Oleg Bach Posted March 11, 2009 Report Posted March 11, 2009 Yes it would be. They can still take your property whether or not you recognize their authority. Dear me, here come the American style survivalist! I don't recognize any authorship or authority over life and property..to do so is to give into a modern form of feudalism. Here I go again - Go down to the sea and catch a fish and inside you will find two gold coins - give them to the tax collector - one from me and one from you - "we don't want to cause them offence" - wise words...don't irritate the authorities or challenge them. You have better things to do. Why stick your hand into a growling dogs mouth - as mum would say in Russian - stroke them - pet the dog..YOU be the master and keep your mouth shut and your head down...bureaucrats are a bored bunch and love a fight. Quote
Alta4ever Posted March 11, 2009 Report Posted March 11, 2009 Dear me, here come the American style survivalist! I don't recognize any authorship or authority over life and property..to do so is to give into a modern form of feudalism. Here I go again - Go down to the sea and catch a fish and inside you will find two gold coins - give them to the tax collector - one from me and one from you - "we don't want to cause them offence" - wise words...don't irritate the authorities or challenge them. You have better things to do. Why stick your hand into a growling dogs mouth - as mum would say in Russian - stroke them - pet the dog..YOU be the master and keep your mouth shut and your head down...bureaucrats are a bored bunch and love a fight. so am I the dog the bureaucrat or the survivalist? Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
Smallc Posted March 11, 2009 Report Posted March 11, 2009 I would like to see them try. I'd like to see you try to stop them. Quote
Alta4ever Posted March 11, 2009 Report Posted March 11, 2009 I'd like to see you try to stop them. Its been done before and it can be done again. Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
Smallc Posted March 11, 2009 Report Posted March 11, 2009 Its been done before and it can be done again. It all depends on what they're doing. For some things, they aren't going to let you stop them....nor, IMO, should they let you....provided they compensate you at reasonable market value. Quote
Alta4ever Posted March 11, 2009 Report Posted March 11, 2009 It all depends on what they're doing. For some things, they aren't going to let you stop them....nor, IMO, should they let you....provided they compensate you at reasonable market value. That depends on what reasonable market value is, what the land was worth prior to road widening or what the value is after the demand for that land has gone up to by the prospect of development. If it was stelmach asking my response would be suck eggs. Quote "What about the legitimacy of the democratic process, yeah, what about it?" Jack Layton and his coup against the people of Canada “The nine most terrifying words in the English language are, ‘I’m from the government and I’m here to help.’” President Ronald Reagan
guyser Posted March 11, 2009 Report Posted March 11, 2009 It is part of the social contract we protect as a nation, as a province and as a community. Double speak and not an answer. Care to try again? How does my polluting equate loss of land ? Quote
guyser Posted March 11, 2009 Report Posted March 11, 2009 realy how was it built in the first place, I've seen many roads re paved without widening them. Lots of road s are repaved. But that wasnt what I said. It could very well have been built from use projections that are now currently outdated. Think of 'farmers lanes' just outside of Calgary around 1970......and think of the traffic on them now that a subdivision has grown up at the end of that lane Quote
guyser Posted March 11, 2009 Report Posted March 11, 2009 I would like to see them try. Thats what the Pickering Airport people said . You might be able to find cause to stop emminent domain, but if it is for the public good and is needed, IOW, all the criteria point to your land , you basically dont stand a chance. You will be served, paid off, arrested and your land will be gone. Dont like it but , there we are. Quote
Canadian Blue Posted March 12, 2009 Author Report Posted March 12, 2009 Nor would we want property laws in the way you want to promote them. The state must always have control for the benefit of the community, province or federation lest the pollution you could create affects us all. Our rights to freedom must always be balanced aginst the right of the individual. The state must always have control thus invalidating our individual liberties. People create the state for the protection or our liberties, not so they can do away with them whenever they like. However the United States has the same issue with eminent domain, however people often have too much faith in government bureaucrats: http://www.reason.tv/video/show/56.html Quote "Keep your government hands off my medicare!" - GOP activist
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.