From my cold, dead hands.

GreenPinga got me thinking, once again, of the unusual nature of garbage in our culture.

I've written before about the sometimes puzzling attitude that businesses display towards their garbage. Long story short, it seems like most businesses would rather destroy or deface merchandise headed for the landfill so that no enterprising scavengers can get their hands on it. Perhaps for economic reasons, perhaps because they can't stand the idea of someone else having a free lunch, who knows.

As an aside, dumpsters are beginning to show some of the effects of the economic slowdown. I can't remember the last time I had a nice substantial find, probably because as purchasing decreases, so do returns. I'm not discounting the effect that this downturn might be having on the number of divers, either.

Anyhow, Pinga's article relates somewhat to the other question I get asked all the time when I accidentally let slip my "hobby."

Is it legal?

Occasionally, an individual will have such a visceral reaction to the idea of someone rummaging around in their garbage that they simply can't believe such an activity is legal.

That's right. How dare you dig through my trash. How is it legal for someone to pick through my garbage, my waste?

Isn't that interesting? Why feel territorial over trash? Setting aside (valid) concerns about identity theft, what could compel a person to viciously defend against the recovery of a chipped cup, a broken vacuum, or a box full of coat hangers from their garbage? What insanity is it that compels them to defend garbage until it's taken to the dump? It's trash. By throwing it out, you have demonstrated that you no longer care what happens to it.

Well, that's one school of thought.

So socially, it seems that a paranoid attachment to one's own waste is tolerated, if not accepted. But what about the aforementioned legal status of the garbage? Do the former owners of that chipped mug have the right to invoke the protection of the state? Will Johnny Law stop me from adding your broken vacuum to my collection?

In the case of dumpsters, it's an unambiguous yes. Dumpsters are considered private property, and rummaging through them without the consent of the owner is trespassing.

But what about personal garbage? In 1988, the Supreme Court agreed with my view of garbage, stating that:

It is common knowledge that plastic garbage bags left on or at the side of a public street are readily accessible to animals, children, scavengers, snoops and other members of the public.

Think of it like WiFi. Don't broadcast a non-secured signal if you don't want people leeching your bandwidth.

One of the dissenting justices, however, wrote:

A search of trash, like a search of the bedroom, can relate intimate details about sexual practices, health, and personal hygiene, as well as reading and recreational habits.

There's a huge difference between the bedroom and the street corner. I, for one, would not expect privacy were I to stand at the curb and brush my teeth, much less if I engaged in "sexual practices." I wouldn't expect my personal papers and receipts to remain untouched out there, either.

Of course, the justices were ruling on an issue far more weighty than whether or not someone like me should be fined for picking Scalia's used rulings out of the bins behind the Supreme Court.

As any fan of television crime dramas knows, police don't need a warrant to rummage through your trash. That ruling is why.

That makes me much more sympathetic to the other side of this argument (nobody wants to be arrested because a cop found an empty dime bag in the trash) but I still have to go with the court on this one. If I were doing something illegal, you had better believe that I would dispose of my incriminating trash in much the same way I rid myself of any trash I don't want prying eyes to see - with fire.

Or, by burying it out in the quarry.

Recently, there's been a disagreement about this ruling. Quoth an Oregon appeals judge:

Garbage cans, like bicycles or cars, are commonly left on or near the street by individuals and, even if those individuals do not take the precaution of securing such items with locks, we would not infer from their unlocked state that the individuals who placed them there intended to abandon them.

Now, I think that's a little ridiculous. By placing garbage at the curb, you are signaling, quite clearly, your intent to abandon all the objects within. You are saying, in effect, "please remove these items from my sight. I wish to have them crushed, incinerated, or buried deep underground." People put couches, televisions, and other large, expensive items on the curb to encourage people to remove them, so why is the trash bag sitting next it so different?

Additionally, how far is your ownership over the trash supposed to extend? Can the police seize it once it reaches the landfill? Can they grab it once it enters the state-run garbage vehicle? Or is the real problem here just that the cops are getting a free lunch from the trash, just like the rest of the scavengers?

You know, it's a cliche, but it's true. One person's trash is someone else's treasure. So this is my message to anyone that's ever thought about releasing the hounds onto some poor graduate student rummaging through your trash can:

Chill out.

You shouldn't be throwing away any personally identifying papers anyway, and it's pretty likely that the only objects of interest in the can are small appliances and recyclables. Don't deprive them of their treasures.

Besides, it's only garbage, right?