magley64 Posted April 21, 2014 Report Share Posted April 21, 2014 (edited) I hope they get federal prison time.Eric Parker can be first. Edited April 21, 2014 by magley64 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReconRat Posted April 21, 2014 Report Share Posted April 21, 2014 (edited) How about obstruction of justice? These agents were executing a lawfully gained warrant when these terrorists showed up and started aiming rifles at them.Street has the point with it being a political issue. That makes it likely that it wasn't a "normal" event, and won't have a "normal" response. Not with elections coming up. I also have to think of politicians and law enforcement that showed up on the support of the state side of the conflict. Wasn't necessarily a "state vs federal" thing, but that's not the point. Once in the media and courts, it could be easily. That and I just can't see politicians and law enforcement called as witnesses. Remember that this was a warrant to take property per a one sided decision, rather than work through the courts. The judge for the warrant probably had no way to refuse it. There's nothing to refuse. Part of that problem is that it isn't law per se of a state or federal legislation. It is a rule of a bureau, which is another "sticky wicket" if it were in an actual court. edit: I did read some LA reporter's account that anyone that had weapons out were ambushed and escorted back to town away from the area. Unable to confirm. Those are probably what you're talking about. They went too far. Edited April 21, 2014 by ReconRat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strictly Street Posted April 21, 2014 Report Share Posted April 21, 2014 I hope they get federal prison time.Eric Parker can be first. You may get your wish. In any case seems like a much needed review IMHO of just how these land deals are brokered is in the future. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted April 21, 2014 Report Share Posted April 21, 2014 Remember that this was a warrant to take property per a one sided decision, rather than work through the courts. The judge for the warrant probably had no way to refuse it. There's nothing to refuse. Part of that problem is that it isn't law per se of a state or federal legislation. It is a rule of a bureau, which is another "sticky wicket" if it were in an actual court.edit: I did read some LA reporter's account that anyone that had weapons out were ambushed and escorted back to town away from the area. Unable to confirm. Those are probably what you're talking about. They went too far.Aren't all legal decisions "one sided"?Bundy had his chance in court, he decided to represent himself and simply deny that the federal government exists... Great defense in a federal court. So 20 more years of illegal grazing, and the blm gets an order to legally remove the trespassing cows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReconRat Posted April 21, 2014 Report Share Posted April 21, 2014 Aren't all legal decisions "one sided"?Bundy had his chance in court, he decided to represent himself and simply deny that the federal government exists... Great defense in a federal court. So 20 more years of illegal grazing, and the blm gets an order to legally remove the trespassing cows.Not really. A law can be reversed by a jury's decision against. He could say there isn't a law. Laws are legislated with representation of the people. A rule or regulation that isn't created by people or our representatives cannot be changed or challenged. Until now, apparently. There are rumors that a batch of the Western states are now reviewing possible return of federal land to state ownership. A batch of states are also re-establishing or improving their respective state militias. Ohio is one of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted April 21, 2014 Report Share Posted April 21, 2014 (edited) there is a law, passed by congress in 78...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Rangelands_Improvement_Act_of_1978 Later modified by reagan in '86... http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1986/21486b.htm Bundy's claim is that there is no US government... Edited April 21, 2014 by magley64 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted April 21, 2014 Report Share Posted April 21, 2014 some more info... http://www.factandmyth.com/bundy-nevada/bundy-court.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAC Posted April 21, 2014 Report Share Posted April 21, 2014 Wow. Summary judgement. As I understand it, that means "get this stupid case the hell out of my courtroom." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted April 21, 2014 Report Share Posted April 21, 2014 (edited) Wow. Summary judgement. As I understand it, that means "get this stupid case the hell out of my courtroom." Yeah, well when the defendant represents himself, and his only defense is roughly translated to "this court's authority doesn't exist, and your courtroom is a sham" you're probably not likely to take his argument under any serious consideration. at least they gave him a month and 1/2 to get his cows back onto his own property... Edited April 21, 2014 by magley64 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strictly Street Posted April 21, 2014 Report Share Posted April 21, 2014 Now Texas.From the non-mainstream mediahttp://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/04/21/The-Eyes-of-the-BLM-are-on-Texas After the recent Bundy Ranch episode by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Texans are becoming more concerned about the BLM’s focus on 90,000 acres along a 116 mile stretch of the Texas/Oklahoma boundary. The BLM is reviewing the possible federal takeover and ownership of privately-held lands which have been deeded property for generations of Texas landowners. No turtles this time and no land use fees either. Sure is a lot of land. