Comments on: Lauren Canario freed after three months

By: susan 28

susan 28 — Tue, 20 Mar 2007 16:57:20 +0000

BJ and Michael are correct; there’s no such thing as private property, only the “graciousness” of the state. sorry but i refuse to capitalise that frikkin word..

By: Oliver Crangle

Oliver Crangle — Mon, 25 Dec 2006 07:00:57 +0000

In my opinion, accepting a plea bargain does not say much for her protest.

Plea bargaining is one of the things that makes the system so evil.
Her participation only validates it.
But I guess she is willing to compromise in order to gain her freedom…
(So in the end it is the same as if she had participated in the system by posting bail)

By: REB

REB — Mon, 25 Dec 2006 02:51:01 +0000

I heartily agree that this lady is in the hero class, unlike ballplayers and moviestars who the term is usually wasted on. We live in serious times,we have a govt and people running it who feel they are our rulers and not our servents,the battle for liberty is one that must be fought every day,and won over and over because evil keeps growing back from the root and good folks have short memories. For liberty to continue in this country we will need many more heros like Lauren, who will not back down just because they are told to,and in fact will push back when pushed!

By: Oliver Crangle

Oliver Crangle — Mon, 25 Dec 2006 01:48:30 +0000

With so may people claiming support for Canario it is odd that she was unable to post bail…

By: Michael Hampton

Michael Hampton — Mon, 25 Dec 2006 01:18:51 +0000

BJ, I made that point in the very first post about Lauren. It would be pretty hard to miss. Oliver, it's not particularly odd at all. To post bail would have defeated the whole purpose of the protest: to show the world exactly how evil the system is.

By: `reb

`reb — Sun, 24 Dec 2006 22:11:24 +0000

If “JK” believes “the ‘buyer’s'admission the price was only half the value” reflects on the sellers credibility, JK does not fully appreciate the operation of a government-empowered confiscation.

By: Standard Mischief»Blog Archive » Lauren Canario, New London eminent domain protester, freed after 90 days

Sat, 23 Dec 2006 22:44:00 +0000

[...] On October 23, Canario received a preliminary hearing during which her bond was raised from $5,000 to $20,000 and she was ordered bound over for trial, but no trial date was set. Court officials at the time said it could be as much as a year before she would receive a trial. [...]

By: BJ

BJ — Sat, 23 Dec 2006 14:10:42 +0000

Her mistake is that she apparently doesn’t understand that the only one with true ownership of the land is the county/state in which it resides in. That’s why the Supreme Court voted the way it did. We pay taxes to have the right to occupy such land. The governing authorities have the right to revoke that priveledge at any time.

Instead of Eminent Domain, the emphasis on WHY that is allowed to occur in the first place should have been discussed.

Everyone that I’ve ever tried to explain that you really don’t own your land under any circumstances gets really, really upset. THAT might have made a difference to the populace.

By: JK87

JK87 — Sat, 23 Dec 2006 09:41:09 +0000

“which they admitted was half value”…you lost cerdiblity right there.

By: Hellmark

Hellmark — Sat, 23 Dec 2006 08:42:02 +0000

William, my family home that I lived in, and my family had owned for 5 generations, was taken from me via eminent domain. I had no choice in the matter. I would either accept their payment (which they admitted was half value), or be taken to court and end up losing the house anyway. The city where I lived decided to build a dead end road, starting at the edge of my property and going through my house, ending at the other edge of my property. The rest of the ground a member of the planning and zoning board got, and used to build an office
complex. Its been two years since I was forced out and my house bulldozed, and despite the office complex being built, the useless road that was planned has still yet to be made.