God I hate to even look like I am defending Bundy. I despise him.
Read the article I posted a couple posts ago. Although the land was not technically his, until 1989 the federal government had no problem with him and others using the land. It was not being used for anything else. Then the Desert Tortoise was named as an endangered animal. Bundy and other ranchers counted on that land. Then the feds started to push them out. And it wasn’t quite so simple as protecting the tortoise. They protected the tortoise there so they wouldn’t have to protect it around Las Vegas and restrict the urban growth of a then booming city. It is telling that Bundy is the last rancher left in the county. The federal government pushed them out of business.
What are you trying to prove? I already said it wasn’t politically feasible. But all those people were arrested or killed weren’t they? In the context of upholding the law that these people broke, they were all punished eventually, though some got some reparations later.
Bundy is holding the land privately. I want the land to be federally controlled by the government. Incidentally, I don’t want the government to sell off lands to private ownership, I want national parks kept as part of the government’s holdings
Protests are done because cops disproportionately kill black people who are innocent. I would hope no one ever accepts that cops can do that without being held accountable. There is also a racial edge to the killings, making them even worse as we are essentially disparaging a whole racial minority group and telling them their lives are worth nothing
If you mean what they specifically want to do with that land, I don’t know. Bundy’s making money off of it. Do you think that someone like me should be able to claim federal land and use it to enrich myself? If you cared at all about public use of land, then you would know that enforcing the law against poaching and stealing is very much part of the duties of the government. Someday, someone with guns may claim something that belongs to you. If the government lets them keep it, that does a disservice to you and everyone else who does not have an armed racist force ready to defend themselves. Go on, just try to claim it will never happen to you. That will tell me all I need to know about your stance since it apparently only matters if it affects you. :rolleyes:
The very act of upholding the law IS the government’s duty. This one isn’t being upheld, that is wrong and harmful to society as a whole
So what? If you wanted to paint Bundy as a passionate defender of rights, you have have failed. A landowner such as the government has a perfect right to allow you to use their land unimpeded if it doesn’t cause harm. Now it does and they have a right to kick you off of it. Or do you encourage squatter’s rights over every piece of property?
Like it or not, Vegas is a large and growing city that’s here to stay. If the difference is between limiting the growth of half a million people vs. one, then sorry, the one must leave
And even if you feel the government should have given more consideration to Bundy, do you really support his tactics of getting armed racists to threaten people? That fact alone erases any sympathy I have for him for being an old man forced to move because of turtles. Do you really think its the better choice to let someone who’s threatened police and is a huge racist use freely land that belongs to the government that they’ve generously allowed him to use for over 20 years?
What is “technical” about his lack of ownership? It wasn’t his. No need for weasel words. Is anyone supposed to feel bad for him because he couldn’t graze his cattle on public land anymore? He had a nice free run, then it ended. If you squatted in a house, does that make it “not technically yours” when somebody shows up to kick you out? Or is it just “not yours”?
The Feds tend to make massive goat fuck out of any attempt to “go in guns blazing.” They kill innocent bystanders, they get their own agents killed, they get people who haven’t been convicted of anything killed. You may be okay that. I’m not. They do all right with liens and assets seizure and other such non-violent techniques. Not saying they are always justifified there, either, but they manage to kill far fewer uninvolved people when they do things that way.
Granted, but if there weren’t weirdos around like the ones who started the disasters at Ruby Ridge and at Waco, then there’d be no reason for the Feds to get involved in the first place now, would there?
If that’s your stance on those matters, then you and I have nothing further to discuss as far as this goes (I kinda pretty much figured, based on your prior postings, that you’d have that stance).
Randy Weaver was charged with illegal firearms trading and decided not to show up in court. The feds certainly did a piss-poor job of handling the situation but they certainly didn’t start it.
In violation of the law? There are a lot of laws I don’t like: do I get to ignore them, with your approval, solely on the basis of my personal moral beliefs?
If Bundy believes he should have access to government land to graze his cattle without paying a fee, he needs to take that up with Congress, which could easily pass an act permitting it. Right now, such grazing is fee-based…but he isn’t paying it.
