You might be more willing if you see it as a kind of reciprocity, your part in a scheme which allows you to hike or otherwise relax on land other than your own.

And even if you never set foot on other's people property, I think it's fair of the government, which ultimately enforces land owners' property rights, to say that they won't support you excluding other people from natural land.

▲

dyauspitr 4 days ago | parent [-]

Honestly in the US it has never been a problem since there is so much land. The laws are also unambiguous here. If I’m on someone’s property I can get shot but on public land we can shoot each other :)

▲

dvdkon 4 days ago | parent [-]

I have to admit that Americans seem to have a different perspective on land use, with the sheer scale of the country and a willingness to drive for hours to get places. If someone told me that I have to travel from Prague to Germany to go hiking or even just let my kids play in a forest, I'd be pretty mad.

▲

dyauspitr 3 days ago | parent [-]

In rural areas many Americans can go on a hike or play in the forest in their backyard.

	▲	dvdkon 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Most Americans live in urban areas, though. I have to say that according to this PDF I found [1], a lot more US families do own forested land, but it's still a minority. [1]: https://web.archive.org/web/20250420022718/http://www.family...