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted April 21, 2014 Report Share Posted April 21, 2014 Now Texas.From the non-mainstream mediahttp://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/04/21/The-Eyes-of-the-BLM-are-on-TexasAfter the recent Bundy Ranch episode by the U.S. Bureau of Land Management (BLM), Texans are becoming more concerned about the BLM’s focus on 90,000 acres along a 116 mile stretch of the Texas/Oklahoma boundary. The BLM is reviewing the possible federal takeover and ownership of privately-held lands which have been deeded property for generations of Texas landowners.No turtles this time and no land use fees either.Sure is a lot of land.LoL again @ Breitbart...Come back when there is a story. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonik Posted April 21, 2014 Report Share Posted April 21, 2014 (edited) some more info... http://www.factandmyth.com/bundy-nevada/bundy-court.pdf Your source is shit. The deficits in 11 and 12 were over 1 Trillion. The below is their proof that Obama didn't spend more money than Bush. And the chart was posted July of 2013, so the real numbers were more than available. Edited April 21, 2014 by Tonik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReconRat Posted April 21, 2014 Report Share Posted April 21, 2014 (edited) there is a law, passed by congress in 78...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Rangelands_Improvement_Act_of_1978 Later modified by reagan in '86... http://www.reagan.utexas.edu/archives/speeches/1986/21486b.htm Bundy's claim is that there is no US government...Yes, that is correct, and it worked pretty well. Too bad it's past history. Now tell me where the current Bureau of Land Management came from. The outfit that is enforcing the current standards. And if those standards have approval of the congress or public. Go for it, I could be wrong. edit: btw, summary judgement can mean different things. Mostly "not a case by court and jury". Award is granted to one party and not the other without deliberation (other than the judge). It can mean one party was plumb loco, or it can mean there is no contestable law. Only summary judgement. Go back and read the Public Rangelands Improvement Act and see what the transgressions and penalties of the law are. There aren't any. Ergo, summary judgement without a trial. The transgressions and penalties can be anything the government says it will be. Which is sad. We need regulation, but not abuse. A fine line of tightrope to walk. The easy way out is to have Congress decide and make it clear. Maybe they will. Reading some more. Will Bundy ever make any headway with this? No, simply no. He will not win anything under any circumstance. Not going to happen. Neither will the people that support him. Edited April 21, 2014 by ReconRat 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strictly Street Posted April 22, 2014 Report Share Posted April 22, 2014 LoL again @ Breitbart...Come back when there is a story. There's always a story. Even if you don't like the source. But you knew I posted this just for you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattm Posted April 22, 2014 Report Share Posted April 22, 2014 Summary judgement in this case is based upon 20 years of losses in court by Bundy. Bundy was not represented by an attorney because it is difficult to find an attorney willing to argue in court that the state of Nevada is sovereign. At least any attorney that didn't want to get disbarred for malpractice. This is not an interesting case in any way shape or form. This guy lost for 20 years because he is in the wrong here. No doubt About it. These other states in the southwest should revisit their own state constitutions before the waste the time of the court arguing this same teabagger crap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strictly Street Posted April 22, 2014 Report Share Posted April 22, 2014 (edited) Summary judgement in this case is based upon 20 years of losses in court by Bundy. Bundy was not represented by an attorney because it is difficult to find an attorney willing to argue in court that the state of Nevada is sovereign. At least any attorney that didn't want to get disbarred for malpractice.This is not an interesting case in any way shape or form. This guy lost for 20 years because he is in the wrong here. No doubt About it. These other states in the southwest should revisit their own state constitutions before the waste the time of the court arguing this same teabagger crap. The flip side of your statement would be that the Federal Govt owns all land. Oddly enough some people have a problem with this idea. A new claim I hadn't heard before: Arizona Official: Cliven Bundy's Acts Are LegalThe only solution to this problem, Weller said, is for the government to follow through on the