PDA

View Full Version : Private Property Rights at stake in Florida: Please Read.



Bionik
04-28-2004, 08:15 PM
I don't live in Florida, but I just figured something out which I consider VERY frightening.

The following house bill: HB 1513, sponsored by Republican Rep. Gayle Harrell.

The bill will allow contractors to use the government to FORCE people to give up their homes for building anything (a strip mall, a circle k, a house, etc.). The victims will be paid a "fair" value determined by the government bureaucrats. Her official office phone number is: 850-488-8749.

If you live in Florida, I'd recommend giving them a piece of your mind before Friday (that's when the bill is being voted on). Spread the word, they're trying to keep this one under the radar -- the whole situation just screams corruption.

CITADEL
04-28-2004, 08:16 PM
I thought that stuff already goes on, at least it does here.

Bionik
04-28-2004, 08:23 PM
I don't think it goes on in South Carolina. Not legally at least...

FiveOneNine
04-28-2004, 08:24 PM
That is terrible. I believe this also falls into the same category of your other thread as it violates one's right to property. I'd take a better look at it, but I don't think anyone will take the otherside of this argument.

beginer03
04-28-2004, 08:36 PM
Well i live in florida and it seems as though it already goes on..

There is a trailor Park home that has like elderly people in it and they are beeing forced to move out so this guy can come in and build condos..Pretty sad if you ask me.. I feel bad for those people.

BigKazWSM747
04-28-2004, 08:37 PM
great eminent domain taken a step further...I would like to point this out to those who defend it.

BigKazWSM747
04-28-2004, 08:39 PM
Originally posted by Bionik
I don't think it goes on in South Carolina. Not legally at least...

The government can basically do the same thing as the Fla. law for public projects (such as parks, highways, etc.). I live in SC, so I know that it happens here as well as other areas.

A fairly recent example in SC in Billy Mitchell in Greenville. His property was condemned and then the city seized his property for a park (although after a lot of debate) and paid him the market value for it.

Bionik
04-28-2004, 08:43 PM
FORCE people to give up their homes for building ANYTHING (a strip mall, a circle k, a house, etc.).

(Pointing something out to the above poster.)

Bionik
04-28-2004, 09:37 PM
I encourage any Florida residents to act quickly -- your rights are at stake here.

It seems like our country is decaying :(

fireman_x
04-28-2004, 09:38 PM
Originally posted by a. americanus
Utter bvll****. Eminent domain is bvll****. This takes it to the level of utter bvll****.
:rolleyes: Eminent domain is bull****? What about Manifest Destiny?

This happens all the time especially when schools have to expand for various reasons, MIT is a good example of such.

Heavily Armed
04-28-2004, 09:51 PM
While it may not be the specific law, it is law nonetheless in most places. Government can condemn property, it seems, for almost any justification. The more popular reasons nowadays are for supposed financial gain. I saw a neighborhood wiped out in Kansas, the properties condemned, to build a speedway racetrack. A similiar thing is happening in the Denver metro area, several small businesses being forced out for a big developer to put in some type of mall. The local government folks say the move is to increase tax revenues and all that garbage. Meanwhile, these little guys are being tossed out, some after many years of providing service to the local area. I guess they weren't generating sufficient taxes. Can you really own property? It depends where you live, and more importantly, who else might want it. Absolutely terrible.

Bionik
04-28-2004, 09:52 PM
Forced transactions = bull****. If I came up to you in your new Ferrari at gunpoint with 100 bucks (insisting that it was "fair") and told you to get out of the car, handed you the 100 dollars, and drove off with 630 horsepower under the hood, would that not be bull****?

axiombiological
04-28-2004, 11:47 PM
Eminent domain was a power granted government only to be used for promoting the "public good" (although I cringe at this phrase), such as for roads, but the owner would receive "just compensation".

Today, this power is used for "private good", where large corporations ask government to condemn lands so that they may confiscate them for development. Local politicians love this power, as it tends to generate greater tax revenues for which they can squander on their programs of choice.

Trump Enterprises, WalMart and The New York Times are all examples of businesses which have used eminent domain to obtain, or try in the case of Trump, private property.

supergarr
04-28-2004, 11:53 PM
I think its wrong, but yea i believe the fed. gov't does this a lot. It should only be reserved for highways, roads, parks, power plants, water plants and things of that nature.

Starsky
04-29-2004, 12:02 AM
Originally posted by Bionik
Forced transactions = bull****. If I came up to you in your new Ferrari at gunpoint with 100 bucks (insisting that it was "fair") and told you to get out of the car, handed you the 100 dollars, and drove off with 630 horsepower under the hood, would that not be bull****?


Welcome to Socialist revolution. They pay what they "think" a good should be worth, rather than what it really is.

beginer03
04-29-2004, 12:50 PM
IMO it seems as if it all leads back to greed..Money money money..

LordNeon
04-29-2004, 01:28 PM
Originally posted by axiombiological
Eminent domain was a power granted government only to be used for promoting the "public good" (although I cringe at this phrase), such as for roads, but the owner would receive "just compensation".

Today, this power is used for "private good", where large corporations ask government to condemn lands so that they may confiscate them for development. Local politicians love this power, as it tends to generate greater tax revenues for which they can squander on their programs of choice.

Trump Enterprises, WalMart and The New York Times are all examples of businesses which have used eminent domain to obtain, or try in the case of Trump, private property.

Eminent domain can be necessary, but yeah, this is pure BS. How can building a WalMart, or any private enterprise, ever qualify as a promotion of the "public good"?

BigKazWSM747
04-29-2004, 03:44 PM
Originally posted by Bionik
(Pointing something out to the above poster.)

It is a bit different, but regardless it is still the principle of kicking someone off of their land because you think someone else could use it more effectively.

LordNeon
04-29-2004, 05:26 PM
Originally posted by BigKazWSM747
It is a bit different, but regardless it is still the principle of kicking someone off of their land because you think someone else could use it more effectively.

If your use of land is presenting a danger to those who live there or to those in the surrounding area, the government should have a right to step in (i.e. condemning property). That's part of eminent domain, too. There's also the issue of maintenance of public utilities and such.

But this is definitely stretching the idea of eminent domain waaaaaay too far.

Bionik
04-29-2004, 06:43 PM
If it isn't necessary/proper for the government to be run, then imminent domain shouldn't be used to obtain it. Also, people who are victims of imminent domain should be paid about 2.5x the "fair market value." The "fair" value simply isn't fair when you consider all the costs of moving and finding a new home.

badbart2000
04-29-2004, 06:48 PM
Originally posted by beginer03
Well i live in florida and it seems as though it already goes on..

There is a trailor Park home that has like elderly people in it and they are beeing forced to move out so this guy can come in and build condos..Pretty sad if you ask me.. I feel bad for those people.

Those are rented lots, the land owner can do anything he wants.