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.
If this bunch had gone unarmed to a federal courts building to peacefully protest the mandatory minimum then heck I might have donated to a gofundme to help pay their expenses.
You wouldn't have known any thing about it, because unless it bleeds, the story does not lead in the media.
To be fair ... if the land in question was privately owned, the fire that got away and created a destruction of property, the dispute would have been handled in a court of law with the fines or penalty, pending an outcome of the court system. However, since it was federal land, the accidental fire comes with an automatic 5 Year prison sentence, no hearing is required.
Out of what part of the ether do you folks pull these fairy tails from? The Hammonds were indicted before a federal grand jury, they were tried in open court and judge by a jury of their peers who based upon the evidence presented convicted them on two counts of the indictment (specifically Title 18, United States Code, section 844(f)(1). Their sentence was appealed to United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit where federal prosecutors won their appeal for re-sentencing according to U.S.Code. The Hammonds appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States for review but the Court declined to review established law.
Quote:
If they had not occupied the federal reserve and brought about media attention (a lot of good that has done) private ownership, property rights and the increased power of the federal government, would not be brought out to the public for discussions and debate.
Utter nonsense. The issues has nothing to do with private property rights unless you are referring to the property rights of the American people. As for the alleged "increased power of the federal government, another red herring. There has been no increase in federal authority just the same power established by the Constitution in 1787,
ARTICLE IV, SECTION 3, CLAUSE 2
The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States....
What part of "deliberately set in order to cover up poaching activities" do you not understand?
The part where the federal government with the will of the under informed in America, will continue to encroach their power into the lives of every citizen, no cover up required.
You have been told numerous times that those accusations were never proven in court, and the charges were dropped. And the testimony of a relative against Hammonds that you've posted so many times, “Strike Anywhere” matches with instructions that they be lit and dropped on the ground because they were going to “light up the whole country on fire.” was dismissed by the judge.
It doesn't matter how many times you repeat it, it's still does not make it true. The evidence was presented in court, and a jury didn't convict them, and the judge didn't believe the accusations either. In the end, the charges were dropped. So, you cannot say that it wasn't a fire that "got away from them".
The Hammonds never claimed the fires were accidental, them admitted that they set the fires. One fire was set to remove overgrowth, and the other was set as a back burn.
"The jury convicted both of the Hammonds of using fire to destroy federal property for a 2001 arson known as the Hardie-Hammond Fire, located in the Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area. Witnesses at trial, including a relative of the Hammonds, testified the arson occurred shortly after Steven Hammond and his hunting party illegally slaughtered several deer on BLM property. Jurors were told that Steven Hammond handed out “Strike Anywhere” matches with instructions that they be lit and dropped on the ground because they were going to “light up the whole country on fire.” One witness testified that he barely escaped the eight to ten foot high flames caused by the arson. The fire consumed 139 acres of public land and destroyed all evidence of the game violations. After committing the arson, Steven Hammond called the BLM office in Burns, Oregon and claimed the fire was started on Hammond property to burn off invasive species and had inadvertently burned onto public lands. Dwight and Steven Hammond told one of their relatives to keep his mouth shut and that nobody needed to know about the fire."
Nothing was thrown out. They were found GUILTY by the jury. Knock it off already.
I don't believe either of you a long with many more in America, has a problem with the mandatory sentencing.
As restriction increase on our ranchers and farmers how will we eat? With the government every thing leads to something and most of it is never good.
I have been involved in working to get MM sentencing changed since long before the Hammonds or the Bundys were ever heard of.
Seems that the vast majority of ranchers and farmers have no problem paying pennies on the dollar for rental fees. Then there are those that think it should be turned over to them to do with as they please. The rancher that runs his cattle on the land behind my house seems to have no problem. The farmer down the road just bought more land to add an orchard to his farm.
I'm sorry, but I think that the land that belongs to the American people should be protected. That means that there has to be a balance between allowing ranchers, loggers, and miners to run roughshod over the land, and totally eliminating the ability of them to use the land responsibly.
