Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
1) 18 USC 111 - Assaulting, resisting, or impeding certain officers or employees,
2) 18 USC 231 - Civil disorders,
3) 18 USC 372 - Conspiracy to impede or injure officer, and
4) 18 USC 373 - Solicitation to commit a crime of violence.
Shall I continue?
Yup, figured, they'd all be on bail, and contacting the ACLU for 1st Amendment violations after their phone call, and then charged would be dropped. The people arrested for assault are already out on bail, and they did assault officers, and they will be tried and if found guilty sentenced, but all of the protesters, not a chance it would stand up in court, the more you charge the more it looks like an attempt to eliminate peoples right to free assembly and protest.
Civil disorders is completely wrong anyway, video evidence shows there was no disorder that did not come as a direct result of government officer actions. That only applies where some civil disorder is currently occurring, not as a response to what could be seen as unlawful government or police actions, you still have the right to self defense, and the right to defend your property.
You can't go around and because you don't like a specific collection of people pick a bunch of laws they possibly infracted, that's not how it works in a free country, it worked that way fine in the Soviet Union and East Germany though. You have to have specific evidence in a free country. Of course if you'd prefer the way it worked in the Soviet Union, and East Germany, the US has got off to a good head start.
Lets do this really slowly for you slow ones here:
Who is the land owned by?
The United States Government per the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848)
Quote:
Originally Posted by aedubber
Who is the land managed by?
The Bureau of Land Management.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aedubber
Who took him to court and demands payment?
The United States of America. (See United States of America v. Cliven Bundy, CV-S-98-531-JBR (RJJ))
Quote:
Originally Posted by aedubber
Once you answer those , then please in gods name tell me how Bundy owes taxpayers money.
Of the fees ($1.1m) and penalties ($630m) owed by Bundy to the United States, 50% would be deposited into a federal Range Betterment Fund. Half of the Range Betterment Funds go to fund the activities of the Department of Interior for BLM allotments without geographic restriction (Ag for Forest Service Allotments) the other half is designated to be spent in the district, region, or forest that generated the fees.
The other 50% (for BLM Allotments) is divided in the following ways: 12.5% goes to the state (Nevada in this case) to be used in the county that generated the receipts, and the other 37.5% goes to general receipts at Treasury.
So federal taxpayers are owed, state taxpayers are owed and county taxpayers are owed. Hope that clears things up. This is codified in federal statute by the way - not an unaccountable blog.
Last edited by KStreetQB; 04-17-2014 at 04:49 PM..
If you quote facts, cases numbers, statutes......nobody will listen here. If you quote emotion......they will run with guns! Cowards do this, not men.
This sub forum is pretty bonkers. I don't bother unless it's an issue I know cold. This is just kind of frustrating because there are serious ranching issues, but no one cares until a deadbeat doesn't pay his bills, and now everyone's passionate about a totally fake issue.
The United States Government per the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848)
The Bureau of Land Management.
The United States of America. (See United States of America v. Cliven Bundy, CV-S-98-531-JBR (RJJ))
Of the fees ($1.1m) and penalties ($630m) owed by Bundy to the United States, 50% would be deposited into a federal Range Betterment Fund. Half of the Range Betterment Funds go to fund the activities of the Department of Interior for BLM allotments without geographic restriction (Ag for Forest Service Allotments) the other half is designated to be spent in the district, region, or forest that generated the fees.
The other 50% (for BLM Allotments) is divided in the following ways: 12.5% goes to the state (Nevada in this case) to be used in the county that generated the receipts, and the other 37.5% goes to general receipts at Treasury.
So federal taxpayers are owed, state taxpayers are owed and county taxpayers are owed. Hope that clears things up. This is codified in federal statute by the way - not an unaccountable blog.
Irrelevant to the politic of the situation.
The "politic" of the situation involves a legal phrase known as "superior knowledge".
HAL 9000 suffered the unintended consequences of carrying superior knowledge.
Will the Supreme Court say that the fees are a tax?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Stop spreading false information.
Bottom line...
