Arrest of Free Stater in New London, Ct. for standing up to 'new Eminent Domain' standard

[Ferret Annica]

Run time: 04:39 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gaITPIRHJ3c   Posted on YouTube: September 24, 2006 By YouTube Member: calebjohnson77 Views on YouTube: 19657   Posted on DU: October 31, 2006 By DU Member: Ferret Annica Views on DU: 546

 
http://www.nhfree.com/

NEW LONDON, Conn, Oct. 23, 2006 - After serving 31 days in prison, Free State Project member Lauren Canario of New London was ordered at yesterday's hearing to be held indefinitely pending a future trial.

Canario was arrested on Sept. 22 for refusing to leave one of the properties seized in the controversial Kelo vs. New London decision, in which the Supreme Court ruled that government can take homes and give the land to private corporations.

Anti-eminent-domain protestors held "Free Lauren Canario" signs at the city jail after she was arrested for sitting down in an attempt to prevent the boarding up of Fort Trumbull homes. The neighborhood was recently seized by the City of New London. She has been held for the past month pending a hearing and she is refusing to be represented by a lawyer.

Protesters arrived early Monday to support Canario. But, according to Free State Project member Kat Kanning, "They told us she wouldn't be brought in until 2 p.m., so we went out until about 1:30 p.m. When we came back, it was done and no one got to see her." 10-year-old protester William asked his father, "Why would they trick us like that, Dad?"

http://www.soulawakenings.com/underground/tikiwiki/tiki-index.php?page=Lauren%20Canario%20Arrest

[Lexingtonian]

1. I have a lot of sympathy

but Kelo was correctly decided. Property rights are not an absolute sovereignty.

[SlavesandBulldozers]

2. sure seems like it to the development corporations.

not an absolute sovereignity, just a sovereign of the well-heeled.

[Lexingtonian]

3. if you don't want public officials who are for sale

you have to stop electing them.

[SouthernBelle82]

5. First of all

that shouldn't matter. This was a decision by THE SUPREME COURT WHO WE DON'T ELECT! If they didn't make this decision it wouldn't be happening more than likely. And second of all who said these people were elected? How do you know they didn't steal it? You don't know that.

[Lexingtonian]

6. have you even read any of the Kelo v New London verdict

or grasped any of its reasoning?

[SouthernBelle82]

4. Oh yes

So never mind the fact that people who own their own land and their own home's and have worked for years to pay them off to own that land and their home's (and sometimes stays in families for generations) is now no longer their's. Sorry but once I buy something it is mine and the corporations have no right to take what is mine for their own businesses. Greedy bastards. And property rights are a part of your sovereignty as citizen's. When we have our own land we do have the right to our own sovereignty as citizen's where we have that Independence and we can live without the government butting into our lives and into our home's thanks to the fourth amendment. I see you care more about corporate greed than our rights as citizen's to have our own place to live and own that place. So I guess you'd be fine if a corporation wanted a farmer's land right? So much for being able to grow food for our country and have your job and your home. Seems to me from your own words you don't have any sympathy for people like my family who own our own house and our own land and the government can walk right up to us out of nowhere one day and demand that we give over our home for them.

[Lexingtonian]

7. I don't understand half of that rant

but we don't live in the Middle Ages, and land is not a commidity held different from all others anymore. That is the difference in our viewpoints. There was a time when arable land was different from all other things and defined a way of life. These days that view is untenable. If you've ever been to Iowa, we're not going to run out of good farmland anytime soon. As for the way of life...it no longer truly exists, how ever hard it is to accept that reality.

I don't view land as a commodity like toilet paper, but neither is any particular private plot of land more sacred than any other just because of your individual say so. A title deed and your desire doesn't consecrate the land. You need more than that. It takes collective agreement for a piece of land to be exceptional. And land is in fact owned collectively; the title deeds only allow you certain uses- and those uses can be further restricted by your neighbors. Try opening a toxic waste dump on your land, or a halfway house for pedophiles or rapists. Imagine if your neighbor did, and what you'd do in response, and why.

As a people we do try to be sensitive to memory, but we refuse to be slaves to it. Your view is extreme nostalgia and you imagine that emotional attachment to some material thing somehow creates a right to that material thing. We simply cannot accept that as a principle.

[Redstone]

8. Oh, just FUCK those "free stater" assholes. They want to take over

New Hampshire, no matter WHAT the people who live there want.

They're just a fucking right-wing militia under another name.

And I'm sad to see a DUer taken in by their bullshit.

Redstone