transfer of public land that was promised to all newly created states at statehood but honored only to the states east of Colorado. He added the government's actions against Bundy amount to a criminal shakedown for payment."That was absolutely deadly force," Weller said. "I don't know that it's hitting the news out there, but [the BLM] were killing cattle, they shot his prize bull from a helicopter through the back of the neck and killed him. Several cattle were killed as they rounded them up and pulled them into the BLM pens. It's just a devastation of force." "The Bundys and the Hages are standing on what's called their water rights and their grazing rights," which, Weller said, "were pre-existing in territorial times, long before the government took over and these states became states and these water rights are mentioned, and any federal law or policy act that comes thereafter is always stated, 'subject to pre-existing rights.'Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/NewsmaxTv/Cliven-Bundy-Barry-Weller-Nevada-land/2014/04/21/id/566807#ixzz2zcRuri78 Ah, the plot thickens. I wondered why the feds owned essentially all the land in the west. How this came to be seems to be a matter of some pretty old paperwork. Ex post facto laws are expressly forbidden by the United States Constitution in Article 1, Section 9, Clause 3. Yet that does seem to be what happened when the BLM was created. Anecdotal reports from Oklahoma, Kansas, Arizona, Idaho, Texas and of course Nevada are starting to snowball as public awareness grows. Not good press in an election year. This is getting more interesting all the time. Edited April 22, 2014 by Strictly Street Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonik Posted April 22, 2014 Report Share Posted April 22, 2014 Well, Obama can add cow murderer to his resume now. http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/bundy-blm/blm-confirms-six-bundy-cattle-died-roundup Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted April 22, 2014 Report Share Posted April 22, 2014 (edited) None of that would have happened if they were on bundy's property... per multiple court orders. Edited April 22, 2014 by magley64 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsvRidr Posted April 22, 2014 Report Share Posted April 22, 2014 save the Turtles, kill the cows..... makes perfect sense. where is the PETA outrage? Sent from my DROID RAZR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAC Posted April 22, 2014 Report Share Posted April 22, 2014 (edited) rsvRidr, on 22 Apr 2014 - 12:36 PM, said:save the Turtles, kill the cows..... makes perfect sense. where is the PETA outrage?Sent from my DROID RAZRI'm a member of the group. We're quite happy with cow slaughter. You were referring to People Eating Tasty Animals, right? It IS the grilling season! Edited April 22, 2014 by DAC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonik Posted April 22, 2014 Report Share Posted April 22, 2014 None of that would have happened if they were on bundy's property... per multiple court orders. So the penalty for trespassing is cow murder? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted April 22, 2014 Report Share Posted April 22, 2014 save the Turtles, kill the cows..... makes perfect sense. where is the PETA outrage?Sent from my DROID RAZR Are the cows endangered? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted April 22, 2014 Report Share Posted April 22, 2014 (edited) So the penalty for trespassing is cow murder? Yes, that's why all the cows that were trespassing are now dead...What was bundy's plan with the cows? let them die of old age? Edited April 22, 2014 by magley64 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonik Posted April 22, 2014 Report Share Posted April 22, 2014 (edited) Are the cows endangered? As long as Obama is in charge, yes they are endangered. Yes, that's why all the cows that were trespassing are now dead...What was bundy's plan with the cows? let them die of old age? Trespassers can not be shot. There must be a real fear of death or great bodily harm before you can shoot someone or something. So far the BLM has provided no evidence that the cows were armed, let alone threatening their agents. Bundy's plan for the cows is irrelevant since they are his cows to do with as he chooses. Edited April 22, 2014 by Tonik Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magley64 Posted April 22, 2014 Report Share Posted April 22, 2014 Trespassers can not be shot. There must be a real fear of death or great bodily harm before you can shoot someone or something. So far the BLM has provided no evidence that the cows were armed, let alone threatening their agents. Bundy's plan for the cows is irrelevant since they are his cows to do with as he chooses. Can burglers be shot? bank robbers? armed or unarmed? Bundy's cows, and by extension bundy were stealing from the federal government for 20 years. I hope when i go rob a federal bank, people will show up with guns to point at federal agents... and... they're fucking cows... guess what, if an animal comes trespassing in my yard, they are getting chased off, if they turn and attack me, they are going to die.Depending on their species, they will then either be refrigerated for later meat processing, or buried in the back yard... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.