Then bloodshed it is. This sort of libertarianism can’t be allowed to pass.
They needn’t wait for him to appear in public, they can just slap liens on his property, bury him in court-papers, and tell the IRS to flag his tax returns for body-cavity-search-level audits. That’s the American Way. 
He doesn’t recognize that the federal government exists. Why would he file a tax return?
Is he actually that extreme? I heard him speak in a radio interview, and, while he sounded confused and a bit stupid, he didn’t sound quite that crazy. He was going on about how he had inherited the right to graze land, as if somehow a rental contract never expired and was heritable forever.
(Gee, can I try that on my landlord? “I inherited the right to stay here, so you can never evict me, even if I stop paying rent.”)
You wanna quote me where I said anything about how the government should have used violence? Could you fucking post that quote?
No?
THEN STOP TALKING OUT OF YOUR ASS. Please.
Most of your posts seem to indicate that you either don’t know much at all about this or you are deliberately trying to skew the conversation by carefully selecting which details you include or omit.
But now that you’ve started to actually put words into my mouth (text into my posts, whatever) and seemingly now want to ascribe motive and method to me while ADMITTING you don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about (“or something”? Is that how you plan to try and profess plausible deniability?) is really annoying.
When come back, bring facts. For a guy who claims to have no dog in this fight, you’re sure spreading a lot of dogshit with your posts and that shit’s gotta come from somewhere.
OMG, he doesn’t acknowledge the US exists?? And so many are willing to follow this guy to their graves. I weep.
Sort of.
Frankly, given the fervor of the nuts, I’m not entirely sure there’s ANY way to avoid “emboldening” them — I don’t see why a successful government action against this guy wouldn’t just inspire passion in them to fight against the “government tyranny.”
So if it’s a choice between emboldening them by giving in and emboldening them by moving against them with a non-zero probability of gunfire and blood, I’m not sure I can blame a decision for the former.
Whee-oo! Thank you! He sounded more rational in the radio interview. This is “freeman of the land” level crazy.
Pointing your gun at federal agents isn’t “rhetoric”, it’s a threat. [
](BLM releases Bundy cattle after protesters block southbound I-15 | Bundy-BLM | News)
These were criminals who, through show of force, got what they wanted. The feds should have called in more feds, not backed down. Unless, and I admit this is an attractive possibility, they got lots of those folks on camera and can now go after them all one at a time for closing the highway, threatening federal agents, etc.
Make no mistake, I don’t think all people who break the law are also by definition wrong. But these folks are rallying to a false cause and lying, to themselves and/or to others, about a lot things but especially their cause: they aren’t trying to take the country back, they are trying to take the country. The feds, or any governmental body, cannot allow such groups to flourish, and backing down from them will encourage their proliferation.
And Cliven Bundy, a man who espouses that point of view, that he isn’t beholden to any government he decides he doesn’t want to be beholden to, while still enjoying all the benefits of living under said government, was allowed to become their rallying point and potential martyr.
Lotta fuckups on the part of the feds here tactically and PR-wise, no doubt, but trying to stop Mr. Bundy from participating in the extinction process of the desert tortoise by grazing his cattle without permit or recompense isn’t one of them.
If anyone still thinks that these were “innocent protestors” and not “armed thugs prepared to kill federal agents”, have a look at the picture atop this article at The Atlantic.
ETA: BTW, the article is a good read; it showcases Mr. Bundy’s disconnected and self-contradictory views and claims.
A friend on Facebook is already claiming false flag government agent plant. “If he were real, he’d BE DEAD.”
Forgot to say thanks for bringing that article to our attention, BobLibDem.
Whoa, whoa, what is this, amateur hour? Everyone knows this is the path to true political change.
- Writing letters to your representatives.
- Blogging.
- Non-violent demonstrations, like camping in a park.
- March around carrying signs (don’t forget that clever wordplay, that’s critical).
- Driving slow in the fast lane.
Hey, you got to make allowances, he’s a Nevadan! “Whatever happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas!”
Errmmm, OK.
And then can we burst the capitalist integument and expropriate the expropriators?
Pretty please with puppy-eyes?
Nitpick, that’s “Freeman on the Land,” but no less crazy for that. See also “Sovereign Citizen.” The ideology of both movements appears to be based on a confused understanding of Anglo-American common law, which exists, confused and conflated with “natural law,” which does not. “Natural law” would of course be eternal and unchangeable by legislation or court decisions, which the common law is nothing but.
Is that thing coming out of his gunstock a rifle-barrel or some kind of extra-surreal hentai tentacle?!
BrainGlutton: it’s a crack in the concrete wall, and he’s aiming through it.
(Unless I’m looking at a different hentacle.)
You’re right, their guns were incidental, they were not acting like a citizen army or anything. :dubious:
Look, when you expect a confrontation with the law, and you bring a gun to it, that’s an implicit threat. If you want to make sure a confrontation with the law doesn’t escalate, then you leave the gun at home.