Property Rights

Discussion in 'Freedom and Liberty' started by Ganado, May 31, 2015.

  1. Ganado

    Ganado Monkey+++

  2. kellory

    kellory An unemployed Jester, is nobody's fool. Banned

    Just another example of being treated like a criminal before the fact.
    Tully Mars likes this.
  3. ghrit

    ghrit Bad company Administrator Founding Member

    More like laying the ground work for regulatory oversight of the puddles in your driveway. From there, comes the criminalization of you for allowing runoff that might contain drippings brought home off the highway. Just one more example of make work for dot gov.
  4. Dont

    Dont Just another old gray Jarhead Monkey

    Have been told that no one really "own" property. If it can be taken from you for not paying a tax or for a parking lot, then how can you claim to "own" that property? If there is an easement? Do you control that property? Not really.
    When I bought this place I reviewed all the easements that applied. Despite living way out of the way, there are existing easements. They are all from logging companies that had gone bankrupt in the 1920's and early 1930's. The road that runs up the hill cross's my property and if I choose to I can put up gates to control random access. I just need to provide a means for others to open the gate.

    The .gov has been intruding on what we can do with our property. Epa has taken lead on most all intrusions on what we are "allowed" to do on our property. It will ultimately be up to the courts, unfortunately, someone has to be harmed first, and it will cost them everything they have to litigate their claim..
  5. Ganado

    Ganado Monkey+++

    You can go thru the process to remove old easements. It's long drawn out and can be expensive .

    This is a wave of a pen and boom. Instant legal access by people you don't know telling you how to manage the drainage and run off on your property. No due process. As a land owner you have no rights if they claim.... not prove..... claim that run off from your property is polluting down stream.

    This will lead to property confiscation far worse than the grazing issues ranchers have had on public grazing leases
  6. Brokor

    Brokor Live Free or Cry Moderator Site Supporter+++ Founding Member

    If you do not hold the TITLE to the actual LAND, you DO NOT own the property. Period. Guess what? The only STATE in the UNION I am aware of which still has titles, is TEXAS (and this was back in 2005). If you are paying taxes on property...chances are -you DO NOT own it. The STATE owns the property. People tend to buy "real estate", which is the house on the land. You need to get the actual (allodial) title for the land to own the property. You will most likely see a "Certificate of Title" or some other document, none of which are actual titles, but a receipt for the contract of the property itself. Much like your vehicle TITLE is NEVER given to you (unless you buy the car in cash at the dealership and request the MSO) it is sent to the STATE, placed on digital file, and kept by them. The STATE issues you your "certificate of title", and contracts YOU to OBEY their "laws". Your driver's license is a CONTRACT, also. You are bound to OBEY even the implied rules and policies per the UCC.

    Here's the most important part: ALL RIGHTS ARE EXERCISED THROUGH THE USE OF PROPERTY OWNERSHIP. (please re-read that again)

    If you do not own the property, how can you possibly justify ANYTHING you wish to do without asking and begging for permission? Now, I did not say that all rights are DERIVED from property ownership. Your rights are there the moment you are born, but you dare not exercise your rights unless you have been granted permission by the land owner or you are the owner (with the implied title). It's simple, really. Our founders created a republic in which EVERY CITIZEN was a KING or QUEEN unto themselves. If I am the ACTUAL land owner, I can make any rules I wish -IT'S MY LAND! And NO, you cannot tax me! NO, you will not trespass. NO, your laws do NOT apply to me on MY LAND.

    These are all concepts foreign to the slaves in America today.

    Whenever there is a question of "who is in the right" legally -the very first question which needs to be asked is, "who owns the property?" There's your answer.
  7. Dont

    Dont Just another old gray Jarhead Monkey

    Have read about what @Brokor states.. I refrained from stating such because I do not feel confident in what I had read.. Thanks to @Brokor for the clarification of property ownership..
    Cruisin Sloth, HK_User and Brokor like this.
  8. BTPost

