[rob74]

Case in point: in Germany, there are occasionally "Durchgang verboten" ("passage forbidden") signs next to driveways leading to e.g. an inner courtyard. These are most of the time a sure sign that it's possible to take a shortcut through the courtyard to the other side of the block. Of course, this is a country where you can be reasonably sure of not getting shot for trespassing...

[devilbunny]

In the US, “NO THRU TRUCKS” is a dead giveaway that you are staring at a shortcut route. And as it isn’t “PRIVATE ROAD”, you are not trespassing.

If it’s not someone’s home, and you are not engaged in nefarious activity, you will not be shot for trespassing. You will be told to leave.

[sib]

PSA: Don't try this in rural Wyoming...

[devilbunny]

Even in cattle country, if you make no attempt to hide your presence, I would expect no trouble. I have pulled a gun on someone and had one pulled on me. It was fine both times. Just needed to be explained.

[StefanBatory]

... if you got to the point where gun was pulled on you, that was already a situation where it's so fine? I'll be honest, I don't understand how can you be so calm.

[devilbunny]

I live in a mostly rural state. Guns are common. Dealing with some person who doesn’t know you, doesn’t know what you want, and is an hour away from law enforcement support has to have some self-reliance. Hands up, explain why you are there, and you can be friends. High-visibility vests help, but you might ditch them.

[thechao]

I had a buddy who said the way you knew it was a good fishing spot was because you got pistol whipped by an AK-47 the last time you were there.

[happyopossum]

> where you can be reasonably sure of not getting shot for trespassing

How exactly does that make it OK to be disrespectful of other people's property and privacy?

[xp84]

Various legal systems have varying definitions of what is and is not a legal infringement on property rights.

For instance, in (some parts of?) the UK there's the Right to Roam, I believe, which grants the public limited rights to pass through certain private property (such as an open field). Obviously this doesn't extend to harming anything. The point is, passing through someone's private property without causing any damage or inconveniencing them is not automatically considered unethical.

[Sharlin]

For the record, freedom to roam in England and Wales is rather limited in scope; the quintessential right-to-roam countries are the Nordics (and to an extent Scotland, but it’s an honorary Nordic country anyway). For example, in Finland the customary rights extend beyond just hiking to activities like gathering wild berries and mushrooms.

[wahnfrieden]

Do you hate Hawaii’s protection of beach access even if it requires passage through private property? Legalized disrespect?

[voxic11]

I couldn't find anything to support the idea that Hawaii’s protection of beach access allows anyone to traverse private property except where a specific rights-of-way easement exists on that property. I don't think the gp would consider use of land via an easement to be disrespectful as the easement holder has rights to the land that must be respected as well.

[Sharlin]

The courtyards of apartment complexes/condos are usually considered either semi-public or semi-private spaces, and their status with regard to passing through is not clear-cut either legally or morally.