that. Personally I'd get a camera instead of this device for it costs more, causes unnecessary annoyance for some people and proofs nothing if those teenagers go berserk because of the noise. You shouldn't be playing judge yourself.
Also, Hungryjoe, you seem to think that those teenagers are too stupid to know where the noise comes from, however it's a very simple task to just follow ones senses. We have two ears, that way we can locate sources of sounds.
QFT!
And, I will, say, if it comes to property damage, I'd really setup a camera on the porch and catch them doing something, call the cops, have them arrested. And if they actually killed one of my dogs, its "say hello to my little friend" next time they even put a foot on my property.
But then again, violence begets violence and it always ends badly for all.