    BTPost Stumpy Old Fart,Deadman Walking, Snow Monkey Moderator

    Actually If one had a USFS Special Use Permit, prior to Alaska Statehood, as per the Articles of Statehood, for the State of Alaska, those Permits could, and were, converted to Patented Land, by the US Government, for a small Fee. Most of the actual Privately Held Land in Alaska was converted to Patented Land, in this way. The rest was processed to the State of Alaska, which then was deeded to the Municipalities, WITHOUT Any TideLands, or Surface, or SubSurface, Mineral or Water Rights, which are ALL held by the State of Alaska, and administered by the Department of Natural Resources, under the Municipal Land Accession Act. There is a State Statute in place, that says ALL Tidelands that came thru the Federal/State Land Grants under the Statehood Act can NOT be sold to Private Interests, but must be held by the State, or a Municipality, for the Public Good. The same Statute also states that ALL Mineral Rights, for any such Land will be held by the State, and can not be deeded to any other entity. This is how the State of Alaska acquired all the Oil Rights on the North Slope, and the proceeds of the Sale of that Oil, is what funds the Alaska Permanent Fund, which pays every State of Alaska Resident, that qualifies yearly, a nice fat check. The State does Permit Water Rights to be Attached to a Property Deed, upon Application, and Use. Mineral Rights, and Tidelands, can be Leased, by the State, or a Municipality to a Private Interest, but Title can NOT be converted. The land I reside on, is Patented Land, and has ALL TideLands, Mineral, and Water Rights, attached. The 5 Acres that my Beach Cabin is on is NOT Patented Land, but came thru the local Borough, (County) Municipal Land Accession Act, and has NO Mineral Rights attached, No Tidelands attached and a State Public Access Easement from Mean High Water, in Land 50Ft, which allows ANYONE to cross my beach at ANYTIME. I do have a State Water Right attached to that Title, for 70USG of Hand Carried Water from Seal Creek, that is 300 Yds North of my Property, and flows into the Inlet. My Water Right is the First of 7 Rights granted on that Creek, so I get my Water, FIRST, followed by the others in succession, by Grant Dates.
  9. Ganado

    Ganado Monkey+++

    Broker you are partially correct. Most people don't own their land. Patented and alloidal titles aside. You do own an interest in the land.. you PURCHASE AN INTEREST when you buy ...again I am not discussing patented land, land grants, alloidal title or any of those specific types of whole title. FYI most patented land is not whole ownership either but you have to read the original grant to know.

    Back to mainstream ownership. When you buy you purchase an interest in the land
    What Bammy just did with the wave of a pen was to reduce our INTEREST that we did purchase even further without due process.

    When you buy land with water rights it's the same thing you purchased the right to use the water. The state always owns the water.

    The rights we do have were further reduced and I think it's important to know these things. Not argue over ownership rights. Duh
  10. BTPost

    BTPost Stumpy Old Fart,Deadman Walking, Snow Monkey Moderator

    Land, Water, & Mineral Rights, are a State Issue, and each State may deal with these issues differently, depending on that States specific State Statutes... So Generalizations may be deceiving when one does NOT have a good handle on the specific Statutes that Govern these issue in the State one is looking at....
    There is going to be some GIANT State Court battles, when it comes to California Water Rights, now that the State is mandating Cuts, by Executive Actions by MoonBeam Brown... Mark my Words here...
  11. Brokor

    Brokor Live Free or Cry Moderator Site Supporter+++ Founding Member

    No, I am completely correct. No "law" supersedes the US Constitution. If any "law" is in violation or contradicts the US Constitution, that "law" is wholly void. This includes any and ALL state "laws". Either you own the property, or the state does. As for the water, easement, birds, fish, tidal zone, seashells, crickets, toads and height of the's all part of the PROPERTY RIGHTS. Some legal mumbo-jumbo and folks think there is actual meaning behind what these criminals do. There can be no WATER RIGHTS if there is not first PROPERTY. There can be no EASEMENT if there is not first PROPERTY. Rinse and repeat.

    A RIGHT cannot be GRANTED.

    They can do whatever they wish. It's all land which is legally theirs, but -it may not be lawful.

    It was important 75 years ago. Today, it's a lost cause, if you want my humble opinion.
    BlueDuck and HK_User like this.
  12. Gator 45/70

    Gator 45/70 Monkey+++

    Move to a house boat, Don't like the state government or your neighbors.

    Crank-up and move, No land taxes!
    Ganado and Brokor like this.
  13. Dont

    Dont Just another old gray Jarhead Monkey

    If you do not own the property then you have no real rights to the land nor any say in portions that are regulated by the owner.. A question should be asked is why are not the states (owners of the land) not speaking out on this grab of "their" resources by the fed's.. Now, in my old and graying memory there was some mention that the fed only had authority over "navigable" waters.. The seasonal spring fed pond in the yard can not be navigated with even a blow up mattress.. If the states tolerate this grab of resources, folk will need to help the state gov remember who we are..

    Patented land.. Read something about getting a patent on your land.. I am a sceptic with things I read on the net, or in those thin pamphlets or books that come to us occasionally.

    Seriously, any preps you do on "your" land is for not if another entity claims right to "your" land...
    Brokor likes this.
  14. Gator 45/70

    Gator 45/70 Monkey+++

    We have 5 old wells on our family land
    In Louisiana its Grandfathered in.
    I don't need a permit to re-drill one that already existed.
  15. BTPost

    BTPost Stumpy Old Fart,Deadman Walking, Snow Monkey Moderator

    @Dont. I can almost hear the STATE AGs whipping up Federal Law Suits if the EPA and Corps of Engineers actually try a push this position thru, without Congress....
    Dont and Brokor like this.
  16. Dont

    Dont Just another old gray Jarhead Monkey

    I would hope the AG's do that, @BTPost ...

