It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is it "civic responsibility" to give up the land you own?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 03:17 PM
link   

Is it "civic responsibility" to give up the land you own?


www.cnn.com

EL CALABOZ, Texas (CNN) -- Eloisa Tamez says she isn't scared anymore, just determined. "I am not backing down," she said.

The U.S. government wants to build a border fence like this one. About 100 landowners are fighting it.

Tamez owns three acres of land along the Texas-Mexico border where the Department of Homeland Security would like to build a border fence. The property is a remnant of a 12,000-acre grant from Spain to her family in 1767, before the United States even existed.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.cnn.com




posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 03:17 PM
link   
In my opinion, it is a ludicrous idea that in order to achieve saftey you must give up personal liberty.

This takes the measure one step further. Not only must you give up a liberty, but the one thing that not only retains value, but rarely ever decreases in value: property.

watch the video here:
www.cnn.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

[edit on 17-1-2008 by tyranny22]



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 03:35 PM
link   
Even though it sounds like a bad deal and like it infringes rights it really doesn't. Eminent Domain its called. This is in the Constitution 5th amendment, it limits the abilities of it. Ya no one wants to give up there land but they are paid "market value" for it and usually above that. with out it all roads would look like curleyQ's and railways be a tangled mess.

Unfortunately it's a fact of life, but it is 100% constitutional and is used very often for formation of parks to freeways. so it IS your civic duty but your not giving it up you are paid.



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 03:38 PM
link   
There's a time and place for everything and this would appear to be it for eminent domain. If not for eminent domain, we would have no interstate highway system today...

Now, taking away property for non-critical things like building condos, as has happened recently in a few areas, is not the time or the place.



posted on Jan, 17 2008 @ 04:08 PM
link   
reply to post by tyranny22
 



first, i'd like to know the exact ammount of national border frontage is actually involved...
is it something like 300' or three acres of frontage
(as part of her family's heritage of 12,000 Acres) that's a legitimate question which would really affect my personal opinion.

but my personal opinion would not change the fact that the State or Federal governments will either condemn, eminent domain, seize, or otherwise gain deed to the needed property--

thinking about it,
i'm thinking that of the "family heritage land"
-> only 3 total acres of frontage land, and 'so many feet deep'
as required to have a access road along the fence on the border frontage
will be condemned/seized by the gov't for the 'common-good'...



She might try to have the land put into the Historical Register,
that won't save the land from seizure.... but it could affect the constuction of the 'fence' and instead of a continuous corregated steel barrier some
20' ft tall which completely despoils ones Vista /view...
the fence builders would have to accomodate the rules & regulations of the Heritage Register.

~that's another free one, as far as adressing problems go,
i'll tell you
(meaning the general readership & members-posters) some of the points i put out ther are he stuff that $100k lawers and $100k strategists get for
'brainstorming'......
me i'm a 120% below poverty level dav guy on SS disability,
but enough of that pitty-potty




=
as i a schizophrenic

[edit on 17-1-2008 by St Udio]



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join