Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : The Barrett Bucket -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (1159)	4/30/2007 8:21:45 PM
From: ManyMoose	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1233

Eminent domain for commercial development is wrong. I agree. There should be eminent domain only for infrastructure that everyone benefits from. Powerlines, highways, very little else.

To: Peter Dierks who wrote (1159)	5/2/2007 3:24:39 AM
From: Lady Lurksalot	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1233

Peter, Right you are: Governments have always looked to grab anything which will bring in max revenue to enhance the public coffers. When it flies in the face of the letter and intent of the U.S. Constitution, it needs to be stopped dead in its tracks. Eminent domain (and condemnation, a California proceeding) for the sole purpose of commercial development is beyond wrong. Best not get me started on the RICO statutes. - Holly Amendment IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.