    Have been watching the county south of me change their land use laws.. They seem to have embraced the "sustainable community".. To many left coasters have moved in there.. And movies and books that are dealing with the agenda 21 story line sets me to thinking.. How could "they" get those of us living out in the hills to give up our life style and embrace the urban life style.. Ever planning for the what if's..
    Motomom34 and Brokor like this.
  17. Brokor

    Brokor Live Free or Cry Moderator Site Supporter+++ Founding Member

    I am willing to bet some states will throw a HOLY fit, others will side with the Gubment.

    I honestly think most are ignorant. Seriously. Never underestimate the power of stupidity. Plus, it's fashionable and hip today to trust the feds.
    Yes. Maritime Law. I can cite the exact references if you like, I also have a bit of an old memory here. But, essentially "laws" were passed, and with the Zip-Code trick, federal zones were created. Maritime Law is Admiralty Law, and these include ditches and drainage areas, all creeks and rivers, essentially everything except the damn desert (although not originally). Even the buffer zone 100-200 miles off every coast line is a federal zone. Lots of tricky lawyering happened, all of them are certainly going to burn in hell for eternity, if there is such a place. This is not to be confused with Federal Territories such as D.C., Guam, the Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico.

    AH, here it is. I knew I posted this before. US moving from 'inclusion' to totalitarianism | Survival Forums

    Sen. Document #43 (1933) Contracts Payable in Gold: "The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State. Individual so-called ownership is only by virtue of government, i.e. law, amounting to a mere user, and use must be in accordance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State."
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2015
  18. Dont

    Dont Just another old gray Jarhead Monkey

    I am pleased to see I am not yet ready to move into the dementia unit at the local nursing home..
    However by my simple reasoning, if private property is guaranteed by constitutional decree why has this not been challenged..
    Another example of being fed a line of propganda by "they"...
    Thanks for the clarification..
    Brokor likes this.
  19. Brokor

    Brokor Live Free or Cry Moderator Site Supporter+++ Founding Member

    @Dont -The Bill of Rights was added to secure the most basic rights of the citizenry, not grant rights (as I am sure you may know). The rest of the Constitution is simply a delegation of authority FROM the people TO the government, entailing what they can do and what they shall not do. Unfortunately, there isn't much in the form of property protection for citizens from an abusive and tyrannical government -not by today's standards. For the time, sure it was complete and it made sense (and still does to patriots), but to the lawyers and the politicians, there's just too much grey area. Just like any RIGHT, it's of no use if it isn't vigilantly protected by an active citizenry.

    In Article IV, Section 3 of the US Constitution it states:
    "The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State."

    Take special note of the wording. It says "the United States", not "The United States", one is describing the union of the republic, the other is a corporation (with every right and privilege of a corporation). "When governments enter the world of commerce, they are subject to the same burdens as any private firm or corporation." Clearfield Trust Co. v. United States, 318 U.S. 363 - 371; United States v. Burr, 309 U.S. 242

    The Fifth Amendment states:
    "...nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb, nor shall be compelled in any criminal
    case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation."

    Due Process. Very interesting how that comes into play. The Bill of Rights makes specific references to property seizure four times. The Bill of Rights speaks to due process of law eighteen times. The United States Supreme Court has often recognized the relevance of the lessons of history in determining the particular demands of due process of law. Due process of law, says the Court, is "a historical product." Justice Frankfurter has aptly pointed out that the Sixth and Seventh Amendment guarantees of criminal and civil jury trials are almost entirely defined by historical materials. "The gloss may be the deposit of history," he observes, "whereby a term gains technical content. Thus the requirements of the Sixth and Seventh Amendments for trial by jury in the federal courts have a rigid meaning."

    I suggest reading every word here: Supreme Law School : E-mail : Box 112 : Msg 11293

    And this is the Amendment ratified in 1868 (Amendment XIV):
    "Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

    We must not forget, the courts do not operate in accordance with common law and the guidelines of the Constitution, but operate entirely within the scope of Admiralty Law, under the active Emergency of War, and will freely claim it to be "Statutory".
    BlueDuck likes this.
  20. Dont

    Dont Just another old gray Jarhead Monkey

    You are a bright man.. Thats one of main reasons I enjoy this forum.. Lots of knowledge here. And entertainment on occasion..
    Thanks for the schooling.
    BlueDuck, Motomom34 and Brokor like this.
  1. toolbelt99
  2. Ganado
  3. DarkLight
  4. GhostX
  5. duane
  6. Dont
  7. Brokor
  8. Mountainman
  9. CATO
  10. Falcon15
  11. Tango3
  12. ColtCarbine
  13. Clyde
survivalmonkey SSL seal warrant canary