• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Feds move in on Nevada rancher's herd over illegal grazing

j-mac said:
You have proof that it was Bundy, or his supporters?
Click to expand...

Nope. Thus he wasn't arrested for it. But it does put officials on notice and they can't afford to assume there won't be trouble. It gives them sound justification to be careful and well prepared just in case. .
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Does the second ammendment allow people to defy federal law?
Click to expand...

If they shoot straight enough, it does.

That is, if you buy the idea that the Second Amendment exists so that the citizenry can rebel and depose the government by force of arms.
 
Dittohead not! said:
Well, other than that, but they do still have a right to exercise their second amendment rights.
Click to expand...

They surely do. But, to show up from another state armed to confront federal, state, or local law enforcement? I believe I'd need to pass on doing something that ignorant.
 
Here's a little caveat about my last few posts, particularly about taking them literally:

sarcasm.jpg
 
AJiveMan said:
The armed BLM law enforcement officers showed up after the armed militia groups appeared, before that, there were thirty protesters at the cattle auction expecting to see Bundy's cattle at auction, which didn't happen.
Click to expand...

From the source that both you and I have repeatedly posted...

"March 15, 2014: After nearly 20 years, the Bureau of Land Management sends Bundy a letter informing him that they plan to impound his "trespass cattle," which have been roaming on 90 miles of federal land. BLM averages four livestock impoundments a year, usually involving a few dozen animals.

March 27, 2014: The BLM has closed off 322,000 acres of public land, and is preparing to collect Bundy's cattle. Bundy files a notice with the county sheriff department, titled “Range War Emergency Notice and Demand for Protection." Bundy also says he has a virtual army of supporters from all over the country ready to protect him. He also has Gardner. “I think Cliven is taking a stand not only for family ranchers, but also for every freedom-loving American, for everyone," Gardner said. "I’ve been trying to resolve these same types of issues since 1984. Perhaps it’s difficult for the average American to understand, but protecting the individual was a underlying factor of our government. ... My support is that I am determined to stand by the Bundy family in any fashion it takes regardless of the threat of life or limb."

Now, I know that you progressives believe that you are the smartest people ever to grace the earth, but as far as I know March is before April....
 
Boo Radley said:
Nope.
Click to expand...

Then why post it in a manner implying that it was?

Thus he wasn't arrested for it. But it does put officials on notice and they can't afford to assume there won't be trouble. It gives them sound justification to be careful and well prepared just in case.
Click to expand...

Yes, I agree...Prepared....I support LE being prepared...And I don't know what intel that they may have had, or didn't...But, the way they proceeded was a public relations nightmare....And if you don't see that then there isn't much we have to discuss.
 
j-mac said:
From the source that both you and I have repeatedly posted...

"March 15, 2014: After nearly 20 years, the Bureau of Land Management sends Bundy a letter informing him that they plan to impound his "trespass cattle," which have been roaming on 90 miles of federal land. BLM averages four livestock impoundments a year, usually involving a few dozen animals.

March 27, 2014: The BLM has closed off 322,000 acres of public land, and is preparing to collect Bundy's cattle. Bundy files a notice with the county sheriff department, titled “Range War Emergency Notice and Demand for Protection." Bundy also says he has a virtual army of supporters from all over the country ready to protect him. He also has Gardner. “I think Cliven is taking a stand not only for family ranchers, but also for every freedom-loving American, for everyone," Gardner said. "I’ve been trying to resolve these same types of issues since 1984. Perhaps it’s difficult for the average American to understand, but protecting the individual was a underlying factor of our government. ... My support is that I am determined to stand by the Bundy family in any fashion it takes regardless of the threat of life or limb."

Now, I know that you progressives believe that you are the smartest people ever to grace the earth, but as far as I know March is before April....
Click to expand...

None of what you posted here states the BLM was on the range before the militia arrived. Note the wording in bold, PLAN and PREPARING.

I'm a progressive?
 
AJiveMan said:
None of what you posted here states the BLM was on the range before the militia arrived. Note the wording in bold, PLAN and PREPARING.

I'm a progressive?
Click to expand...

Ok, read down a little then....

"April 5, 2014: After decades of trepidation, federal officials and cowboys start rounding up what they think are Cliven Bundy's hundreds of cows.

snip

April 10, 2014: A protest camp has formed. There is a sign at the entrance that reads, "MILITA SIGHN IN."

April 5th still before April 10th....No?
 
j-mac said:
Ok, read down a little then....

"April 5, 2014: After decades of trepidation, federal officials and cowboys start rounding up what they think are Cliven Bundy's hundreds of cows.

snip

April 10, 2014: A protest camp has formed. There is a sign at the entrance that reads, "MILITA SIGHN IN."

April 5th still before April 10th....No?
Click to expand...

It's a good thing they came prepared, isn't it?
 
Dittohead not! said:
Better to look like an idiot than to be caught unprepared for the worst. They didn't turn out to bve idiots, now did they?
Click to expand...

Yeah, kind of....They didn't accomplish anything but make themselves look foolish, and embolden the ranchers in the west....
 
j-mac said:
Then why post it in a manner implying that it was?
Click to expand...

I didn't. I only said that was a likely reason why things happened the way it happened.

Yes, I agree...Prepared....I support LE being prepared...And I don't know what intel that they may have had, or didn't...But, the way they proceeded was a public relations nightmare....And if you don't see that then there isn't much we have to discuss.
Click to expand...

