Armed Feds Prepare For Showdown With Nevada Cattle Rancher

[GratefulCitizen]

Originally Posted by akv

My $.02 the American revolution was somewhat unique, the respective states were fairly set with infrastructure in place and the for the most part the same state leaders were in place afterwords to agree on a constitution, They didn't tear down the existing system so much as push out an occupying force.

Exactly.

Western states have governments.
People in the area have been going about their lives and using the land for generations.

Along comes the federal government asserting themselves.
From the perspective of the locals, this qualifies as an occupying force.

The federal government certainly has invested in infrastructure in the west (kinda like everywhere else...).
Perhaps they are justly trying to recoup some of their expenses.

England invested plenty fighting the French and Indian Wars.
They were just trying to recoup some of their expenses.

Parliament claimed supremacy and asserted they could do whatever they felt was appropriate (Declaratory Act).
The Colonies' response: Molon Labe.

The federal government goes to a federal judge who "orders" them to do what they already wanted to do (not just in the Bundy case).
Some of the people out west have a response: Molon Labe.


The Feds lack the actual manpower to enforce their will nationwide and are reliant upon "consent of the governed".
The people have discovered this fact.

"Revolution" is neither necessary nor desirable.
Resistance is sufficient.

[Oldrotorhead]

Once the Federal Government starts working through the courts unless you are very rich or poor already they will keep you in court until you are broke. I don't think any citizen can win in Federal court if the Feds want to win. I think that Bundy had two choices, give in or fight and if the press and militias didn't show up his cattle would be gone and he would be waiting for the next legal attack by the Feds.

[Stobey]

Slightly OT, but here is something that should have happened long ago: State legislatures in numerous western states trying to retrieve land the Fed government retained when they became states.

http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/04/we...est-land-feds/

[Oldrotorhead]

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004

A difference between Kent State and here is that the people were armed, or at least enough of them were.

Your statement is way too simple. Kent State was a demonstration against the Vietnam War where students attacked a poorly trained National Guard unit. This resulted in a loss for the kiddies. First the NG shot IIRC without orders. Second the NG's shooting skills were lacking and as a result more students lived and Darwin was cheated.

The stand off in NV was armed citizens refusing to comply with a Federal Government demand.

Both were civil disobedience but they shared almost no other similarities.

[PSM]

Mass grave of cattle found: http://www.inquisitr.com/1220627/bun...raphic-images/

Pat

[Dai Uy]

Originally Posted by Broadsword2004

As a side question is it true that the protesters, or the Sheriff Mack, were intending to use women and children as shields?

Straight from the horseʻs mouth... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cllweBGE3Ak

[Penn]

AKV

but where we really that close to revolution?

A revolution is not going to occur, the story has been marginalized in the media, with the rancher painted as a tax dodger and free grazer. This is not to say, there won't be a confrontation, but if there is, the BLM will lower the hammer.

oldrotorhead

students attacked a poorly trained NG unit

I mentioned Kent State as an example of Federal agents willingness to follow orders. Regardless, of what your opinion is of that period in history. You, I, and everyone who has signed the dotted line and taken the oath to protect and defend, did so, to afford those students that right.

In my mind, there is no argument that satisfies that National tragedy, poorly trained will not be a shield for the BLM, nor should it be for the ONG.

[Oldrotorhead]

Penn

"I mentioned Kent State as an example of Federal agents willingness to follow orders. Regardless, of what your opinion is of that period in history. You, I, and everyone who has signed the dotted line and taken the oath to protect and defend, did so, to afford those students that right.

In my mind, there is no argument that satisfies that National tragedy, poorly trained will not be a shield for the BLM, nor should it be for the ONG. "

I did sign the dotted line and I'm sorry I wasn't clearer I didn't intend to justify Kent State. I do think there is a big difference between throwing rocks as a form of protest and taking up arms and refusing to comply with a government agency. My point was and is there is a big difference between Kent State and the confrontation in NV with the BLM.

On this site where I am a guest people know the difference between blindly following orders and compliance with the oath we took. Part of what I wrote was was out of line by being sarcastic after I made my point and I will be more careful in the future..

If I'm out of line tell me and I will shut up.

