How would I react? Hmmm. I believe I can honestly say that the government would have a hell of a fight on their hands. They better bring in the military while their at it. Seriously though. I think the government grosely oversteps the boundries of reality when it comes to this. I hear horror stories all of the time about eminent domain from my wife who is in real estate. I do understand why this law is around. Especially when it come to congested areas where traffic issues exist. However I don't think this should be an issue where someone wants to build an "upscale" shopping center. Geez,we have enough of those as it is. It makes you wonder just how free we really are. Are we free as long as we don't have something they want?

It has become entirely too convenient and popular to take another's property or their rights to the use of the property.

This is true even here, where there have been some very onerous ordinances proposed, even championed. The worst of these have been beaten back, but not without sufficient public outcry.

The founding fathers recognized the threat to the property of the one, when coveted by the many. For this reason, we are blessed to have the 5th amendment of the Bill of Rights to protect us from such outrages.

To avoid becoming a victim, one must be forever vigilant.

I think that it is abhorrent that the U.S. government utilizes eminent domain in any case other than one that is bred from pure public necessity. I was made aware of a case on the news where a woman was being forced to sell her home so that an Native American Indian tribe could expand their gambling casino.

This woman's situation made me angry and I think that this particular government action would anger our nation's founders. The 4th Amendment states that, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, HOUSES, papers and effects, against UNREASONABLE searches and SEIZURES shall not be violated..."

I believe that this amendment to the Constitution sets a clear precedent. Why is the ACLU not crying out for civil liberties to be protected in this case?

Private Property is the most basic rights of a free society. Just because some big shot developer comes in and woo's the local government with the enticement of jobs and an expanded tax base, does not ever give the government the right to seize a person property, turn it over to a private developer and pay the price THEY want to pay. Everyone has the right to sell their property to the higest bidder . THAT'S what capitalism is all about. If the property is blighted or in disrepair , then enforce the local codes and if they are not adequate, then stream line and tweak them so they work. Beware of the ruse of Redevelopment authorities working hand in hand with developers, working with politicians ,whom received campaign contributions , taking property from tax paying citizens to give it to another to make a profit. Let them play by the same play book as anyone else that wants to purchase property for development.