Perhaps. Or perhaps we just have a public 9or a segment of the public) too willing to leap to conclusions. I'm not sure I can answer that currently. But reading the time line, the law breaker has been treated more than fairly.
 
Boo Radley said:
I didn't. I only said that was a likely reason why things happened the way it happened.



Perhaps. Or perhaps we just have a public 9or a segment of the public) too willing to leap to conclusions. I'm not sure I can answer that currently. But reading the time line, the law breaker has been treated more than fairly.
Click to expand...

You know there are more ways to look at things rather than the way you do right?
 
j-mac said:
You know there are more ways to look at things rather than the way you do right?
Click to expand...

Of course there is, but there is also such a thing as an unfair way to look at things. Objectively, there was reason to both come and come in force. Bundy was breaking the law. There had been episodes of violence. So tell me why the guy breaking the law deserves support, so we can defend others who violates laws.
 
j-mac said:
Yeah, kind of....They didn't accomplish anything but make themselves look foolish, and embolden the ranchers in the west....
Click to expand...

and get the freeloader off of the land without firing a shot.
 
j-mac said:
Ok, read down a little then....

"April 5, 2014: After decades of trepidation, federal officials and cowboys start rounding up what they think are Cliven Bundy's hundreds of cows.

snip

April 10, 2014: A protest camp has formed. There is a sign at the entrance that reads, "MILITA SIGHN IN."

April 5th still before April 10th....No?
Click to expand...
Hi j-mac :2wave:

Well, let's agree on at least one thing here, that it's not clear who showed up first, the militias or the BLM. But, I will concede that the BLM was already in the area where Bundy's cattle might have been gathered. But those may or may not have been the BLM LE people, they might have been ordinary cowboys (the BLM has cowboys you know) trying to round up some.

It's kinda like, well, which came first, the chicken, or the egg.
 
Boo Radley said:
Of course there is, but there is also such a thing as an unfair way to look at things. Objectively, there was reason to both come and come in force. Bundy was breaking the law. There had been episodes of violence. So tell me why the guy breaking the law deserves support, so we can defend others who violates laws.
Click to expand...

"Unfair"? According to whom? You? Pfft! Forgive me if I don't care what you think is unfair, or not....And with a court order in hand they did have a reason to come to the ranch, and enforce the courts order, I agree with that...But, you have to wonder why this rancher had so much reach in support at such short notice....It is because, IMHO, that people in that area, and indeed ranchers across the country feel that the government is using regulation, and heavy handed enforcement to destroy their way of life, business, and force them out of areas in the west for land grabs...So, now in order to argue that the government is overbearing, and heavy handed I have to argue to you why someone should be able to break the law? Nah, I won't do that...It is a false construct...Instead tell me why, a rancher with NO links to what may, or may not have happened in the past, needs to have what amounts to a para military force show up to enforce a simple eviction? Tell me why this group of government thugs wanted to set up "Free speech zones".... Is that America to you Joe? Free Speech Zones?
 
Dittohead not! said:
and get the freeloader off of the land without firing a shot.
Click to expand...

Did they succeed at that? I don't think they did....They packed up and left after destroying some infrastructure, and seized some cattle (not all), and they ended up giving most of the cattle back so they say, so it seems to me they got their asses handed to them...
 
j-mac said:
Did they succeed at that? I don't think they did....They packed up and left after destroying some infrastructure, and seized some cattle (not all), and they ended up giving most of the cattle back so they say, so it seems to me they got their asses handed to them...
Click to expand...

Not really it was a strategic move on their part. They could have blasted every one of those hillbillies into dust if the government REALLY wanted to.

Now, they are letting them hang themselves with their own rope:

http://www.debatepolitics.com/break...points-demand-papers-control-taffic-flow.html

As soon as one of these militia members REALLY screws up and ends up shooting an innocent person, they are all toast and the government wins.
 
AJiveMan said:
Hi j-mac :2wave:

Well, let's agree on at least one thing here, that it's not clear who showed up first, the militias or the BLM. But, I will concede that the BLM was already in the area where Bundy's cattle might have been gathered. But those may or may not have been the BLM LE people, they might have been ordinary cowboys (the BLM has cowboys you know) trying to round up some.

It's kinda like, well, which came first, the chicken, or the egg.
Click to expand...

Hi there JM..:2wave:

:lamo No, I won't that it is "unclear who showed up first".... For pages you have been mocking, and disparaging anyone who suggested that the BLM were first on the scene, because it allows you to paint Bundy as a nut that is just sitting there waiting for a war....You tried to use an article showing the timeline of events from the WaPo that I posted earlier, and thought without reading it that it proved your point, when in fact it doesn't....Now instead of simply saying that BLM was there first, and moving on, you want to say 'we don't know'? hahahha! Nah, that isn't how it works man.....April 5, is before April 10 period....
 
j-mac said:
Hi there JM..:2wave:

:lamo No, I won't that it is "unclear who showed up first".... For pages you have been mocking, and disparaging anyone who suggested that the BLM were first on the scene, because it allows you to paint Bundy as a nut that is just sitting there waiting for a war....You tried to use an article showing the timeline of events from the WaPo that I posted earlier, and thought without reading it that it proved your point, when in fact it doesn't....Now instead of simply saying that BLM was there first, and moving on, you want to say 'we don't know'? hahahha! Nah, that isn't how it works man.....April 5, is before April 10 period....
Click to expand...

:lamo

Armed BLM law enforcement was on the ground rounding up steer, that's a good one.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom