Land Ownership Discuss Land Patents, Allodial Titles, and other methods of protecting sovereign land owner rights.


Go Back   Suijuris Forums > Educational & Learning > Land Ownership
User Name
Password

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 06-24-2005, 09:35 AM
wirlwind wirlwind is offline
Mental Jujitsu
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Alabama
Posts: 614
Send a message via Yahoo to wirlwind
Will land patents stop eminent domain?

Does anyone know if the land patent will be effective against eminent domain?
__________________
When the people fear the government, you have tyranny; when the government fears the people, you have freedom-Thomas Jefferson
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 06-24-2005, 04:21 PM
virgil
 
Posts: n/a
There was a very good audio course available that went into great detail on the laws that apply to land transfer. It was available through WCES. However, their web site hasn't worked for over a month now.

I believe the (s)upreme (c)ourt decided that 'homes and businesses' and property could be seized. I would be surprised if they mention LAND anywhere in the ruling. What they did mention are appurtanences to land and property or possibly real estate. None of these are LAND.

Connecticut is one of the original 13 states and through the treaty of paris of 1783 with king george land grants were not supposed to be touched by the new government. If there is no sheriffs auction in your abstract then title can be traced back to the original grant or patent. Your title is protected by international law. If there is a sheriffs auction transfer you don't have clear chain of title back to the original grant. What you bought was color of title since the state only sold you what interest they had. The only interest the state had was an equity interest.

The legal profession could be trying to blow smoke up your A$$ if they think you can be fooled. The affect of the ruling could be to make people think that they don't have a legal leg to stand on and to just give up and sign their LAND away for a pittance. DON'T SIGN. Even if you get thrown off. Wait until the multimillion dollar development goes in and then decide you want your land back.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-25-2005, 12:38 AM
sadie sadie is offline
Practice Makes Perfect
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 373
Public use?

They are stealing property by eminent domain to give to the private corporate developers so they can get richer. How does that constitute public use? Because the "public" will go to the mall and give them their"money"

So why don't I just "steal" your car so I can put it up for "public" auction and make myself some "money"?

Does this now mean I can steal someone's property and claim it is for public use as I am one of the public and I will then be using it?

Don't people in this country see anything that is happening?

Just this week what - congress is passing a constitutional amendment to stop people from expressing free speech - what other things are being tacked on to this one besides flag burning?

Interesting how they all stayed away from the volatile issue of gay marriages and (rightly) decided a constitutional amendment is not appropriate in this regard. Then they very quickly want to rush this blatant denial of free speech (flag) through. Wouldn't this amendment be void as it violates the constituion?

Now this eminent domain thing to take your property for private developement

And yesterday on my local news the City of Gulfport Mississippi passed an ordinance against children playing in the street in front of their houses.
It is now illegal to play hopscotch on the sidewalk or street or to play ball on the street with your friends. Anyone who puts up a basketball hoop in front of their house will be fined or probably tasered to death.

Of course they claim it is for the safety of the children. Maybe they based it on some study that showed playing may be dangerous for kids.
I guess it would be safer for the children to go down to an empty lot or building and do drugs so they can be arrested and used as slave labor from prison or tasered to death.

Or maybe it's so they can go off with a child molester so he can increase his claim of victims to 37,000.

Forgive me for ranting but I feel like I need to go to a mental instituion to find some sanity.

God bless us all.
__________________
sadie

not legal advice - just my 2 cents (not lawful money)
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Shocking New Developments In Supreme Court vs. Homeowners Case iamfreeru2 End Days of America 7 09-02-2005 07:03 AM
Stop It! gregtu Religion 2 07-28-2005 11:38 AM
The Excuses Stop Here! gregtu Religion 2 04-11-2005 09:05 PM
Whatever You Do, Never Stop Praying!! gregtu Religion 2 10-04-2004 10:24 AM
Cite: Investigatory Stop Requires Cause TheBlackTruth Court 0 08-24-2004 10:39 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:56 AM.
Powered by vBulletin Version 3.5.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 2.4.0
2003-2008 Copyright by Law Research Group, LLC Terms of Use | Sitemap | Privacy Policy | Notice/Disclaimer