You're right; however taking away your land to build a school that is
needed and getting fair price is different than having your homes
removed so somebody else can build a home for somebody else. The
basic principle is the same - the American Dream should be safe
except for rare cases.
This decision opened it up to many more cases than should ever have
been allowed. Long Branch is one such example. How can anyone say
someone with beachfront property was the owner of a blighted
property? That's just ridiculous.
On Sep 27, 2007, at 2:16 PM, dfsavgny wrote:
--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, Gary Wien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> IMO, one of the basic ideas of America is that you can own land and
> not have the government take it away.
Sorry Gary but the government always had the power to take it away. No
one should deny them that right. What the argument is about (Kelo et
al.) is why they take it and how much should they pay. I say they have
the right to take it but only for public use not public purpose.
And public use means just that, school, road, fire house, etc. Public
purpose can and has meant almost anything those it power want it to
mean.
