[Destroyer]

Originally Posted by SkunkBoat

btw, CA "secured leases" on empty motels and other facilities.

They did not "TAKE" anything.

and btw, every State has control over the use of land in the state. You don't really own your land, you own the rights to use it in accordance with the State's authority. The state's authority comes from the people of the state..past, present and future. It has always been that way. It has to be that way.

What they can't do is quarter soldiers in your home...and even that amendment is a little squishy.

So if I don't own my land does that mean that I don't have to pay taxes on it? LOL

Of course I own my land. I am not it's leaser, I am it's owner. The ONLY right the state has is to take my land "for the common good" but ONLY after paying me it's just worth. Even then, the states right of eminent domain is not absolute. It can be challenged in the courts and if the courts rule in favor of the owner the state cannot take the land.

I agree that the state has the right to limit certain activities on the land if those activities would adversely impact other land owners. That's just common sense. For instance, if you live on a 100' x 150' plot of land and you have a neighbor that lives 250' away from you you cannot hunt game with a high powered rifle. Nor can you drill for oil or a host of other things. Those limits are to protect others, not because the state owns the land. The states do have the right to limit or set aside certain areas for certain uses. For instance a land owner cannot build a large factory in an area zoned for residential use since that could adversely effect neighbors values of their homes and could impact their quality of living.

I'm not sure what you mean by "secured" leases. Ca took the vacant hotels, motels, etc under the guise of a national emergency. They did not reach an agreement with the owners first. That "may" have happened later. https://www.natlawreview.com/article...deering-hotels
And yes, the 3rd amendment is and always has been squishy, mainly because it's never had to be used for quartering troops.

In all cases, my original post was and still is about showing everyone just how fast, under the guise of "protecting" us, they can lose some or all of their Constitutionally given rights. (And this, perhaps more than any other reason, is why we must never let our 2nd amendment rights be taken from us. IMHO) I don't think that makes me a drama queen. Personally,
I prefer the moniker of "Patriot".