Thanks for the ping!!!
Posted on 09/12/2006 1:56:42 AM PDT by goldstategop
The city of Cooper City, Fla., has given itself the power to seize residents' personal property in times of emergency.
Officials deemed this new law necessary because of what is expected to be a busy hurricane season.
But don't worry, they say. The law would never be enforced unless there were no other options – presumably meaning that the city could not persuade private citizens to permit the government to borrow, rent or buy their equipment.
Think of it as eminent domain for generators, power tools, trucks and anything else local czars determine they need.
Not surprisingly, this plan has met with some resistance.
''These people, with their mindset, should be arrested and put in jail for even attempting to do something like this,'' said Tim Wilder, a mobile mechanic who owns emergency tools and equipment.
While Commissioner Elliot Kleiman acknowledged that such a law is subject to abuse, he explained, ''but it's not going to happen here.''
Wouldn't that make you feel better?
You see, tyrants and dictators always believe they will be benevolent – that they would do the right thing in all circumstances. Few people run for office or seek power believing they cannot be trusted. They almost all trust themselves.
However, if we could trust people in power, we wouldn't need the safeguards we have in America to keep them in check, to limit their authority, to restrict their actions, to maintain the rule of law rather than the rule of men.
What's happening in Cooper City is not unusual. Unfortunately it is happening all over the country. It's happening in local governments. It's happening n state governments. And it's happening at the federal level.
That's why this is worth talking about – worth thinking about, worth praying about and worth fighting with all of our American resolve for independence and liberty and individual freedom.
It's easy for government to respect civil rights in the best of times. The challenge is for government to respect them in the worst of times. And few rights are as foundational as property rights.
That's why I agree with Mr. Wilder. That's the theory behind our rights. But what about the pragmatic implications of seizure laws like this? Are they really effective? Or are they, in fact, counterproductive to saving lives and property in times of emergency?
Think about this.
The best emergency scenario is that people themselves are prepared. Even the most well-equipped, efficient, resourceful and powerful government in the world can't take care of everyone's needs in an emergency.
Does a law like the one approved in Cooper City encourage people to prepare for emergencies? Or does it discourage them?
Most of the adamant objections to the law come from people who are prepared – people who make preparedness a way of life, people who even make a living investing in and operating emergency equipment.
Are these not the very people we need during times of emergency? Isn't it better to encourage people to do just what these folks are doing? Isn't it better for all concerned if we don't discourage people from making those investments and maintaining those businesses? Would any city or state want to drive these people out of their jurisdictions by raising fears of confiscation of their property and livelihoods?
Furthermore, why would other private citizens knowingly invest their own dollars and cents in preparing when city officials are giving them the impression that their neighbor's equipment will be seized by government to rescue them?
It's just one more example of a law that makes people more dependent on government – never a good idea in times of emergency.
You want to hear the real kicker? The Cooper City law, as with so many others like it, would allow officials to prohibit possession of firearms in times of emergency and close any public gathering place.
There go the First and Second Amendments as well as the Third, Fourth and Fifth in one fell swoop.
Is there any point in owning anything any more? Or, maybe a better question would be: Does anyone, besides government, really own anything any more?
This is getting very close to martial law...what powers local or central government have under the Constitution to declare martial law, and under what conditions, I don't know.
But this law is unAmerican, and probably not constitutional.
I do know that rights are typically curtailed during the aftermath of hurricanes. For instance, after Wilma, the mayor of Dade Country declared a county wide curfew for several nights, even though serious damage was fairly isolated. After Andrew, the curfew lasted weeks, but only in the areas that were heavily impacted.
'Course, there are always great justifications and noble causes whenever governments make power grabs. Usually it's the Left doing this kind of thing, using all sorts of causes as levers, the "war on poverty, the "environment," you name it. But conservatives are susceptible as well. In any case, we need underlying guiding principles to avoid this way of thinking. Like the Constitution, I guess.
I'm sorry your Honor but I was in fear for my life.
Nanny State PING!!!!!!!!!!
Thanks for the ping!!!
Help me here. Which cases are you citing?
The fact that a government can take any item they think they need in a crises bothers me greatly!
Consider the contractor that has his heavy equipment seized and cannot work. He and his employees are harmed.
The farmer whose tractor is seized. Heck, even horses could be seized to use in a crises. A stretch? I don't know.
Please disregard my Post 47. I thought it said LEGAL. Mea culpa.
Was this directed at me?
You watch CNN in Germany don't you?
No, and it's sometimes necessary in genuine, large scale emergencies. Problem is that the government has demonstrated absolutely no restraint so often when dealing with private property rights. Or just about any other personal freedoms that inconvenience the bureaucrats.
As far as guns are concerned. If you are not commiting a crime, then they have no business taking your gun. Period. Particularly in emergency situations where there is little law enforcement available. I remember Andrew (Miami). Lot of people there had to protect their property with firearms.
"As the actual un-plagerized and un-edited article points out, one person complained."
Only one person? Oh, well, that's ok then.
They can just come in and take anything they want.
After all, only ONE person complained!
/MAJOR sarcasm
The other, unstated, possibly un-realized problem that comes with confiscation of firearms..
Getting it back..
I had a simple pellet gun "confiscated" from my nephew..
( I owned it, he and a freind were shooting pigeons with it..)
The Police refused to return it to me until I could show "proof of ownership"..
Luckily, I was able to locate my sales reciept for the gun, or I would have been out one pellet rifle, valued at nearly a hundred bucks at the time..
A warning to all gun owners in areas where confiscation laws are enacted..
Make sure all your papers are in order.. You will be required to show your papers..
Oh, Yeah.. Demand a reciept for any and all items "confiscated"..
Make sure you get the name(s), badge numbers, etc., of any government employees involved in said confiscations...
Note the date / time of the seizure(s)
You will be required to have all this information in order to get your property back..
Even then, in some instances, you may require the services of a lawyer.. And even that is no guarantee..
"Confiscated property would be returned within 30 days after an emergency ends. And the city must compensate an owner for using personal property,..."
This is still unacceptable. What good is the person's property if they are subject to any confiscation? What good is the citizens property that they need during the time of an emergency? Why would any other person, who was unprepared, be considered higher value for the use of these confiscated resources?
This is nothing more than the inevitable results of passing price gouging legislation!
One mal-contented cheapskate.
There is no real property ownership in America.
So someone who is concerned about protecting 'his property' is a cheapskate?
I'm sorry, but communism hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried.
Except for the 'government' that is.
Public opinion contradicts you. Simply look at Katrina and other catastrophes.
The same applies to the 'war' on guns, on drugs, and on sin.
And everything gets to be an emergency in a war, don't we know. Even when the 'war' lasts for 70 + years. [the war on guns started in 1933]
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.