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.
*law enforcement tells them to do somethinng, and
*they don't, so
*they're shot down and killed there on the spot
...what do you want to bet that the usual group of apologists who constantly bleat "Well, if they'd just done what Officer Friendly told them to do, they'd still be alive!" will suddenly be singing a very different tune?
Of course, that won't happen. They're racist right-wing nutjobs, so they'll be treated with kid gloves.
You beat me to the punch.
If these criminals were non-white, there is no question that they would either be dead (most likely) or in jail.
Anyone who doubts me need not look any further than how the Cliven Bundy criminals, many of whom took up sniper positions and pointed rifles at law enforcement officers numerous times during the standoff, were treated.
No one was shot and I don't believe anyone was ever charged with a crime.
If these criminals were non-white, there is no question that they would either be dead (most likely) or in jail.
Anyone who doubts me need not look any further than how the Cliven Bundy criminals, many of whom took up sniper positions and pointed rifles at law enforcement officers numerous times during the standoff, were treated.
No one was shot and I don't believe anyone was ever charged with a crime.
This is the very definition of a double standard.
Really? Funny, I saw all sorts of criminal behavior with the BLM crowd, but not one instance where they were all killed.
Anyone who doubts me need not look any further than how the Cliven Bundy criminals, many of whom took up sniper positions and pointed rifles at law enforcement officers numerous times during the standoff, were treated.
No one was shot and I don't believe anyone was ever charged with a crime.
If these criminals were non-white, there is no question that they would either be dead (most likely) or in jail.
Anyone who doubts me need not look any further than how the Cliven Bundy criminals, many of whom took up sniper positions and pointed rifles at law enforcement officers numerous times during the standoff, were treated.
No one was shot and I don't believe anyone was ever charged with a crime.
This is the very definition of a double standard.
If you really believe your bolded statement I don't think there is any hope for you to engage in rational discussion.
A group of people take an empty building (unlawfully) in a desolate area and you believe if they were black they would most likely be dead. How many of the looters in Ferguson were killed?
Who cares they are not asking for free student loans or wanting to kill police. These ranchers happen to be tried of paying fees for land they are not allowed to use. I do wonder what Mr. Hammond was thinking if post #242 is true.......the poaching thing if true should be known, not brushed aside in being not important.
I read that letter. The first mistake ranchers make is assuming they have some kind of a vested right to graze their livestock on public land. They don't. They have whatever right they contract for over a year or a given period of time. The land does not belong to them. It belongs to the citizens of the United States. If they don't like those terms, they are free to sell their livestock and get out of the ranching business. The BLM is simply an agent for the public and is responsible for administering the use of public lands.
No cow could be fed for the ridiculously low price that ranchers pay to lease grazing land. In essence, that low price offers ranchers a pretty swingin' deal for grazing their cattle. Of course that right is subject to restrictions. The public has many uses for its land. Leasing the land to ranchers is one use. However, there are a variety of uses for public lands that include: recreation; conservation; protection of endangered species; and leasing lands for mineral development.
The BLM has regulated grazing since the Taylor Grazing Act was passed in the 1930's. The law was passed because of abuses by ranchers who owned livestock and were attempting to graze so many cattle that forage on public lands was being depleted to a point where it could not replenish itself. The act requires the BLM to regulate grazing and restrict in places where the land is being depleted.
I find myself having no sympathy for someone like Bundy who thinks he has the right to graze his cattle on public land and not pay for it.
Last edited by markg91359; 01-04-2016 at 02:33 PM..
Mike Larson @Milarso 7h7 hours ago Detroit, MI
The only freedom the #OregonUnderAttack terrorists are protecting is their perceived right to use government land without paying for it.
Joey Toledo @joey_toledo 5h5 hours ago Toledo, OH
#YallQuaeda says they will occupy Federal building for years
Translation:
None of them have jobs or anything better to do
#OregonUnderAttack
Christopher Zullo @ChrisJZullo 4h4 hours ago
Don't like that parking ticket? Armed militia. Don't like your neighbors dog? Armed militia. Forget about due process #OregonUnderAttack
Nia Girma @MrsGirma 2h2 hours ago Paradise, NV
Protesters carry signs. Terrorist carry guns #oregonunderattack
Really? Funny, I saw all sorts of criminal behavior with the BLM crowd, but not one instance where they were all killed.
But you never saw any of them pointing guns at law enforcement officers or anyone else, for that matter.
If they had, they would have been shot on the spot by the police and you know it.
Why don't you respond to what I wrote (which really happened) and not some nonsense you are trying to twist?
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.