Posted on 03/01/2020 3:53:20 PM PST by libstripper
A very disturbing video was posted on Twitter this weekend.
A homeowner in Los Angeles claims the local government is preventing him from removing a homeless encampment from his property.
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
This is what happened to a buddy of mine in the DR. He went with his father to chase squatters off land they owned regularly. If they built a shack or something, under the socialist leadership, they could lay claim to the land and his father would lose it. They eventually had to hire guards to patrol the land with shotguns to keep it.
These commies need to be...removed.
When the government won’t enforce the laws against trespass, and instead sides with the trespassers, it’s a taking.
Unconstitutional.
Why have a government if it won’t protect you against invasion, crime, or appropriation of property?
They want anarchy.
Call me skeptical. I’d like to see some confirmation before I get too excited over this.
Maybe I’m misreading this but the linked story suggests that the courts are saying that local governments can’t prohibit private property owners from allowing the homeless to camp on the land. That’s a bit different from the headline. And again, assuming I’m not missing something here, that’s not Communism.
Maybe I’m misreading this but the linked story suggests that the courts are saying that local governments can’t prohibit private property owners from allowing the homeless to camp on *their* land. That’s a bit different from the headline. And again, assuming I’m not missing something here, that’s not Communism.
CORRECTED
Of course exceptions will be made if the homeless start camping out in Scarsdale,New Canaan or Palo Alto.
You first, Nancy.
These ASSHATS just keep pushing the envelope GEEZE at this rate Trump will win Oregon, WA. and CA. I say good move ALL the homeless on to private property and really let these Libs see what is is like under socialist rule GO FOR IT!! Piss off every property owner in all 3 states AND start with Beverly Hill, Hollywood Hills, Malibu, there are HUGE estates there with LOTS of land on their properties!!!
Only for a while.
Remember, they want to tell everyone what to do, how to live, and to allocate all resources. Anarchy is a tool, a transitional stage to tear down the existing social and economic system, but not a permanent plan.
I would put pointed stakes one foot apart over my yard.
Yeah, that’s confusing. But, another question...if government can’t ban the homeless from camping on private property (IF the owner allows it), will the government remove the squatters if the owner says move them off the property?
I’m all for this law.
BUT
I have one important tweak to make to it. The very first properties that must be opened up for the homeless to camp on are the properties of politicians. We’ll start with the governor and move on to members of the state senate and house. When all of those properties have been filled with the homeless we’ll move on to government cabinet officials. from there we’ll move on to US Senators and Representatives from that state. Only once all of the properties of politicians have been filled with the homeless can we even think about allowing them to camp on anybody else’s property.
That’s a good question. This a very poorly worded piece.
INVADERS should be give maps to SANCTUARIANS and their families houses. After all, they do deserve a nice place to stay.
Watch the video at the site. That's all the confirmation I need.
See the movie “Pacific Heights”
Michael Keaton is a nightmare.
Makes you think being a landlord is a crazy poposition.
Exactly. Anarcho-Communist.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.