• The Shot You’ll Never Forget Giveaway - Enter To Win A Barrel From Rifle Barrel Blanks!

    Tell us about the best or most memorable shot you’ve ever taken. Contest ends June 13th and remember: subscribe for a better chance of winning!

    Join contest Subscribe

Maggie’s Supreme court gives a win to private property owners

W54/XM-388

Online Training Member
Full Member
Minuteman
Legend
  • Oct 1, 2005
    14,967
    33,940
    Dallas, TX
    While our dear Republicans can't seem to do anything decent apart from help the democrats, at least the Supreme court is doing a few things right.


    It seems the evil communists on the supreme court are pretty upset that the court ruled the government can't just take your property and say figure out how to get paid later, but you can now go directly to Federal court and say your rights are being violated (like all the deviants get to do).

    Overall a big win for good folks.

    Considering how upset the communist bloc on the supreme court is, you know it's a good ruling.
     
    If government is allowed to take private property based on a future promise to pay, during the time between taking of the property and payment, the person has had their property taken without just compensation. Try going into a store, and walking out with merchandise as long as you leave a note saying you promise to pay later. If the logic doesn't work when it is expanded, it is faulty logic.

    I believe the 1985 decision that allowed government to take property based on a promise to pay in the future was flawed. Now, the Supreme Court agrees with me.

    As said above, if the liberals are upset, it is probably a good decision. I'm not tired of winning yet, is anyone else tired of winning?
     
    One thing about a commitment to Stare Decisis is on one hand it keeps Roe vs Wade, on the other it also keeps Heller.
    In the future a SCOTUS may overturn Heller "just because".