Would you actually sneak into a National Park (it’s not that hard to do) to avoid paying the entrance fee? Do you believe that’s the right thing for someone to do if they don’t want to consent to the fee?
Are you sure you want to endorse this kind of “Freeman On The Land” thinking?
Weaver cut the shotgun down after being prompted by ATF’s boy on the scene.
Weaver isn’t anybody I would choose as a friend, but what the Feds did to him and his family was wrong.
Yeah, but he could have gone and had his day in court. He chose not to.
Like I’ve said in other threads about police violence. If you decide that LEO don’t have a monopoly WRT legal use of force; you pays your nickel and you takes your chances. So far Bundy has come out better than most people who take that route. I think that’s largely due to it being a property crime, and his group being more credible than most organizations in being able to deal violence back to the authorities.
In light of this, I would rather that they did wait Bundy out at this point. I imagine a lot of the people who have chargeable offenses from the incident have not left the compound, so wait them out, as well. The government can wait for the right opportunity to act, and avoid a situation such as those listed above.
Now, I do think that the BLM needs to patrol the area in question. Abdicating authority isn’t a good precedent, at all. If the Bundy crowd see that as reason to resort to violence, they should receive the proper response. If that leads to a massacre, I wouldn’t place the responsibility for that at the feet of the authorities.
There are two additional issues at play. The first is that the Bumdy family are not destitute, they can get by just fine without their cattle, their grow melons on their own actual land, melons which are highly regarded, AIUI. So taking their cattle and booting them off the range would not end up being an immense hardship.
The other issue is that Bundy has been irrigating part of the rangeland to grow feed. The Feds told him to stop doing that, but he refuses to. This is an area adjacent to Lake Mead National Recreation Area, which is run by the park service. You can see it on satellite, it looks like the irrigated area goes into the park area, so Bundy is just being a prick. And he claims that his “improvements” should give him claim to the land – yet, I have not heard any indication that he wants to pay any property taxes on the land, he just wants to use it for free.
I would like to see the BLM find a buyer, then Bundy can see how he likes to pay private grazing fees, which are suffocating compared to what the government charges.
This is all about a TORTOISE !!! A freakin’ TORTOISE ! :smack:
Little wonder the BLM has backed down. They can’t afford a court case that would publicize their efforts to push an armed assault to protect a tortoise. That could lead to huge budget cuts.
Yes, the ATF did start it. The ATF wanted Randy Weaver to spy on Aryan Nations. Weaver refused. Later, an ATF informant asked Weaver to illegally shorten the barrel of a shotgun, which Weaver originally refused to do. The ATF informant purchased two shotguns, sold them to Weaver, and again requested that Weaver shorten the barrels. The ATF informant bought the shortened guns back from Weaver.
(For the uninformed, cutting down the barrel of a shotgun only requires a hacksaw. That’s far cheaper than paying someone else $100 to cut it for you.)
8 months later, ATF agents forcibly detained Weaver, threatening to arrest him for selling the illegal shotgun if he didn’t spy on the Aryan Nations. Weaver was then arraigned and released.
Weaver was notified by the court that his court date was March 20, 1991. Weaver’s actual court date was February 20, 1991. Oops. Weaver was indicted for failure to appear and an arrest warrant was issued.
The ATF then spent several million dollars to arrest someone for failure to appear and 4 people were killed.
And federal agents chose to murder his wife and son. Hardly the same thing as choosing not to go to court and get railroaded. The power imbalance is so severe it’s foolish to make such comparisons.
He knew he had a bench warrant out for him by the time any action was taken. He refused to go peacefully. In the end, he had months were he and only he could have diffused the situation after it had entered its end game. He chose not to.
ATF started it, fucked up the paperwork on it, and then ended it by killing some people who were not Randy Weaver. After a lot of fucking around in court, the US Government settled with cash payments to Weaver and his people. One would have to squint pretty hard and hold his mouth just right to see any way this wasn’t the fault of the feds.