Speakeasy forum

General discussion

A man's home WAS his castle.....

Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: A man's home WAS his castle.....
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: A man's home WAS his castle.....
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
(NT) (NT) yup its sucks

In reply to: A man's home WAS his castle.....

Collapse -
Ummm...

In reply to: A man's home WAS his castle.....

... this was a Supreme Court ruling, so, unfortunately, there's no overturning to be done.

We discussed this story here a while back. I'll have to wait to be on a faster connection to read the opinion. No doubt I'll agree with what your article describes as a "stinging dissent".

I feel very bad for these families, and am scared of what this means for the future in other cities, etc.

Evie Happy

Collapse -
Things that make you go Ummm

In reply to: Ummm...

Now paint the pitcher by placing a liberal or conservative tag on the justices and look at the vote split.

Collapse -
How COULD this be undone?

In reply to: Ummm...

What could people do to undo decisions like this? Can the Constitution be amended? Any other way?

I think this is just plain robbery!

Cindi

Collapse -
the rich get richer, the poor get poorer

In reply to: How COULD this be undone?

money talks, b/s walks!
and "shaft" is more than the name of a movie...

.

Collapse -
These people will be compensated beyond

In reply to: the rich get richer, the poor get poorer

their wildest dreams.When they see the money lying on the table they'll forget all about their "home"

Collapse -
Not the case.

In reply to: These people will be compensated beyond

I live somewhat "local" to this case, and the "fair market values" being bantied around are all under $100K -- many considerably so.

If developers, etc. want the land so bad, let THEM buy them out at the obscenely inflated prices. It's what happened in neighboring farms/homes around the casinos, or with homes that were "in the way" of places retailers like WalMart wanted to put up. Those parcels not bought outright by the "economic developer" often were converted to commercial zoned properties the owners were able to sell for far more than a residential home next to Wal Mart would, etc. There have been cases where the owners weren't swayed no matter how big the financial carrot -- that is their personal choice, and other ways were found.

But no, the Dem council in New London wants to take the homes involuntarily away from one owner to give it to another. That's just WRONG.

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) not this way its bs ruleing

In reply to: These people will be compensated beyond

Collapse -
I've heard of instances

In reply to: These people will be compensated beyond

Where the compensation was far less than fair market value, never mind incentive to sell! I've also heard that if you don't take the second offer, they'll just have your home condemned and take it for zip, zero, nada.

Cindi

Collapse -
The city can condemn the property and take it

In reply to: These people will be compensated beyond

There will not necessarily be any generous compensation here. The city has been given the power to steal this property Sad

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) Noe that's a wildest dream!!!!!

In reply to: These people will be compensated beyond

Collapse -
You are in a dream world. Who, while holding all the cards,

In reply to: These people will be compensated beyond

is going to pay people more than their wildest dreams? It's not going to happen.

Collapse -
Who?

In reply to: You are in a dream world. Who, while holding all the cards,

These organizations ,that's who.And these are only the top TEN from ONE state.
7 of the ten were compensated very well,2 are ongoing and one got screwed, although he didn't make a bundle,he was compensated fairly.
These lawsuits are driven by fear and if aproperty owner takes a good avenue of approach with knowledgeable representation they can and will win.

http://emdomain.com/guide/top10.html

Collapse -
Your link puts me ...

In reply to: Who?

... somewhere "Untitled" and blank out in cyberspace, so I can't respond re: "these organizations". But, you seem to be missing the point. This case involves the government seizing the property to give it to another private entity for development. Bottom line for the government is that if used for the new intended purpose, their revenue from property taxes will increase. They -- NON-COMPETITIVELY -- will offer the current owners "fair market value" for their residential homes. The homes in that area are not from the Style section of the NYT, and neither is their location "prime" at present. Even if the prices are "fair" or even significantly inflated over going market rates, this will NOT be a windfall for any of the residents -- let alone compensate some that are essentially having their intergenerational family homes stolen from them.

If the developers want the land so badly, THEN it will be a fair process for them to bid for the property. It's certainly worth more for commercial enterprise than to the single home owner -- so let the commercial enterprise pay THAT "fair market value". They don't have the government's ability to take the property forceably and that is a HUGE difference.

Also, within New London, there is ALREADY a fair amount of publically owned land that could be developed similarly.

This ruling stinks to high Heaven!

Collapse -
"blighted"

In reply to: Your link puts me ...

Many times these blighted areas are also the fault of local governments. Why can you travel to these areas and find unrepaired roads with potholes in them, broken sidewalks, sometimes local parks seemingly abandoned by public works for mowing more than a couple times a year, street lights out, and a giving the area over to crime rather than clear the criminals out so those long time residents can have a peaceful neighborhood again. Yet not all of these places are crime ridden, many just have homes in need of repair and public works that have been ignored by the city itself. I can't help but believe the cities deliberately try to "blight" certain areas they've already made long term plans years ahead on aquiring by eminent domain.

