your home is not your castle

Quote:

---

The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that local governments may seize people's homes and businesses -- even against their will -- for private economic development.

---

story

I don't like it but sometimes I agree that compulsory purchase is needed for government projects, but I cannot agree with people having to lose their property to a private business against their will.

If a private company wishes to build on private land they should have to make an offer to the landowners. If the landowners ask too much then tough, don't buy the land.

If I wasn't compensated nicely then I would be breakin' out my arsenal to fight an unjust government.

:ph34r:

is this not against human rights and stuff?

Sure, fine, - since your the boss, just take my land which my ancestors built and not managed to screw up - yeah why not - hey if its a highway even better
ever heard of douglas adams?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman

If I wasn't compensated nicely then I would be breakin' out my arsenal to fight an unjust government.

:ph34r:

---

I'm not familiar with the law in the US, could someone point me or explain to me what sort of a pecuniary compensation are the people whose land is seized entitled to? :unsure:


edit: forgot one part of the sentence: it should be "could someone point me to a site" :frusty:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 99%

Sure, fine, - since your the boss, just take my land which my ancestors built and not managed to screw up - yeah why not - hey if its a highway even better
ever heard of douglas adams?

---

Highways would be Eminent Domain since it's for public use.

What vid pointed out is different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Guillaume

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman

If I wasn't compensated nicely then I would be breakin' out my arsenal to fight an unjust government.

:ph34r:

---

I'm not familiar with the law in the US, could someone point me or explain to me what sort of a pecuniary compensation are the people whose land is seized entitled to? :unsure:


edit: forgot one part of the sentence: it should be "could someone point me to a site" :frusty:

---

Can't say for sure the exact amount, but a friend of mine was bought out for the construction of a huge mall complex. His family was quite happy to leave, as were the residents of the entire three blocks, so apparently the offers are generous.

In a second situation, for another 500 million dollars project, a cluster of houses were bought out, with the exception of a little old lady who refused to leave. All the houses were destroyed and even the excavation had begun. Three years later, her house was still there, isolated. The project lost funding and a large hole remained at the excavation site which covered many city blocks. It was dubbed the Clayton pond and it sat there for ten years.

Each case is really a special situation. The real issue is just how much abuse is made. The decision should be based on need, not political arm twisting behind the scenes.

.



and also this




.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Busyman

If I wasn't compensated nicely then I would be breakin' out my arsenal to fight an unjust government.

:ph34r:

---

Maybe play out Stephen Kings Roadwork?


*If that ever happens, let me know... I wanna watch :ph34r:

TD

I may be wrong, as the USA law is different to the UK's (and it was only mentioned briefly in my training all those years ago), however I believe in the USA compensation for Compulsary Purchase is an appraisal of the open market value of the residential property.

If it was a private company, then it wouldnt have been compulsary purchase, and they would offer more than the market value to get the land.

In the UK you'd get the Market Value; plus compensation based upon the time the property has been in your, or your families possession for the Compulsary Purchase, and the same thing would happen as in the USA for private companies.

Not knowing all the facts, i couldnt second guess the Judges.. but on the face of it, this is just a private company getting the land cheap by making a loophole in the legislation.

Someone is probably either on the take or has an interest in the development at the Local Government level for them to get involved in something like this... :ph34r: