California gives beach back to black family after it was stolen nearly 100 years ago | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 81680631 United States 07/24/2022 10:34 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | I know of a score of people who's land was taken as this families. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 80542035 Problem is their European and Hispanic. Their land is now streets and water treatment facilities they received low ball bids too. We are NOT equal in this country. Whites need to take inequalities of law, such as this, and claim it as a precedent for all- because inequality under law is blatantly unconstitutional. Then they need to flood courts with claims of their own for the same kind of payment. But they won't, they never do. |
Paul Drake User ID: 77420325 United States 07/24/2022 11:08 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | "30 lots were acquired by the city through eminent domain on the pretense of building a park. Twenty five of those lots were owned by white families. The total paid for the 30 lots was $66,040.63. Even though the Bruce family owned only two out of the 30 lots, the Bruce family received $14,500, or 22 percent of the amount awarded by the court. Some of the lots were vacant land and others had improvements on them." "Of the five black families who were forced to sell their property, four of them purchased another parcel in Manhattan Beach. They were not “driven out of town,” as some have stated. The Bruce family was the only Black family to leave the city as a result of the eminent domain." [link to easyreadernews.com (secure)] |
SFX User ID: 13475882 United States 07/24/2022 11:16 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 79889820 Canada 07/24/2022 11:19 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | then by example the "black family" should give it back to whomever owned it prior. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 70470468 It wasn't even stolen. It was purchased, and only NOW are they upset about the deal! These people were not even alive when the legal deal was made. They saw a payday, and California will now be paying them yearly with taxpayer money. Eminent domain is a criminal thing. Where they have no legal way to force you to sell, or no legal way to buy it. So they do that, to get it anyway. You won't sell? Eminent domain it out of your hands. These people deserve to be paid for it if you ask me. These people weren't alive in 1924. |
Digital mix guy User ID: 81178086 United States 07/24/2022 11:23 PM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 83906654 07/25/2022 12:13 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | then by example the "black family" should give it back to whomever owned it prior. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 70470468 It wasn't even stolen. It was purchased, and only NOW are they upset about the deal! These people were not even alive when the legal deal was made. They saw a payday, and California will now be paying them yearly with taxpayer money. Eminent domain is a criminal thing. Where they have no legal way to force you to sell, or no legal way to buy it. So they do that, to get it anyway. You won't sell? Eminent domain it out of your hands. These people deserve to be paid for it if you ask me. These people weren't alive in 1924. Says the trust fund baby… |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 83707093 United States 07/25/2022 12:17 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 83907743 United States 07/25/2022 12:20 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | It will soon be a place where black people can once again enjoy the beach. [link to www.bing.com (secure)] |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 78964344 United States 07/25/2022 12:22 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 80289823 United States 07/25/2022 12:40 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Paul Drake User ID: 77420325 United States 07/25/2022 12:48 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | "The California Eagle printed a letter from E. Burton Ceruti, Attorney for the L.A. Branch, N.A.A.C.P. on July 11, 1924, wherein he stated that Mrs. Bruce was “willing to sell her property and, even if a suit be instituted, would sell at a fair price at any time, and would abandon the suit at such time.” By December, they had entered into the condemnation proceedings with Attorney Willis O. Tyler as their lawyer." [link to www.manhattanbeach.gov (secure)] I think they opened a door.... Reparations? Giving back lots taken from eminent domain? Might get interesting. When will this end? It never will. Not saying that family wasn't harassed - at that time in our history, I have no doubt they were. But if the city/county/state gives back one lot that they forced the owner to sell, they must give back the other 28 lots. Isn't this entire case based on fairness? Then they should be fair to all. JMHO Last Edited by Paul Drake on 07/25/2022 12:51 AM |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 83892911 Mexico 07/25/2022 01:03 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 78504586 United States 07/25/2022 01:10 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | This, like a lot of other things to do with the nations’s seashore beaches, is BS. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 83864825 The USSC ruled in the early 1980s that the nation’s seashore beaches are public property, and cannot be owned by any person, state or municipality, nor can access to the beach be contingent on beach passes, etc.. Nevertheless, this ruling has been ignored with impunity by almost every state that borders the ocean. America is basically a lawless nation. That is correct. They do not have to allow you access via an easement to the beach, but they do not actually OWN the beach. No such thing as a "private" beach. They can own the beach up until the sand becomes wet from the ocean. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 83041820 United States 07/25/2022 01:16 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 78504586 United States 07/25/2022 01:16 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Yeah, they were payed $14,500 for it in 1924. Quoting: Daniel~Sun That amount back then would be the equivalent of around $200,000 or more today, so hardly stolen. They would have been able to purchase a couple of nice homes with the money they received. :9teen: You forget that they had a thriving business, so yeah it was stolen. Same for a lot of poor white and brown folk as well. Yeah, but poor Whites will never be compensated and are still being screwed over. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 29143373 United States 07/25/2022 02:27 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 81796553 Ukraine 07/25/2022 02:37 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Because, you know, they just LOVE the beach! Quoting: FightForGod! They don't even want the beach: Bruce's Beach in California was formally returned to the Black descendants it was seized from in 1924. Charles and Willa Bruce ran a resort for Black families until their land was seized by the city via eminent domain. The Bruce family plans to lease their newly-returned land back to the city for $413,000 a year. [link to www.msn.com (secure)] shit son.. 90 percent of these muhfuckas cant even swim or go into the woods |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 19199382 United States 07/25/2022 03:21 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | then by example the "black family" should give it back to whomever owned it prior. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 70470468 It wasn't even stolen. It was purchased, and only NOW are they upset about the deal! These people were not even alive when the legal deal was made. They saw a payday, and California will now be paying them yearly with taxpayer money. JEALOUS RACIST DETECTED ALWAYS SUBERSIVE TO THE TRUTH |