They did that in Tampa, the eastern side of it, then moved in after years of city neglect to the neighborhood infrastructure such as road repairs, water line replacement, adequate lighting, upkeep on roads, etc, then later took all the properties there under Urban Renewal program in the 70's. They wouldn't even just give people an amount for the condemned structure and then raze it, leaving the land to them. They took it all. Now all that area is developed and has been "improved" but it wasn't the property owners that were enriched, no, they were shoved off the land en masse and the city government and developers were enriched. They increased their tax base, but by the deliberate practice of oppressing the poor without regard that they should have the same constitutional rights as every other person. At the same time, neighborhoods that were of the same age or older, continued to get the monies to properly maintain the roads, to replace old broken up sidewalks, even replacing the water and sewer mains.

Tampa is one of the worst places for this type of activity in the South. It's probably because it's not founded on Southern principles but those of the various Hispanic mafia groups. The Italian Club in Ybor city is where the corruption started I believe and the town is pretty much in the grips of being controlled behind the scenes by them. Tampa has the most restrictive and punitive zoning I've ever seen down South. This ruling will be considered an absolvement for their crimes against the poorer residents there, and you can be sure Tampa will be one of the first to take advantage of this to the fullest. This ruling by the Supreme Court is like giving Tampa officials a pass to do whatever they want now. Other cities will rush to do the same. They will not control themselves, and the courts were the last hope for many property owners who will now be pushed of their property at a price they can't buy back in somewhere else to own a home outright again, probably never again for many of them.

That is one reason you will find a huge difference between the people and the governments in Tampa and that in St. Petersburg. Interestingly the Tampa government has historically been democratic and the St. Petersburg government, republican.

Collapse -
You're missing the point...

In reply to: Who?

People's private property is not the state's to dispose of. Terrany is terrany regardless the guise or purpose.

Collapse -
not missing nothing

In reply to: You're missing the point...

I'm simply responding to a jab that I am "in a dream world" backed up by FACTUAL EVIDENCE.

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) Still "in a dream world"

In reply to: not missing nothing

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) That's Intelligent

In reply to: (NT) Still "in a dream world"

Collapse -
Working link might help ...

In reply to: not missing nothing

... or respond to my posts as I am someone "local" enough to actually know beyond the national stories what is involved here. You are amiss with the facts of this situation and ruling. Sad

Collapse -
Checks and Balances....

In reply to: How COULD this be undone?

Congress could pass a law (not necessarily an amendment), and there is probably some Presidential power that could be used to intervene.

Collapse -
Impeach liberal justices!

In reply to: How COULD this be undone?

State laws can prohibit this and already do in several states. If not in your state, insist the law be changed to defend property rights.

NEVER let another ultra-liberal judge make it to the Supreme Court again. THIS is the end result of liberalism gone amuck.

Collapse -
it's not a problem

In reply to: A man's home WAS his castle.....

build a small church on the land and scream "freedom of speech"

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) Churches can be condemned, too.

In reply to: it's not a problem

Collapse -
i said "build" a church

In reply to: (NT) Churches can be condemned, too.

not "bring in some delapidated ruin"

.

Collapse -
It doesn't matter if it's

In reply to: i said "build" a church

made out of polished titanium and stainless steel. Even if it could withstand 5 tornadoes and a hurricane at the same time. Even if it's picture postcard perfect. It can still be condemned if the state wishes to take it.

Dan

Collapse -
(NT) (NT) A socialism stink to me....

In reply to: A man's home WAS his castle.....

Collapse -
One of the few times I'm with Thomas, Scallia, & Rhenquist

In reply to: A man's home WAS his castle.....

But it's unlikely to be overturned -- this IS the SCOTUS!

-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email semods4@yahoo.com

The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!

Collapse -
YAY! Something at last that you see us...

In reply to: One of the few times I'm with Thomas, Scallia, & Rhenquist

...as being on the side of the angels! Devil

Seriously, Dave, this decision really was an abomination. I read it and realized that should the city I live in decide to tear down the area where I live (home values $150 - 180K - in a state where values aren't yet inflated all out of proportion) and sell the land to some developer who wanted to build $500K palaces, they could!

The concept of property rights as it's been understood since the ratification of the Fifth Amendment was just overturned in favor of a structure that enormously empowers government at our expense.

Now, Congress could set this right with properly written legislation. Alas, I think that these's no political will in either party to do so.

Will we down the road have a spate of cases in which governments seek to exercise their newly granted power to generate additional property tax revenue at the expense of the middle class? I fear we will; and only then will people get what the Supremes have done with this decision to American freedom and individual rights.

Popular Forums

icon
Computer Newbies 10,686 discussions
icon
Computer Help 54,365 discussions
icon
Laptops 21,181 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 16,313 discussions
icon
Phones 17,137 discussions
icon
Security 31,287 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 22,101 discussions
icon
Windows 7 8,164 discussions
icon
Windows 10 2,657 discussions

GIVEAWAY

Enter to win* a free holiday tech gift!

CNET's giving five lucky winners the gift of their choice valued up to $250!