Wow. The judge said he needs a mental exam before being released.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
That's a little weird. Although in this case a bit laughable, I wonder what's actually necessary to create a country.
If I, say, offered a billion dollars to purchase an acre of land from the US and call it a new country, removed from property taxes and what-not, could I do that?
Posted by dantesparadigm (Member # 8756) on :
I say we hold him as a foreign combatant.
Posted by Lupus (Member # 6516) on :
I guess that is one way of defending yourself...leaving the union.
Of course that was tried once before, and it didn't work out so well for those that tried to secede.
Posted by Leonide (Member # 4157) on :
Was it this guy? Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
quote:Originally posted by Raymond Arnold: If I, say, offered a billion dollars to purchase an acre of land from the US and call it a new country, removed from property taxes and what-not, could I do that?
Who would you pay? Your municipality? State? The federal government?
Leaving aside the fact that none of them have any particular reason to agree to such a sale, and quite a few reasons not to.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
Not according to International Law unless you fulfill numerous conditions which one man with a patch of land and a shot gun doesn't.
Posted by Nighthawk (Member # 4176) on :
I say we drop several thousand tons of ordinance, then invade.
I mean, we have to do it for his own good, right?
Posted by King of Men (Member # 6684) on :
Nations do sell land, including sovereignty, given sufficient incentive. Louisiana, Alaska, the Heligoland/Zanzibar swap, Mughal grants of extraterritoriality to European traders. In medieval Europe it was common, if King A had beaten King B in war, for A to become the vassal of B (not a typo); that is, the winner would swear fealty for the lands he had just annexed, which is a sale of sorts. My namesake Rolf the Ganger got Normandy this way, although after kissing the French king's shoe he grabbed the foot and tipped the king over, hinting perhaps that he considered the fealty a bit of a formality.
Incidentally, 'ordinance' is a law or regulation. 'Ordnance' is weapons, usually explosive.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 9735) on :
On the other hand, if you did drop several thousand tons of law books on the guy, he's probably just as dead.
But yes, a billion dollars should be enough to buy an acre of the US these days. Heck, its probably worth more than the US banking system Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Nations have sold land in the past. Pretty sure it's been quite a while since the last sale of note.
Posted by Raymond Arnold (Member # 11712) on :
I figure it'd depend on the acre in question/
Is there a rule in International Law that everyone has to part of a country? Even if one man with an acre doesn't count as a country, can it count as some vaguely country-like entity?
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
The Republic of Dave comes to mind.
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
quote:Who would you pay? Your municipality? State? The federal government?
Leaving aside the fact that none of them have any particular reason to agree to such a sale, and quite a few reasons not to.
I don't think a state has the authority to declare that land is no longer part of the country, so you'd have to get permission from the federal government. In granting that permission, the federal government could decide that payment might go to any of the above.
As for whether the government would accept offer to sell land, if you offered say $700 billion dollars right now, for an insignificant island, I could imagine they might just go for it. Everything's for sale, you just have to offer the right price.
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
"I am a rock... I am an island..." Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
I think all the insignificant islands are already privately owned. And yet, still part of the US.
Funny how that works.
Posted by Starsnuffer (Member # 8116) on :
That is not to say they cannot be sold by the federal govt assuming they pay the owner of the island a fair price... Nobody said anything about things being owned not being part of the US.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
He plead guilty. Posted by EmpSquared (Member # 10890) on :
quote:Originally posted by Samprimary: The Republic of Dave comes to mind.
Can't wait for Broken Steel.
Posted by DDDaysh (Member # 9499) on :
Ok - even saying you COULD decide to purchase yourself away from the US - what's to stop the US (or Mexico, or even CUBA) from invading the next day to take you back? There isn't really any overarching world law about how nations can behave towards one another. The things that typically keep bigger nations from pounding on smaller ones (military alliances, treaties, and trade sanctions) would likely get easily overlooked over a matter as trivial as this.
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
quote:I think all the insignificant islands are already privately owned. And yet, still part of the US.
Funny how that works.
And it doesn't really matter whether it's an island or a 1/4 acre lot.
Property tax is something that really bothers me, way more than income tax. If you have to continue paying for it after you own it, it isn't really your property. It's just a lease. The purchase price is merely a down payment.
But as far as buying your own island country is concerned, you would have to have ownership of the property, and also buy its independence from the government. Which might be considered like paying all the property taxes in advance, and in perpetuity, and then giving up the protections of being part of a larger country.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
It's also the point at which any government I can think of would balk.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)