Reaction to Property Outlaws
The article talks about a problem, which has been neglected by many scholars, that property outlaws have in fact contributed to the update of property law. The authors divide property outlaws into three categories: acquisitive outlaws, expressive outlaws and intersectional outlaws. By analyzing these three sorts of property outlaws in deterrent and retributive ways, the authors find that property outlaws are alternative way to express information and reach social justice. The behavior of property outlaws of all sorts provides a particularly effective mechanism by which those who are left out of the system o private ownership can challenge and change that system from the outside. However, though property outlaws have some positive contribution of property law, its illegal nature determines that property outlaw should never be an equal way as congress hearing or court decisions to change law. As the authors discuss in the article, the foundation of property law is stability. Though property outlaws may have some information value, we should not allow people to reach their ends via illegal ways. In Riggs v. Palmer, the court affirmed the fundamental maxim of common that “No one shall be permitted to profit by his own fraud, or to take advantage of his own wrong, or to found any claim upon his own iniquity, or to acquire property by his own crime.” If we justified property outlaws or even admit it as an alternative way to change property law, it will be unfair to those victims, and it will impair the authority of legislative branch and jurisdiction branch. 1. Indeed, property outlaws have some positive effect on property law in certain times. It is undeniable that property outlaws in certain time contributed to the update of property law. As illustrated in the article, in certain times when the property law itself was deficient，property outlaws could help to reform the social recognition of minority groups’ rights and dilemma. In the lunch counter sit-in movement, for example, the black students’ illegal behavior finally turned out to be a successful education and expression to the society. By sitting in the lunch counters against the business owners’ wish, black students showed in a non-violent way the they could behave equally or even better than those white people. The movement not only express their desire of equality, but also successful rose the sympathies of people. In the native American’s case, the squatters created the impetus for legal change by running roughshod over established property law, thereby creating for themselves communities governed by their own conception of just, albeit self-serving, property relations. However, their success cannot be separate from the support of states. Instead of saying that it was the squatter “against” the federal government, we would rather say that it were states against federal government. Similar with black students’ example, western public opinion, among squatters and non squatters alike, favored squatters over absentee landlords, public and private. The contemporary urban squatters example, is a little different. The squatters in this time were well-organized, they had a clear goal and they had clearly recognized the illegal nature of their behavior. Not only their movement advocated for poor people and reformed the public opinion, to some extent the movement also contributed to the re-allocation of social resource. Comparing the three example, it could be noticed that all three examples happened when the property law was deficient and society was experiencing changing. Society reforms always reflect on property relations, especially when minority group fight for their rights, they not only desire political voice, but or even more desire property rights. When African American advocated abolishing racial separation, they actually fought for property rights. When women advocated gender equality, one of the major topic was equality in employment and wages, which were also …show more content…
For example, in “Black Lives Matter” movement, not only protestors protests on private land against the landlords’ wish, but the assemblies were always accompanied by violence. For instance, in the incident of “Black Lives Matter” in Mall of America last year, the mall was forced to shut down. If we allow people to reach their goal in this way, why don 't we allow terrorists obtain their goal by putting suspecting bags in buildings, by sending threatening mails, or even by
The article talks about a problem, which has been neglected by many scholars, that property outlaws have in fact contributed to the update of property law. The authors divide property outlaws into three categories: acquisitive outlaws, expressive outlaws and intersectional outlaws. By analyzing these three sorts of property outlaws in deterrent and retributive ways, the authors find that property outlaws are alternative way to express information and reach social justice. The behavior of property outlaws of all sorts provides a particularly effective mechanism by which those who are left out of the system o private ownership can challenge and change that system from the outside. However, though property outlaws have some positive contribution of property law, its illegal nature determines that property outlaw should never be an equal way as congress hearing or court decisions to change law. As the authors discuss in the article, the foundation of property law is stability. Though property outlaws may have some information value, we should not allow people to reach their ends via illegal ways. In Riggs v. Palmer, the court affirmed the fundamental maxim of common that “No one shall be permitted to profit by his own fraud, or to take advantage of his own wrong, or to found any claim upon his own iniquity, or to acquire property by his own crime.” If we justified property outlaws or even admit it as an alternative way to change property law, it will be unfair to those victims, and it will impair the authority of legislative branch and jurisdiction branch. 1. Indeed, property outlaws have some positive effect on property law in certain times. It is undeniable that property outlaws in certain time contributed to the update of property law. As illustrated in the article, in certain times when the property law itself was deficient，property outlaws could help to reform the social recognition of minority groups’ rights and dilemma. In the lunch counter sit-in movement, for example, the black students’ illegal behavior finally turned out to be a successful education and expression to the society. By sitting in the lunch counters against the business owners’ wish, black students showed in a non-violent way the they could behave equally or even better than those white people. The movement not only express their desire of equality, but also successful rose the sympathies of people. In the native American’s case, the squatters created the impetus for legal change by running roughshod over established property law, thereby creating for themselves communities governed by their own conception of just, albeit self-serving, property relations. However, their success cannot be separate from the support of states. Instead of saying that it was the squatter “against” the federal government, we would rather say that it were states against federal government. Similar with black students’ example, western public opinion, among squatters and non squatters alike, favored squatters over absentee landlords, public and private. The contemporary urban squatters example, is a little different. The squatters in this time were well-organized, they had a clear goal and they had clearly recognized the illegal nature of their behavior. Not only their movement advocated for poor people and reformed the public opinion, to some extent the movement also contributed to the re-allocation of social resource. Comparing the three example, it could be noticed that all three examples happened when the property law was deficient and society was experiencing changing. Society reforms always reflect on property relations, especially when minority group fight for their rights, they not only desire political voice, but or even more desire property rights. When African American advocated abolishing racial separation, they actually fought for property rights. When women advocated gender equality, one of the major topic was equality in employment and wages, which were also …show more content…
For example, in “Black Lives Matter” movement, not only protestors protests on private land against the landlords’ wish, but the assemblies were always accompanied by violence. For instance, in the incident of “Black Lives Matter” in Mall of America last year, the mall was forced to shut down. If we allow people to reach their goal in this way, why don 't we allow terrorists obtain their goal by putting suspecting bags in buildings, by sending threatening mails, or even by