P&T need to do a Bullshit show on city ordinances. Edmond, Oklahoma has a crapload of them. I would love to see P&T's rip these morons apart.

For example:

Edmond code 8.12.080 Displaying insulting signs. It shall be unlawful and an offense for any person, firm or corporation within the city, to display any sign, emblem, badge, flag or device, which in its common acceptance is insulting, profane or abusive to the citizens of the city, and which is calculated, or where the natural consequence is, to cause a breach of the peace or an assault. (1954 Code § 254).

Apparently Edmond feels like it is not a part of the United States and therefore the US Constitution doesn't apply.

8.08.100 Illicit sexual intercourse defined. Illicit sexual intercourse is sexual intercourse with any person other than one's lawful husband or wife. (1954 Code § 232).

Lets go arrest every high school student and homosexual. In a State that doesn't allow gay marriage, this law clearly was created to discriminate against homosexual citizens.

Grow up.

Every jurisdiction has archaic ordinances that aren't enforced anymore, they aren't directed at you. Or maybe you do have a guilty continence?

I'm pretty sure you mean "conscience." Not "continence."

...although "continence" would make sense in context.
("continence": Noun: 1. able to control movements of bladder and bowel; 2. exercising self-restraint, esp. sexually.")

Just because they have been on the books doesn't mean that they are right. I don't claim that they are directed at me, they are directed at society in general. The only reason to keep them on the books is to reserve the right to use them in the future. If it is archaic, take 2 seconds out of the next council meeting and repeal it, just as they have other ordinances. The greatest wrongs against society have been conducted under the authority of bullshit laws and people that are willing to blindly follow them.

I have been to more public meetings than any human being should be allowed to attend.

Some local ordinances are not so archaic and they're not always about trying to regulate "morality." I've seen local elected officials struggling to define the word "family" not because they're trying to be restrictive about the definition, but because they want to be more inclusive. However, the only reason they have to define the word in the first place is because their zoning regulations required it in order to designate residential zones.

One borough council spent a lot of time debating how many animals their residents could own and of what variety. They didn't want chickens or pigs in town. But why should they have the right to restrict what kind of non-dangerous pets you can keep in the first place?

Another borough council considered banning open drink containers, so, people wouldn't be able to walk down the street drinking any sort of beverage. And then they got into a angry argument about whether you could have an open beverage while driving through town. The police chief said he wasn't going to enforce that sort of law.

And what's an acceptable height for your grass? Seems like a simple question, but what about ornamental grass? Or people with big yards who let a portion of their properties grow as a meadow habitat? Are golden rod or Queen Anne's lace wildflowers or weeds?

You can't put windmills on many properties because local ordinances have height restrictions or have simply deemed them ugly, so forget about generating your own electricity that way.

Should local governments have a right to regulate personal aesthetics, morality, who you live with, how many people constitute a family, how tall your fence is, what kind of pets you own, what you do inside your own home?

These laws aren't directed at anyone, they're just old and forgotten. Here are some odd ones from Illinois. Methinks you're a bit paranoid.

http://cbs2chicago.com/slideshows/odd.illinois.laws.20.792779.html

Here's a brand-spanking-new anti-harassment law in a small town in Michigan. It has a sentence in it that prohibits repeated "annoying" behavior.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/Story?id=6519251&page=1

I can get pretty annoying sometimes, but I hardly think I should be fined $100 for it.

Lots of these laws are old and forgotten, most never should have been on the books to begin with. But just because they are forgotten doesn't mean that they can't be enforced. You don't care about these laws until you are the one with a 300 dollar ticket for being annoying, for having 3 dogs on your own property, or for not putting a license plate on your bicycle. Having ridiculous laws allows ridiculous people to choose to enforce them at any given time. There are laws still on the books that prevent interracial marriage, discriminate against blacks and women etc. But at any given time some moron can choose to enforce any of these laws. If you want to duck your head in the sand and pretend that everything is ok, then do it. But don't start crying when you realize that your personal freedoms and liberties are slowly being eroded away.

I agree with Vee here. Just because they're old and practically never enforced doesn't mean they have any place in a modern society. Having them still on the books means that they CAN be used by assholes to make other, innocent people's lives hell.