Rationalist User ID: 83908232 Philippines 07/25/2022 03:26 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | then by example the "black family" should give it back to whomever owned it prior. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 70470468 It wasn't even stolen. It was purchased, and only NOW are they upset about the deal! These people were not even alive when the legal deal was made. They saw a payday, and California will now be paying them yearly with taxpayer money. Good for them. Which of us -- given an opportunity like this -- would not take it?? |
Glaber User ID: 74833160 United States 07/25/2022 03:36 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Eminent domain is perfectly legal in the United States of America; always has been. The problem is with the Kelo decision, SCOTUS changed the definition of public use. It used to mean highways, water treatment plants etc. Now, it can mean a corporation that can bring in more tax revenue to the gov is worthy. If the black family was compensated nearly one hundred years ago, they should not get a do over. White people (including relatives of mine) have had the same thing happen to them for hundreds of years here. [link to www.law.cornell.edu (secure)] "A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still" |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 83277861 United States 07/25/2022 03:44 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Yeah, they were payed $14,500 for it in 1924. Quoting: Daniel~Sun That amount back then would be the equivalent of around $200,000 or more today, so hardly stolen. They would have been able to purchase a couple of nice homes with the money they received. We know what's been stolen when $14,500 in 1924 is worth $200,000 or more today. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 83277861 United States 07/25/2022 03:58 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Eminent domain is perfectly legal in the United States of America; always has been. The problem is with the Kelo decision, SCOTUS changed the definition of public use. It used to mean highways, water treatment plants etc. Now, it can mean a corporation that can bring in more tax revenue to the gov is worthy. If the black family was compensated nearly one hundred years ago, they should not get a do over. White people (including relatives of mine) have had the same thing happen to them for hundreds of years here. [link to www.law.cornell.edu (secure)] Quoting: Glaber "Eminent domain is perfectly legal in the United States of America" That is true. Eminent domain is also unlawful. The 'Needs of the state' should Never be an excuse to take someone's Rights. That communist bullshit should not be allowed because this is the United States of America. Fuck their socialist legalities. |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 73826414 United States 07/25/2022 04:15 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 77949466 United States 07/25/2022 04:18 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Because, you know, they just LOVE the beach! Quoting: FightForGod! They don't even want the beach: Bruce's Beach in California was formally returned to the Black descendants it was seized from in 1924. Charles and Willa Bruce ran a resort for Black families until their land was seized by the city via eminent domain. The Bruce family plans to lease their newly-returned land back to the city for $413,000 a year. [link to www.msn.com (secure)] What about all the countless others whose land was taken of all colors to build a fucking interstate concrete jungle hell hole? They got a few nickels prolly |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 83277861 United States 07/25/2022 04:30 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | Because, you know, they just LOVE the beach! Quoting: FightForGod! They don't even want the beach: Bruce's Beach in California was formally returned to the Black descendants it was seized from in 1924. Charles and Willa Bruce ran a resort for Black families until their land was seized by the city via eminent domain. The Bruce family plans to lease their newly-returned land back to the city for $413,000 a year. [link to www.msn.com (secure)] What about all the countless others whose land was taken of all colors to build a fucking interstate concrete jungle hell hole? They got a few nickels prolly How about all the Ranchers whose land was taken for 'nature preserves and parks? Seems like everyone got screwed by the corporate owed government front. I guarantee, they wouldn't touch any of Gates new farms. |
buckets99 User ID: 47808803 United States 07/25/2022 04:31 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 78919163 United States 07/25/2022 06:16 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 74769583 United States 07/25/2022 06:20 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | |
FightForGod! (OP) User ID: 80146778 United States 07/25/2022 06:24 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | "30 lots were acquired by the city through eminent domain on the pretense of building a park. Twenty five of those lots were owned by white families. The total paid for the 30 lots was $66,040.63. Even though the Bruce family owned only two out of the 30 lots, the Bruce family received $14,500, or 22 percent of the amount awarded by the court. Some of the lots were vacant land and others had improvements on them." Quoting: Paul Drake "Of the five black families who were forced to sell their property, four of them purchased another parcel in Manhattan Beach. They were not “driven out of town,” as some have stated. The Bruce family was the only Black family to leave the city as a result of the eminent domain." [link to easyreadernews.com (secure)] Oh look! And now, the rest of the story. 1 Corinthians 6:9-10 ESV Or do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor men who practice homosexuality, nor thieves, nor the greedy, nor drunkards, |
Anonymous Coward User ID: 80585787 United States 07/25/2022 06:26 AM Report Abusive Post Report Copyright Violation | This, like a lot of other things to do with the nations’s seashore beaches, is BS. Quoting: Anonymous Coward 83864825 The USSC ruled in the early 1980s that the nation’s seashore beaches are public property, and cannot be owned by any person, state or municipality, nor can access to the beach be contingent on beach passes, etc.. Nevertheless, this ruling has been ignored with impunity by almost every state that borders the ocean. America is basically a lawless nation. That is correct. They do not have to allow you access via an easement to the beach, but they do not actually OWN the beach. No such thing as a "private" beach. People here in NJ get around this by launching their kayak at any place that offers legal ocean access, like under a bridge right-of-way for example, then paddling to the beach and coming in from the ocean. The beach patrols will often harass them, and sometimes even give them tickets because they failed to show a “beach pass”, but when it goes to court and gets dismissed, the kayaker sues the town involved and usually gets a very nice payday. Because of this, a lot of shore towns have stopped hassling people coming to the beach from off the ocean, as it’s a losing proposition. Why can’t you just walk in without a pass through the boardwalk entries? and when they ask tell them to call the cops? |