U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-03-2016, 11:01 AM
 
9,984 posts, read 6,771,963 times
Reputation: 5613

Advertisements

Ammon Bundy should mind his own business, and the Hammonds
were convicted of arson on Federal Land.
This place has been a wildlife refuge since 1935.
Events such as this give a bad name to real freedom movements
and militias.
Our constitution provides for the protection and setting aside
of wild areas for conservation purposes.
We are welcome to some degree on these lands but are not
welcome to poach or burn it.
I suspect that the Hammonds and/or Ammon Bundy have an agenda
which is not what it seems.
Nobody should support these criminals.

The proper course is to cordon them off and allow them to starve
until they leave peaceably and prosecute them legally for wasting
resources and disrupting the peace.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-03-2016, 11:01 AM
 
26,304 posts, read 12,868,479 times
Reputation: 12551
Quote:
Originally Posted by unwillingphoenician View Post
If this is true, it burns me up.

Why were they slaughtering deer on public land?

This is being depicted as a private land takeover by supporters of these people.

If the government is rededicating public land to a wildlife refuge instead of renewing sweetheart "welfare" leases at far below market value, as is typical of BLM lands all across the west, then good riddance, especially if they were slaughtering deer, which are a public resource.

If it is part private land takeover and part refusal to lease, then what are the percentages? More information, please.
I dont think thats the one that truly angered the locals, but rather the second one that endangered firefighters lives who were fighting a fire when these morons set another one on the other side of them. Small detail that a lot of the folks leave out.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2016, 11:03 AM
 
1,663 posts, read 1,654,443 times
Reputation: 1708
Quote:
Originally Posted by Enigma83 View Post
1.No they aren't.
2. They were already punished under an asinine and constitutionally illegal law.This was NOT terrorism,its just the pissy government getting pissy.
BS. There is nothing unconstitutional about protecting Federal lands. The courts have ruled on this very issue many times.

The two idiots that this thing is all based on are a couple of arsonists and poachers. Hardly anyone we would want to hold up as defenders of liberty.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2016, 11:08 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
66,574 posts, read 33,850,746 times
Reputation: 14281
Funny how an armed society doesn't get run over so easily by government overreach.
Come & Take It!

Ones mortality has a way of turning you into a patriot, or a coward.


They call their bluff and see who is willing to make a stand and die. When their life is on the line, they don't get paid enough and high-tail it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2016, 11:18 AM
 
7,249 posts, read 5,590,976 times
Reputation: 7954
Time to round them all up. They can sit in jail right alongside the poaching, arsonist Hammond clan that they've decided are heroes.

http://www.justice.gov/usao-or/pr/ea...e-years-prison

They could've easily stayed out of jail by simply not poaching and not starting fires on federal land on multiple occasions.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2016, 11:20 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
66,574 posts, read 33,850,746 times
Reputation: 14281
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floorist View Post
The Hammonds burned 138 acres of public land to cover the fact they were poaching there. It's in the trial records.

They were never charged with poaching. That is made up, because yearly burn off of the over brush so the cattle can graze and the grasses come in greener, has been occurring yearly for over a century.

Just like they use to do all over.

Mexico still does it yearly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2016, 11:25 AM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
66,574 posts, read 33,850,746 times
Reputation: 14281
The government is mad, because they cannot go after the guy, for anymore liability. There was no market for the land, or the resources on it, so no monetary damages can be awarded. They are going for punitive, after the fact, on a trumped up accusation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2016, 11:32 AM
 
7,249 posts, read 5,590,976 times
Reputation: 7954
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
The government is mad, because they cannot go after the guy, for anymore liability. There was no market for the land, or the resources on it, so no monetary damages can be awarded. They are going for punitive, after the fact, on a trumped up accusation.
Trumped up? Multiple witnesses testified. They were both convicted of a 2001 arson (the one to cover up the illegal deer slaughter) and convicted the son of a second 2006 arson.

Why do right wing entitled nuts always cling to the worst people to hold up as heroes for their 'movement'?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2016, 11:32 AM
 
Location: United States
10,950 posts, read 5,075,199 times
Reputation: 5240
These claims of poaching seem very dubious, does anyone have solid proof that the Hammonds were poaching?

Just like in the Bundy Ranch situation, the misinformation is rampant.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-03-2016, 11:35 AM
 
7,249 posts, read 5,590,976 times
Reputation: 7954
Quote:
Originally Posted by stburr91 View Post
These claims of poaching seem very dubious, does anyone have solid proof that the Hammonds were poaching?

Just like in the Bundy Ranch situation, the misinformation is rampant.
They set the forest on fire to destroy the evidence.

The poaching is basically irrelevant outside of providing a motive for the 2001 fire that both got convicted of starting.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top