Posted on 06/23/2005 8:06:55 PM PDT by Blood of Tyrants
Everybody knows about the shot that was heard around the world as the birthing pains of this once great nation. Today, sadly, we may have heard it's death knell.
It did not come with violence or shots fired. It came with the virtual elimination of personal property rights.
Our founding fathers knew how important the ownership of property was and sought to protect the right to be secure in the ownership of property to the extent that they enshrined the guarantee that property would not be taken for public use without due process and just compensation.
For over 200 years it was understood that "public use" meant that the ownership would transfer from the private owner to the local, state, or federal government for things such as military bases, roads, schools, prisons, etc. Now, the meaning of "public use" has been altered by 5 people who were never elected to office and in all reality, are completely unaccountable to anyone, to mean privately owned condos, shopping centers, and business parks under the thin guise that those enterprises would contribute more tax money to the coffers, thus increasing the "public good"
Justice Stevens, writing for the majority said that judges should give city councils and state legislatures "broad latitude in determining what public needs justify the use of the takings power," he added. To make sure that he wasn't misunderstood he added, "The city has carefully formulated a development plan that it believes will provide appreciable benefits to the community, including, but not limited to, new jobs and increased tax revenue," and just destroyed any pretence that you have any recourse whatsoever if the government or county decides that they want your property for any reason at all.
Sandra Day O'Connor writing a scathing dissent correctly said that now rich and politically land developers and businesses could basically take your land away from you with the help from the local government. Yes, you could fight it in court, but it is now fruitless as you are guaranteed to lose in a fixed fight.
For years the people have for the most party sat quietly as the government stole more and more freedoms from us. Prior to 1914 and fool could take any drug he or she wanted and kill themselves, thus increasing the quality of the gene pool for the rest of us. Before 1918, the government had no claim to your wages and could not tax them. Prior to 1934, Sears sold machine guns from their catalog and nobody thought anything about it. Prior to the 1950's preachers could freely endorse or denigrate any political candidate they wanted, just as had been done since the very first town government was formed in this country almost 350 years prior. Since 1986 it has been illegal to manufacture and sell a machine gun to a civilian despite the fact that in the past several decades the number of people int he US murdered by a person with a machine gun has been exactly one, and the person doing the shooting was a police officer using a gun issued to the police department.
But hope is not lost however, ownership of real property does a funny thing to people. It is a spot that a person can say, "This land is MINE!" with a dedication and a fierceness that is somewhat scary. Religion and politics and abortion and the WOT all take a back seat when two neighbors are faced with having their property stolen by the government.
Maybe that bell sounding isn't the death knell but the alarm.
Maybe this will awake the sheeple to realize that the socialist have gone too far.
Maybe the bell is just signalling round two of the Revolutionary War.
Will this war be fought with bullets or ballots?
We shall see.
There's no Constitutional right to the land, or the house. Ownership is a privilege granted upon payment of fees, taxes and property maintenance according to extensive volumes of ridiculous, bureaucratic codes. It's rented communal property. Nuke reclamation sites and porn shops are additionally regulated and licenced.
Furthermore, there's no Constitutional right to pick your nose, or wipe your butt either. State health and safety codes can regulate that and under the Commerce Clause the feds can toss in their 2 cents too, since you'd be effecting interstate commerce in "med" services.
The Constitution doesn't grant rights. It's the blueprint for a govm't that should protect them.
"The Constitution doesn't grant rights. It's the blueprint for a govm't that should protect them"
Says something sad about our world that even the folks here, at FR, don't seem to know that.
great post, BoT.
Tree of Liberty bump.
With respect to your reply to post 218 in this thread: Then it is incumbent upon you to do something and encourage others that you know to do something! Let's get it done people while we still have the chance.
Ravenstar
I also have less problem with that than with the taking of our land to give to a corporation.
I have an equally large problem with the idea that just because I own land I am presumed to be unable or unwilling to allow nature to coexist there. This merely states that some "expert" will do a better job of taking care of land that has been in the family's care for over 300 years.
Had that land not been cared for in the first place, there would be no endangered whatsywhoosit to protect.
Many freedoms were lost before this.
What exactly are we going to get done?
At least the Feds are not making it a hate crime for the property owner not to take their offer.
bttt
I noticed the MSM is reporting on the ruling. It appears even they (news media) are a little shocked by it. While they are reporting what happened, I noticed they wouldn't name the "justices" who voted FOR this outrage. They seem to be down playing the fact that they are all liberals, while the Conservatives dissented in the strongest possible terms.
For any democRAT voters lurking- let's make sure you understand what has happened: You work hard, save your money, buy a house. You put money into that house, and you want to leave that house to your children.
Guess what? That house that you worked so hard to get, is only yours until the govt. along side a big corporation, decides they want your property. They can take YOUR house away from you.
Oh, they have to offer money, but does that equal what you put into your house? Does it make up for the fact that you wanted to leave your home to your kids?(Some of the houses involved in the case had been in the owner's families since the early 1800's- several generations of family members were born in them). This really means that you don't own that propery at all.
THE UNELECTED SUPREME HIGH OVERLORDS OF THE USSA HAVE DISPENSED WITH YOUR PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS.
WAKE UP AMERICA! WAKE UP!
This is the most serious threat to the United States that has occured in my life time. I don't know what to do. I'm beyond outrage. Maybe we should send tea bags to the court and congress? This is on a par with the Boston Tea party, or it should be. What is the congress going to do about this? This is what leads to Civil War and states seceeding from the Union.
