Skip to comments.
Why private property owners may be the biggest obstacle to Trump's wall (Build the wall)
My Statesman ^
| Posted: 12:35 p.m. Friday, March 31, 2017
| By Sean Collins Walsh - American-Statesman Staff
Posted on 04/10/2017 6:21:26 AM PDT by cba123
(this is pretty good)
Please click to the link, for the article.
Includes a video.
(Excerpt) Read more at mystatesman.com ...
TOPICS: Business/Economy
KEYWORDS: clickbait; eminentdomain; globalism; thewall
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-73 last
To: Soul of the South
61
posted on
04/10/2017 8:21:25 AM PDT
by
Enchante
(Libtards are enemies of true civilization!)
To: hoosierham
We don't need to look like East Germany. Just make the wall like the Vatican and call it the largest work of art ever created!
62
posted on
04/10/2017 8:26:45 AM PDT
by
Enchante
(Libtards are enemies of true civilization!)
To: cba123
There should be 200 feet of easement, from the actual border into the property owner’s land. Just like owning land along a US Highway. An easement allows the government to keep taxing you for the property you can’t build on.
63
posted on
04/10/2017 8:39:00 AM PDT
by
Dixie Yooper
(Ephesians 6:11)
To: cba123
Taking land for a private oil pipeline was supported; taking land for a wall will not be a problem.
64
posted on
04/10/2017 8:51:55 AM PDT
by
Theoria
(I should never have surrendered. I should have fought until I was the last man alive)
To: hoosierham
Remember.
This “East Germany” comparison is done often, when trying to criticize a real border.
The East Germany wall, was designed to KEEP PEOPLE IN. It was a prison wall.
The Trump was is the complete opposite.
But you knew that.
65
posted on
04/10/2017 9:20:35 AM PDT
by
cba123
( Toi la nguoi My. Toi bay gio o Viet Nam.)
To: hoosierham
“I really am not comfortable with my nation looking like East Germany ———”
—
Oh for heaven’s sake-——two COMPLETELY different things.
.
66
posted on
04/10/2017 9:24:07 AM PDT
by
Mears
To: cba123
Build the wall north of their property.
67
posted on
04/10/2017 9:35:28 AM PDT
by
TwoSue
To: cba123
The property owner should be reminded that their open section of the fence will be a funnel for illegal crossings, ie the trash, dead bodies, and CBP running over their land.
68
posted on
04/10/2017 9:50:54 AM PDT
by
PhiloBedo
(You gotta roll with the punches, and get with what's real.)
To: cba123
If they can't get the wall funded, there is your 2 weeks a year of National Guard duty. Or the feds could fund some compensation for longer assignments. Good practice for detecting infiltrators if they have to go to Iraq/Syria.
A lot cheaper than building and unguarded wall 50 miles from nowhere that the drug cartel would go over/under/thru like they do along the Calif. border.
You did see where the cartel built a door/gate into the wall big enough to drive thru, but looked just like any other section and not noticed by the Border Patrol driving by on their rounds.
To: cba123
The concept is called eminent domain. Hopefully with just compensation.
5.56mm
70
posted on
04/10/2017 10:00:36 AM PDT
by
M Kehoe
To: TexasTransplant
Well that is good news, we just need to stock more and bigger alligators in the Rio Grand River. The big question is how to younger them to like the taste of criminals and cartel members?
71
posted on
04/10/2017 11:42:28 AM PDT
by
WMarshal
(President Trump, a president keeping his promises to the American people. It feels like winning.)
To: muleskinner
I highly doubt that the narcos have the ability to tunnel under the Rio Grande River due to the water seepage and, even if they could, sensors could detect the digging. If we set the wall back from the river they would have a hard time starting a tunnel between the river and the wall.
Besides, it is entirely feasible to insert explosive mines underground that would only kill the tunnellers.
All open-borders Freepers are pathetic.
72
posted on
04/10/2017 11:48:23 AM PDT
by
WMarshal
(President Trump, a president keeping his promises to the American people. It feels like winning.)
To: Soul of the South
Kelo most certainly DOES apply. Though the case was in regards of Ms. Kelo and her neighbors losing their homes to a government who was going to hand their property over to a private developer, the precedent was powerful. Ask any lawyer who works in this area of law-- I have. Kelo was a bulldozer of eminent domain. Any government, down the the smallest hamlet and all the way up to the Trump administration, can now take properly for literally any reason. Why do you think states have been passing anti-Kelo statutes? They KNOW the case made defending against an eminent domain taking almost impossible.
73
posted on
04/10/2017 3:26:01 PM PDT
by
backwoods-engineer
(Trump won; I celebrated; I'm good. Let's get on with the civil war now.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-73 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson