In many states, especially the liberal progressive states, this is a fact of life for many. The state condemning one's property for the use of another private individual under the auspices of eminent domain.

Eminent domain is a necessary evil within the constitutions of the several states, otherwise many vital services could never be completed. However, to abuse the power for private gain is but treasonous. Without organizations like the Institute for Justice, many people have no other option but to roll over and grease up because the state depends on the inability of the private individual to seek justice.

However, even then this justice does not go far enough. Once the individual has been exonerated, it is now time for the perpetrator to be dealt justice, the civil law suits against the persons.

It is not until the people receive their just remedies will things start to change. Once the public servant realizes that there is a penalty involved with violating their master's rights will change be effected.

Read more: Private Property Rights

Reviewing some of the cases is truly interesting and strongly suggested.

if there truly was private property

which there isn't

property ""owners"" are truly kust renting the land
from the govt

if you do not believe it do not pay your rent ""property tax""

property tax is actually unconstitutional as it makes the govt.
the lords of the land

which the Constitution says there will be no lords

Only to those that refuse to do something about it but cry.

who's crying

it seems some make a lot of preconceived notions

i bring stuff to the attention of others to raise awareness

Perhaps I would suggest:



Statement sure seems stronger than a whine, the little boy on the playground crying because he couldn't do something because......

again it is not a cry or a whine

it is a statement to raise awareness

which is how most protesting begins

and those that wish to not protest care those that do whiners and say they are crying

so when a better suggestion is available i will listen

but i am not a terrorist and will not attack the govt even if i
feel the tactics they are using are unconstitutional

but i will vote against those with a record of voting for
illegal bills

But the government needs to be attacked, but not violently, there are no winners there, at least for now. They only understand one thing, actually two things but they are related, money and power.

The power is impossible to win without first eliminating it's source, the money. So protest all you want, get your head wrapped in a bandage and spend some time courtesy of the people.

Learn law, the constitution and the common law, the means to the end. Then the divorce, divorce yourself from their control, as totally as you can within the constraints of your own benefit.

As an example, the driver's license. Do you drive for a living, i.e. taxi or truck driver, then you need it or you would be unemployed. If not, then why have it. It is a source of billions of stolen and hidden taxes upon an unsuspecting public. Just speeding tickets are over a $6 billion industry annually to the corporate tax system.

But when you speed, just who is harmed, the state. That is a piece of paper, a fiction. You can't harm a fiction, there is no corpus delicti.

Study it and discover how the bankers and their enforcers the BAR association keep those that refuse to learn trapped in a system designed around the color of law.

But no, most would just rather cringe before them while crying "why don't they do something about it?" Well just who the heck is "they". I would rather die on my feet with a look of defiance than take to my knees as so many crybabies do.

who are you to tell others what to do

is it not better to educate rather than dictate

why do you attack on systematics and technicalities

why not bring points you believe in to light

rather than belittle others that do bring things into the light

or is it you are as you say the one crying and feel you must
belittle others to make yourself feel bigger and more important

i have been here a long time pointing things out i feel need said

do some research before making insinuations of me

Wow, what a heady thought to think one would have the power to tell someone what to do by tying words into a forum over the internet. One that is unknown and unseen, the absolute desire of any neo-con. But is there such a power or is it just the insecurity of the perceived.

But as to just who I am, I am a free man that does have the right to post my views in any manner I desire. It is the right of another to either read them or ignore them.

But to declare that I am resuming the responsibility of another's actions is just absurd and I emphatically deny that responsibility. If one felt compelled to treat the written words of another as a command, then I would suggest a self examination would be in order.



This would seem self answering, obviously not.



First, because it is my prerogative as a free man. Second because to not do so would be an acceptance of the mediocre and unjustified and would be a dereliction of duty as a free man. This world as we know it is built around semantics and technicalities. To those that ignore them face consequences and perils by their doing so, a matter that I have taken a duty as an acceptance of my accepting the republic.

So as a general rule of free man, one that is either too lazy or too ignorant to insure a statement made by then is truly factual should not be surprised when challenged by another. If they were truly concerned, they would not post false statements or would otherwise post the statement as a question.



Crying are those that normally are the first to criticize but the last to ever offer a solution. Their world is all about the unfairness of it all, the professional victim.

As to the victim felling belittled, that is the normal conclusion of a victim. It is rarely the thought of a thinking individual as being corrected is but a way to further knowledge, to learn that which was not known. The thinking man welcomes the opportunity to expand knowledge, the victim retreats to a corner and cries over an undeserved acknowledgement.



I care not how long an error has been occurring, but only that it not occur in my presence without an appropriate challenge. If one feels something needs to be said, they one should take the time to insure that it is said to the best of one's ability. As the old saying goes "It is best to let someone think one a fool that to open one's mouth and remove all doubt."

And except for a very few here, I would dare say I have no desire to know more than presented here about those posting here. Therefore, your words represent all that will ever be known. And as previously stated, the ability to pursue semantics and technicalities say a lot about those known only by what they write.

Therefore, there are no insinuations made than those determined from the meanings written. This forum is built with the concept and rule of not judging a person, but a person's words.

PRIVATE Property ?
Private is redundant,and Public Property is a Contradiction!

http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/human_rights_and_property_rights.html

http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/property_rights.html

http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/individual_rights.html

Not really so, private is a legitimate description of property that belongs exclusively to an entity, whether an individual, group or company.

And public is not a contraindication but is but another way to same the law of the commons, it is for the use of all as part of the commons and cannot be taken for use by any separate entity. One of the largest examples of this entity are the highways, public thoroughfares for the use of all, regulated only for commercial use as it proper.

All very valid theories.