This is completely dependent on your beliefs.
If all property is owned by the government, you have no safety from the government controlling your life. If they wish to use your location of residence for something else, then they can force you to move elsewhere.
If property is owned privately, the property that could be used in better ways, but the owner is too stubborn to sell it, will just be wasted property.
Both have benefits and both have faults.
A tyrannic government is a government that strips individuals of basic rights that they should be allowed, such as "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" or freedom of speech. Basically, according to Jefferson, it is a government that deprives individuals of "Unalienable right".
A minarchist believes in very limited government and it should only exist to protect the life, liberty, and property of individuals.
John Locke believed in the principles of natural rights, limited government, and the social contract. He argued that individuals have inherent rights to life, liberty, and property, that government should be restricted in its power over individuals, and that the authority of government is derived from the consent of the governed.
Everyone is allowed to use intellectual property, as long as they have permission from the owner or an exemption in the law.
because it can be botch
If the government needs private property for its own use, they should give fair market value to the owner of the property. The property owner can also give the government an easement agreement to the property and still retain ownership.
Rousseau believed that people should not own private property because it would make them greedy. He believed that the government should manage all property, and everybody should get an equal amount owned by the government.
John Locke believed that individuals have fundamental rights to life, liberty, and property. He argued that these natural rights should be protected by a social contract between the government and the governed. Additionally, Locke believed that individuals have the right to rebel against a government that violates these rights.
Comunism.
Parents should not let this happen. The community mailboxes are the property of the US Postal System, and as such government property. If someone falls off and cracks open their head who is supposed to pay ... the government or the parents? Should be the parents for allowing them to play on things that are not designated at "play equipment". Pure lack of parental control.
One argument people use is that the government should not put restrictions on private property. If something is environmentally unfriendly on property you own, some people believe the government should not be able to tell you how to treat that property.
Yes, you should be allowed to smoke on school property. As long as your away from people who dont want to smell the wonderful smell of burning tobacco, you should be allowed. At my school, you are allowed to smoke in the parking lots which is a good idea. It keeps kids from sneaking around school smoking in places that maybe they shouldnt.