"The jury convicted both of the Hammonds of using fire to destroy federal property for a 2001 arson known as the Hardie-Hammond Fire, located in the Steens Mountain Cooperative Management and Protection Area. Witnesses at trial, including a relative of the Hammonds, testified the arson occurred shortly after Steven Hammond and his hunting party illegally slaughtered several deer on BLM property. Jurors were told that Steven Hammond handed out “Strike Anywhere” matches with instructions that they be lit and dropped on the ground because they were going to “light up the whole country on fire.” One witness testified that he barely escaped the eight to ten foot high flames caused by the arson. The fire consumed 139 acres of public land and destroyed all evidence of the game violations. After committing the arson, Steven Hammond called the BLM office in Burns, Oregon and claimed the fire was started on Hammond property to burn off invasive species and had inadvertently burned onto public lands. Dwight and Steven Hammond told one of their relatives to keep his mouth shut and that nobody needed to know about the fire."
Nothing was thrown out. They were found GUILTY by the jury. Knock it off already.
You should do your research, because you are wrong.
The charges pertaining to the accusations of one of the fires being set to cover up poaching were dropped, and the judge dismissed the testimony highlighted above in red.
Out of what part of the ether do you folks pull these fairy tails from? The Hammonds were indicted before a federal grand jury, they were tried in open court and judge by a jury of their peers who based upon the evidence presented convicted them on two counts of the indictment (specifically Title 18, United States Code, section 844(f)(1). Their sentence was appealed to United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit where federal prosecutors won their appeal for re-sentencing according to U.S.Code. The Hammonds appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States for review but the Court declined to review established law.
Utter nonsense. The issues has nothing to do with private property rights unless you are referring to the property rights of the American people. As for the alleged "increased power of the federal government, another red herring. There has been no increase in federal authority just the same power established by the Constitution in 1787,
ARTICLE IV, SECTION 3, CLAUSE 2
The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States....
btw: Understanding the government's ability to increase their power, right up under citizens noses, may go over some folks heads. Seeing as how 'all' property belongs to the United States and no one seems to have a problem with that, just goes to show how long freemen last. How the founding fathers intended the citizens to live and how we ended up are two very different ideals, just so you know.
You should do your research, because you are wrong.
The charges pertaining to the accusations of one of the fires being set to cover up poaching were dropped, and the judge dismissed the testimony highlighted above in red.
Link?
Because all I see is that they WERE convicted of two counts of arson each. One for the Hardie-Hammond Fire ( the one that the witnesses said they started to cover poaching) and the Krumbo Butte Fire.
They were not charged with poaching, they were charged with arson.
Because all I see is that they WERE convicted of two counts of arson each. One for the Hardie-Hammond Fire ( the one that the witnesses said they started to cover poaching) and the Krumbo Butte Fire.
They were not charged with poaching, they were charged with arson.
This all has been covered several times in the other thread on the Hammonds. If you want the information, it's all in the other thread, including court documents.
The Birdhouse Boys, set a fire on their land, that got away from them and by accident burned some federal land, which by 'law' will land them in jail for 5 years. For whatever reason, no one seems to have a problem with this? Or is the part where some one comes along to tell me, I don't understand the situation, between the government and the ranchers.
Minimum sentencing guidelines are detrimental to the judicial system and should be done away with in a lot of cases. That said, they were sentenced improperly the first time under a law that like it or not, applied, and carried a five-year minimum. Had the first judge done what he was paid to do the Hammonds would never have been released to become a rallying point for sedition.
I don't understand why this was Bundy's fight, or why he wasn't smart enough to pursue it through legal channels before gathering a ragtag army to try to force the government to do what he wanted. Happily for them, there are no minimum guidelines for most of the charges that will be proffered against this bunch. Unhappily for them, they racked up enough charges to account for several lifetimes. They got exactly what they bargained for when they carried their guns into the refuge and left their brains back home. Most of the leaders will probably never see daylight again as free individuals.
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.
Or is the part where some one comes along to tell me, I don't understand the situation, between the government and the ranchers.