RT>SK> RT>SK> Please post that part in it's entirety. I'd sure like to
RT>SK> RT>SK> see  it...considering it doesn't exist.
RT>SK> RT>Try the Just Compensation clause of the Fifth Amendment:
RT>SK> RT>".....nor shall private property be taken for public use
RT>SK> RT>without just compensation."
RT>SK> But then, a cop taking a car isn't taking it for public use.
RT>Sure is.  A police officer is a public servant.
But it's NOT public use. Just as a judges chambers aren't public just 
because the judge is a public servant. Or, just as a cops patrol car 
isn't public because they are a public servant. Thus, why should my 
personal vehicle be considered for public use just because a cop wants 
to use it.
RT>SK> This clause has to do with eminent domain (you know, a freeway
RT>SK> being  built through your property or such), not commandeering of
RT>SK> vehicles. 
RT>Excellent!  Originally, yes, but its meaning (along with about
RT>everything else in the Constitution) has been extended.
Nope. Not in this case. Eminent domain has never been used as an 
"excuse" for commandeering of vehicles.
---
* CMPQwk #1.42* UNREGISTERED HANGDGUN COPY
--- WILDMAIL!/WC v4.12 
---------------