namelesstavern.net

Now, if these folks decided to take up arms and defend their land, would you still be on their side?

Yep.

Martrae wrote:BTW...There are eight states where the use of eminent domain for private development is all but prohibited by law. Those states are Washington, Montana, Illinois, Kentucky, Arkansas, Maine, South Carolina and Florida.

Best thing you can do is work to get your state added to this list.

Tikker wrote:You could build a brand new house, and 6 months later the government could come and say, "We decided this lot is the perfect spot for a mini-mall. Here's your cheque for the value we've appraised your house at. You have 1 month to move"

You have no legal recourse to stop them from bulldozing your brand new house

Of course the fair market value has nothing to do with interest owed. Lets take Tikkers example, say you find a nice piece of land somewhere with a nice view and an acre of land. You like the spot because it is close to a small town, and conveinent for shopinng tire rotations, school systems etc.

You get a loan from the bank and build your dream house, including 2.5 baths, hot tub, built in speaker system equiped to pump nice music thru the house at all times, even a air conditioning unit that makes eskimo's freeze. Of course the monetary value of the place is somewhat high due to the luxuries. Now, Bob the Builder comes in 1 year later and decides a Wal Mart should go up on your place. At this point, hell your still paying down interest, your wife is pregnant and the pool is just now being dug. Imminent domain says fair market vallue, however last I checked it does not say fair market value with interest owed to be paid to the customer. What about all the hard work you have into the place? Are they gonna wait for you to build another home so all your shit you have bought can go in there? Nope.

Last I checked fair market value is dependant on what the property Assesment is, however since he does not come into the house he does not know what you have done inside, nor does he know anything more than curb appeal imho.

Goose_Man wrote:The comment about building a brand new house then 6 months later having it taken away is ludicrous it just wouldn’t happen.

Considering the source of this article I guarantee there is MUCH more to this story than meets the eye.

I’m pretty sure this falls somewhere within the best use of land laws. Apparently the land had a much better use for it rather than a run down neighborhood.

ahh yes i have heard about this mumbo jumbo, Goose, as a poster here i do respect your opinion but please be reasonable. first the 6month old house can go bye bye at any time, if you dont believe me take a look at the land grabs in Henry and Butts County in Georgia.
And the best lands laws my ass, that is written by the same motherfucker buying your land for 'fair market value'

He recanted that later in the thread, hon.

yeah I missed a page, sorry goose, still love buddy

Martrae wrote:

Martrae wrote:BTW...There are eight states where the use of eminent domain for private development is all but prohibited by law. Those states are Washington, Montana, Illinois, Kentucky, Arkansas, Maine, South Carolina and Florida.

Best thing you can do is work to get your state added to this list.

Doesnt this decision by the supreme court superseed this? Since most federal laws override state's ones.

No...the Supreme Court said that cities had the right to use ED. It did say they HAD to use it. This still allows cities and states to self-regulate.

The supreme court cannot overrule laws unless they are unconstitutional. If they tried to overrule something like private property laws moreso they would really cause a groundswell of support for heavy limitations of their powers.

Martrae wrote:BTW...There are eight states where the use of eminent domain for private development is all but prohibited by law. Those states are Washington, Montana, Illinois, Kentucky, Arkansas, Maine, South Carolina and Florida.

Florida doesn't have to worry about eminent domain because the hurricanes take out all their houses yearly anyway.

LOL

The opposing view:

http://www.fresnobee.com/opinion/story/10765094p-11543412c.html

I responded to the article, and got the message it was awating moderation, I somehow doubt it will make it onto thier websight.

“private properties shall not be taken for public use, without just compensation.”

The very fact that this statement refers to public use denotes to that is what it pertains to. Invocation of eminent domain for the use of private business is contrary to the constitution and the intent of the founding fathers of this country. Even many far left liberals I know condemn this ruling by the Supreme Court. This is not government by the people for the people; this is government by and for the almighty dollar. To attribute the reaction of many people to being duped into frenzy by "Web sites of questionable credibility" is unbelievably thoughtless and ignorant. The writer of this article is to busy supporting their political bias to realize that this is not a left vs. right issue, but one of government overstepping its bounds and violating peoples civil rights.

Jennay wrote:Fuck this.. I'm moving to Canada or Switzerland, places more free than America really is. Who's coming with me?

If yoiu can wait 9 years I will go with you.

If I could find a job in Canada or in Europe, I'd go happily. I may see about spending an academic year abroad in England next year, hope hope.

-Arlos

Good riddance.

Man our government is getting real real big.

I made a new national flag.

<img src="http://namelesstavern.org/phpBB2/album_pic.php?pic_id=723">

Mindia wrote:

Actually you won't get fair market value, you won't get expenses for moving and you won't get any help and you'll have 30 days to move. Would you call that fair?

Actually, you do get fair market value. You get full appraised value.

That's not the same thing. I can tell you right now the house across from me if ripped down would not get 635K but it just sold for that much. No you won't get full value.

Mindia wrote:Um, that's a good thing. You don't want some Dufus getting in the way of production just because his grandpappy built the house he's living in. They're getting fair market value for the property anyway, so just take the money, move and stfu.

Umm, sorry, I disagree. Mindia, we cannot allow any Tom, Dick and Harry to take our property at their whim. Even cities should be held to the highest standard, when annexing land and aquiring land for growth. Because, as long as it is hidden under a guise of "prosperity and growth", we will lose our rights as citizens, and any loss of right is just one more step down the road to an absolution of the self-governing powers that we enjoy today.

This is a first step away from land rights and ownership, and a move towards centrallized control of land, which in the end will lead to a determination against any right of ownership, be it land or whatever. Which I should point out is against all that our constitution stands for.

-Duck

http://www.visi.com/juan/congress/

Contact Congress.

It's starting already

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mp ... ss/3240725

That is awesome