[Golf1echo]

Even in training Civil Disturbance actions can go South very quickly.

What if the Federal Government designated the Bundy Ranch a National Heritage Site and started paying him some subsides for his hard work in maintaining a authentic AMERICAN Ranch. It's hard to imagine there is not also room for another couple of AMERICAN Solar plants out there in all that expanse...what is so special about his land? Maybe just convenience ( shorter transmission lines, highway off ramp, ???

Now if Harry Reid is involved in any of this other than opening doors to facilitate this, I'd put his first pay check at the back of an open jail cell...the door would not be open when he tried to leave...

Professional Politicians are dragging us all down, perhaps there should be a separation of business and state?

[Snaquebite]

Got this in an e-mail. Thoughts?

The Bundy Family purchased all of that land in 1877, only to have it seized by the government in the 1930s. This violated Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the Constitution, known as the Enclave Clause, which limits the Federal Government to owning land ONLY for Federal Buildings and military installations, NOT seizing millions of acres of private and public lands to be sold to corporations or pledged as collateral on out-of-control government borrowing.
Then there is the Homestead law, which says ownership of the land belongs to those who have lived on the land and developed it, which the Bundys have done in an unbroken chain since 1887.
The BLM does not have legal jurisdiction as the land in question is actually under state control.

[Surf n Turf]

Originally Posted by Penn

I mentioned Kent State as an example of Federal agents willingness to follow orders. Regardless, of what your opinion is of that period in history. You, I, and everyone who has signed the dotted line and taken the oath to protect and defend, did so, to afford those students that right.

In my mind, there is no argument that satisfies that National tragedy, poorly trained will not be a shield for the BLM, nor should it be for the ONG.

Penn,

I was on-campus (to observe) at Kent State the evening before the shooting.

This act was not a case of "Federal Agents" (ONG) following orders. This was a case of young, tired, pissed-off teenagers, in uniform, shooting people who pushed all their buttons. IMO this happened, not because of orders, but by lack of leadership and discipline.

Some of the acts by the students were criminal (cutting fire hoses with people inside the burning ROTC building), and they should have been prosecuted.

Remember that martial law was not declared on campus. and there is NO fine line between what the students did and how the ONG responded. In even the most dispassionate evaluation of events it was murder / attempted murder under color of law, but not a "willingness to follow orders."

SnT

[Penn]

Surf n’ Turf
I possess no sympathy for arguments based on age, inexperience, or untrained and leaderless as cause for that INCIDENT, or any incident that involves armed government agents.

Especially, when considering those of us who served, the ONG did Basic, where part of the drill was familiarization and respect for a weapon. And, as many here can attest, age, inexperience, and untrained leaders did not deter them from doing their duty in VN, Iraq, or Afghanistan, or around the globe.

That said, I am highly skeptical of any investigation, which as part of it fact finding, offers the same in thinly veiled attempt to shift, or exonerate those involved. Benghazi is the most recent event that comes to mind, replacing leadership culpability for failure to act, with an inability to act, remarkably similar to the ONG reasoning, inability to intercede, direct, or control the situation….blab, blab, blab…..

The Bundy situation is different, Bundy addresses constitutional rights, questions basic principles of fair treatment under the 4th, and 14th amendment.

Additionally, for the Bundy supporters, there is the engrained American Western Myth at work, incorporating the intangibles between right and wrong into a valid argument, like those in the past who confronted government agents, create their own relationship with myth and legend on the back of a horse. Luckily, this theater did not turn into a Greek tragedy that day.

[Snaquebite]

If anyone happened to see the article regarding the SF guy on the BLM sniper team, It has been confirmed that the guy is not SF Q'd. He did go through (Pass?/Fail?) SFAS in 2005. He is assigned to 19th Group as a 35P (Intel).

[Streck-Fu]

Originally Posted by Snaquebite

If anyone happened to see the article regarding the SF guy on the BLM sniper team, It has been confirmed that the guy is not SF Q'd. He did go through (Pass?/Fail?) SFAS in 2005. He is assigned to 19th Group as a 35P (Intel).

The BLM has a designated sniper team?

[The Reaper]

Originally Posted by Streck-Fu

The BLM has a designated sniper team?

Doesn't everyone?

TR