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.
I haven't read the whole thread, but I think it's ridiculous to give them a 5 year prison sentence based on a terrorism law. They actually improved the value of the land accidentally. I don't consider them arsonists or terrorists for accidentally burning a relatively small patch of wilderness and improving the value of it.
I'm not defending the ranchers completely, but the state has been very tyrannical during this situation. The law was not intended to punish these actions as terrorism, but they're being treated like it anyway because...they technically can be treated that way under the law? I don't get it.
I haven't read the whole thread, but I think it's ridiculous to give them a 5 year prison sentence based on a terrorism law. They actually improved the value of the land accidentally. I don't consider them arsonists or terrorists for accidentally burning a relatively small patch of wilderness and improving the value of it.
I'm not defending the ranchers completely, but the state has been very tyrannical during this situation. The law was not intended to punish these actions as terrorism, but they're being treated like it anyway because...they technically can be treated that way under the law? I don't get it.
The burning was no accident. It was a deliberate attempt to cover up a crime. It was the third time they did this in less than 10 years. The land was leased to them strickly for grazing by the American people. They attempted to kill off the wildlife on it to improve the grazing for their cattle. If you don't believe me, read the transcripts of the testimony from their very own relatives who testified against them.
Additionally, the Hammonds have voluntarily returned to finish their sentence. The people of the area don't want the Bundy's and their agenda of government revolt anywhere near them and the town is full of signs saying "Militia Go Home."
I agree there are some injustices in mandatory sentencing that is why I put up the example of someone going to jail for 50 years after stealing some video tapes, this is not that. Three fires set over the course of 10 years in addition to poaching wildlife I would say deserves a stiff sentence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
I imagine he was thinking that the government was trying to hold them accountable for actions they refuse to hold themselves to.
.
Well you can suppose but the judge didn't provide any specific reason for the minimal sentence based on their actions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp
I have a feeling you don't know what they "usually" do.
Let's not make believe this never occurred before.
Last edited by Goodnight; 01-05-2016 at 04:37 PM..
BLM has threatened violence. They have even undertook violence.
With a beef I bet you agree with? Do you believe in mandatory sentencing?
I do not believe in mandatory sentencing. It does not take into account the circumstance of the crime committed. Which should be taken into account during sentencing.
I agree there are some injustices in mandatory sentencing that is why I put up the example of someone going to jail for 50 years after stealing some video tapes, this is not that. Three fires set over the course of 10 years in addition to poaching wildlife I would say deserves a stiff sentence.
Another guilty despite not being convicted. When someone goes there I understand there is no rational discussion to be had.
I do not believe in mandatory sentencing. It does not take into account the circumstance of the crime committed. Which should be taken into account during sentencing.
Another guilty despite not being convicted. When someone goes there I understand there is no rational discussion to be had.
The Hammonds were convicted and openly admitted to setting the fires, so what was the judges rationale other than the sentence was two severe, maybe it was hey they only set 3 fires.
I haven't read the whole thread, but I think it's ridiculous to give them a 5 year prison sentence based on a terrorism law. They actually improved the value of the land accidentally. I don't consider them arsonists or terrorists for accidentally burning a relatively small patch of wilderness and improving the value of it.
I'm not defending the ranchers completely, but the state has been very tyrannical during this situation. The law was not intended to punish these actions as terrorism, but they're being treated like it anyway because...they technically can be treated that way under the law? I don't get it.
The law is routinely unfair. Our justice system is weighted towards those with money and means. The little guys usually gets the shaft. The armed takeover of a Federal facility will do nothing to change that.
I haven't read the whole thread, but I think it's ridiculous to give them a 5 year prison sentence based on a terrorism law. They actually improved the value of the land accidentally. I don't consider them arsonists or terrorists for accidentally burning a relatively small patch of wilderness and improving the value of it.
I'm not defending the ranchers completely, but the state has been very tyrannical during this situation. The law was not intended to punish these actions as terrorism, but they're being treated like it anyway because...they technically can be treated that way under the law? I don't get it.
They were charged for ARSON. And the law there had dealt with these guys many times. If the fires they set, which spread to government land, had killed a firefighter, would you say that's okay? When did arson become legal?
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.
