There many steps that must be taken. The first is to give the owner notice of the taking. You could research "eminent domain taking" in your state code for the statutory steps that must be taken when land is taken from private owners for public use.
Lenin's first move as head of the government after the October Revolution was to abolish the private ownership of property.
eminent domain
first answer: No, Mussolini and fascism did not support government ownership of property. He encouraged private ownership. second improved answer: Fascism & communism are both socialist political & economic movements. Private property ownership is one of the major differences between fascism & communism. However, in fascism the government controls the usage of property, land, & private businesses. Fascism perverts & corrupts capitalism, such that economic & political freedom is lost. The Fascist government can decide to seize the assets of any person or business, solely on the orders of key fascist leaders. One of the ways that Hitler & Mussolini received public support from their people was to promise to resist communism (which would have seized all private property). However, Hitler & Mussolini would have eventually gravitated towards the seizure or control of all property. As you can see, communism & fascism are vey similar, with communism being the most extreme form of socialism.
Lenin's view toward property ownership was that it had to be abolished if capitalism were to be eliminated and socialism (and later communism) successfully imposed on the society. As Karl Marx had said the essence of capitalism is the private ownership of property. Abolish private ownership of property and you abolish capitalism. One of the very first things Lenin did after the Revolution was to abolish the private ownership of property and vest it in the state.
In the late 1920s, Japan had a democratic government. While it was largely a two party system during the twenties, by the late 20s it had become a largely coalition government and Prime Minister. During these years the country was deeply committed to constitutional democracy and private property.
If it is on someones private property YES. However several law comeinto play if is is damed up and prevented from flow normally.
law a city government dictating usages of a private property
Private property cannot be taken by the government without what ?
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.
As long as the viewing area of the camera is limited to your own property only.
i think that government action is something that you do with the government. private action is like something you do as a family or a small grupe of people.
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.
Private property is not owned or controlled by the government. The owner has the exclusive right to its use and possession, can sell or mortgage it, and her heirs will inherit it if she dies.
No state is created.
ummm you should know this
larceny grand larceny larcely of private property larceny of government property
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.