SHOULD CITIZENS BE FORCED TO SELL PRIVATE PROPERTY TO PRIVATE COMPANIES?

user ballots

news related :

SHOULD CITIZENS BE FORCED TO SELL PRIVATE PROPERTY TO PRIVATE COMPANIES?


[+] ballot by thesoothsayer
created Sun Jun 26, 05

Imminent Domain ruling by the Supreme
Court: Do you agree local Government
can take/buy your property for private
interprise purposes against your will?

Yes
No


Ballot #76042 : SEE RESULTS

Comment:

show your vote with comment?

v 1.5 © BESTANDWORST.COM
smile bank:









similiar ballots:
90480. Would allowing the use of lethal force to protect private property work as a deterrent to such crimes?
48620. Can You Hardly Blame Those who make Private ballots outside the private section so they can get votes?
44437. ABC's Private Ballot
58136. Televising Private Ryan
74689. Favorite TV cop, law man or private investigator?
76958. Private Ballot Scenario:
105531. Who Is The Largest Private Landowner In The U.S.
106897. Is anyone else unable to get their private messages?
116719. Don’t tell me it’s an emergency then climb on your private jet
126136. Private vs Public Schools...which is better?


COMMENTS:
This is a bonanza for the Developers and a crime against private property.

The Supreme Court ruling nullifies citizens Consitutional right to illegal search and seizure or their property.

They just made seizing private property LEGAL, not for the common good, but for PROFIT!

There is no guarantee that building a shopping center or other commercial enterprises in blighted areas will result in economic revival.

The old saying that you can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink, applies here.

It also increases the chances of local government corruption with Developers using their money and influence to get local policitians to invoke "emminent domain" in areas where there is no justification except their own profit.

Will anybody who owns beachfront property be safe now that "emminent domain" can be invoked so some developer can built a resort hotel there?

I can see Corporations scouring the country for cheap land knowing the NOW they can FORCE the property owners off the land and get it dirt cheap.

Emminent Domain used to be used only for public works projects likes highways, bridges, dams, etc. which were for the common good.

Now it will be used to benefit a few rich people and NOT the common good!

by Grapost on Sun Jun 26, 05 10:15am [+]

This ruling is well positioned to become a foundation for mass corruption.
by Cathexis on Sun Jun 26, 05 10:59am [+]

And the left wonders why republicans hang on so tight to their guns. If this isn't the first step towards a dictatorship I don't know what else to call it. Remember this when the supreme court decides private ownership of firearms is outdated. They'll probably start with unpopular weapons, like those that look big and scary. Then pistols, then shotguns, finally rifles. So we're going to lose our freedoms incrementally, in amounts that everyone who protests them look rather silly.
by herzog on Sun Jun 26, 05 11:45am [+]

This was a terrible decision. Now government crooks can pretty much steal whatever land they want for their business cronies, all in the name of economic development. I can't express in words how much I hate this decision. This may be a real tipping point toward a fascist state (not that Bushy hasn't made many steps toward that already). This is a disaster for a free America.
by cranky on Sun Jun 26, 05 12:20pm [+]

This was one time when I agreed with the conservatives on the court.
by FiddleFaddleOnLSD on Sun Jun 26, 05 3:00pm [+]

Watch out, one and all. If there's a shopping center coming to your neighborhood...
by Truthseeker013 on Sun Jun 26, 05 5:00pm [+]

(watch, some kids will wave their flags of freedom until the very end :)
by Jyl on Sun Jun 26, 05 7:02pm [+]

no, no, no, no.
It's bad enough watching the state take private property to put roadways in, that's always bothered me a bit - the person whose property is being taken doesn't necessarily always agree with what the state thinks is "fair value". But for private corporations and private interests? that's way out of line.
But then I hear the Golder Rule means - he who has the gold, makes the rules.......
by lightreaper on Sun Jun 26, 05 9:31pm [+]

I cannot express my hatred for this decision enough. This is the biggest bullsh*t decision the US Supreme Court has ever made. I wrote to my state representatives, as should all of you. It may not help, but it certainly can't hurt. We must fight for our freedom, not watch it be taken away, acre by acre.
by ceejjj on Mon Jun 27, 05 12:34am [+]

Sometime I just don't understand your comments Jyl. What does this one mean?
by ceejjj on Mon Jun 27, 05 12:42am [+]

Hey, if Crown Prince Abdullah wants your house, he'll take your house.
by _Beelzebubba on Mon Jun 27, 05 11:34am [+]

No and anyone who thinks that is at the risk of sounding conservative un American.
by seon on Wed Jun 29, 05 5:58am [+]






About Us | Join Us | Privacy Policy | Contact
© 2002-2008 BestAndWorst.com All Rights Reserved