I was surprised at one conservative talk show host who, while acknowleging the seriousness of the issue, suggested that the solution was to " elect City Council members who won't take your property away". I was thinking What? This goes way beyond electing city council.
In fact, if this abomination is allowed to stand, there won't be a point to having elections or voting. The Judicial branch of government will officially establish itself as an unelected dictatorship. It's that serious.
I am fed up with republican's cowering over judicial nominations, and being to lazy to take thE democrats on. i.e. not making the rats filibuster for real, or using the constitutional ammendment, or whatever you have to.
Note to all Republican elected officials-
YOU WERE NOT SENT TO WASHINGTON TO "GET ALONG" WITH THE DEMACRATS.
YOU WERE SENT THERE TO STOP THEM. YOU WERE SENT THERE TO PREVENT THIER SOCIALIST AGENDA FROM BEING IMPLEMENTED.
I noticed the MSM is reporting on the ruling. It appears even they (news media) are a little shocked by it. While they are reporting what happened, I noticed they wouldn't name the "justices" who voted FOR this outrage. They seem to be down playing the fact that they are all liberals, while the Conservatives dissented in the strongest possible terms.
For any democRAT voters lurking- let's make sure you understand what has happened: You work hard, save your money, buy a house. You put money into that house, and you want to leave that house to your children.
Guess what? That house that you worked so hard to get, is only yours until the govt. along side a big corporation, decides they want your property. They can take YOUR house away from you.
Oh, they have to offer money, but does that equal what you put into your house? Does it make up for the fact that you wanted to leave your home to your kids?(Some of the houses involved in the case had been in the owner's families since the early 1800's- several generations of family members were born in them). This really means that you don't own that propery at all.
THE UNELECTED SUPREME HIGH OVERLORDS OF THE USSA HAVE DISPENSED WITH YOUR PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS.
WAKE UP AMERICA! WAKE UP!
This is the most serious threat to the United States that has occured in my life time. I don't know what to do. I'm beyond outrage. Maybe we should send tea bags to the court and congress? This is on a par with the Boston Tea party, or it should be. What is the congress going to do about this? This is what leads to Civil War and states seceeding from the Union.
I was surprised at one conservative talk show host who, while acknowleging the seriousness of the issue, suggested that the solution was to " elect City Council members who won't take your property away". I was thinking What? This goes way beyond electing city council.
In fact, if this abomination is allowed to stand, there won't be a point to having elections or voting. The Judicial branch of government will officially establish itself as an unelected dictatorship. It's that serious.
I am fed up with republican's cowering over judicial nominations, and being to lazy to take thE democrats on. i.e. not making the rats filibuster for real, or using the constitutional ammendment, or whatever you have to.
Note to all Republican elected officials-
YOU WERE NOT SENT TO WASHINGTON TO "GET ALONG" WITH THE DEMACRATS.
YOU WERE SENT THERE TO STOP THEM. YOU WERE SENT THERE TO PREVENT THIER SOCIALIST AGENDA FROM BEING IMPLEMENTED.
It is up to each of us to take action to overturn this obviously unconstitutional decision. If you take your support from a Party that is not doing the will of the people, such as sealing the borders, and there are many other examples so it isn't one issue, then it has a consequence to them! Without a consequence they will keep marching happily along ignoring the people. The Senate Democrats and Republicans have been playing with this distraction about nominees for how long??? Like 4 YEARS now?! It is meant to keep us distracted while the activism continues until the Government has taken away all the rights given to us by our creator. Do something or resign yourself to the government seizing your property when ever THEY feel like it.
If this occurred, see post 218 this thread, over a few month period with even a few million across the country it would shake up the status quo and change the course of this nation which is straight to international socialism from what I can see from here unless something is done to change that direction.
Ravenstar
Well said!
People greatly underestimate the ability of the American citizen to do what is required (taking up of arms). Any such action taken by citizens WOULD NOT BE QUELLED QUICKLY by the government, you give the beaurocrats too much credit and do not credit the members of the military enough. No service member that I have ever known would ever fire on an American citizen for any reason. How many millions of Americans are military veterans? To be successful, citizens would have to use low-intensity warfare over a long period of years. And the Citizens would be successful. Casualties would be horrendous. Who doubts the Constitution is worth that price?
Taking for private use isn't even mentioned, so apparently it's left up to the states and localities, which is the gist of of the Supreme Court opinion.
I think the point is that the court allowed a taking for private use. That's what used to be un-constitutional
Excellent point. A fair price is what the seller decides, not the buyer. What the Supremes just did was say the buyer determines the fair market value of property. If the seller doesn't agree the buyer can have the governement intervene to force the sale. Compare it to ebay. Image if ebay allowed buyers to set the market value of items and could intervene to force a sale if a seller didn't meet a buyer's price. What a scam.
I GUESS if could be even worse. The Supremes could have stated the just compensation could be required only if the land is taken for private use, and that if its taken for public use, no compensation is required.
You know, their tricky wordplay again.
I hate to argue against thios, but technically the Supremes didn't do away with these rights ... the legislatures and city councils that took private land for other private use did away with our rights ... The Supreme Court just didn't do its job and slap down these actions of the perversion of eminent domain.
So, there's a LOT of blame on this issue.
Another right trampled under for the sake of socialism. Sad things is that most Americans don't even realize what has just transpired, or if they do, don't even care.
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.