This thread is dedicated to the discussion of the crazy ranchers and their takeover of an outpost on government land. And the reasons on both sides of the issue.


OK I found a few things about the beginning of this disagreement.

I think many, if not most, cattlemen can’t understand why Cliven Bundy is considered a hero in some people’s eyes. After all, he didn’t pay his grazing fees for 20 years. Of course, like most things, the situation is a little more complicated than it appears at first glance.

Where's the beef?

I understand most of the locals think these guys are douchebags.

Is there a percentage of the total that believe they are douchbags. Is it 51% giving them a majority? or 90%

The situation is not complicated and that opinion piece you posted spells out exactly what we already know.

Some ranchers want things to be like they were 100 years ago. Most of them realize that times change, though nobody really likes it that our taxes and costs of doing business rise.

Cliven Bundy and his sons are criminals, that's a fact that doesn't become any less true because some like-minded people view them as 'heroes'. They break the law by evading taxes, pointing loaded firearms at law enforcement, and stealing other people's property. They do so for their own gain and because they think they're entitled, partially due to their faith and their family history. They are criminals.

I have no issues with anyone protesting the government land management or anything else, in urban or rural locales. Freedom of speech and public assembly -- I'm a big fan. I do have a problem with people committing crimes that threaten others, and I hope Cliven, Ammon, and Ryan Bundy face consequences (as the writer of the OP opinion piece predicts they will).

(01-20-2016, 01:08 PM)Donovan Wrote: I understand most of the locals think these guys are douchebags.

Not just the locals..

The leader of an armed group who took over a national wildlife refuge in southeastern Oregon weeks ago joined hundreds of area residents at a tense community meeting -- listening quietly as many loudly chanted at him to "go."

Ammon Bundy, who has been trying to drum up support for his cause, didn't speak at Tuesday night's meeting in Burns where residents discussed the armed occupation of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge which began earlier this month.

Some of the several hundred community members spoke to Bundy directly. One woman thanked him for raising awareness around issues of public lands, but told him it's time to go home to his family.

"Ammon, you need to go home to your family; thank you," said local resident Jennifer Williams. "I've heard so many things I didn't know before. Now I'm aware."

Other speakers were less congenial and at times angry and emotional in comments directed at the armed group as well as at local government officials and federal government, in part for not doing more to end the occupation.

Harney County Judge Steve Grasty took the microphone over to where Bundy sat in the bleachers and told Bundy he'd drive him wherever he wanted to go, as far as Utah. He also offered to meet with him anytime.

Bundy and his small posse left after the meeting without incident.

Rallies also were held in Portland and Eugene, Oregon and in Boise, Idaho, Tuesday, with hundreds of people calling for Bundy to end the occupation and pointing out that federal management allows all kinds of people to enjoy public lands.

Harney County Sheriff Dave Ward reiterated in a statement before the Burns meeting that law enforcement wants the armed group to vacate the refuge.

He said police have arrested two men affiliated with the group and included a new report that Duane Kirkland of Hamilton, Montana, was stopped and arrested Thursday on a felon in possession of a firearm charge. Police arrested Kenneth Medenbach, of La Pine, in Burns Friday for unauthorized use of a vehicle authorities say was taken illegally from the refuge.

Full story: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/01/20/ore...ts-go.html

I am absolutely sure they will face charges. That is not debatable. The debate is if the government and its entities and policies are the best ones suited to decide management of land. I believe that given the government policies of the past think that they are more politically motivated than common sense motivated as is shown in quite a few policies that come out. I believe they have made their statement and should move on before it becomes a loss of lives.

In your opinion, Maggot. To which you're entitled.

You and the Bundys can work to affect change in many ways that don't include threatening lives and committing other crimes.

To the best of my knowledge, Cliven's still grazing without paying taxes or back taxes, walking around free talking about how Jesus and the Book of Mormon justify his crimes, and about how negros were better off as slaves, and whatnot.

So, while his sons may also be charged, it's my hope that they and Cliven are actually pursued by law enforcement, not just allowed to dodge court appearances and carry on breaking the law- same as it ever was.

I still believe that if they were black or brown or red and doing this it never, ever would have been allowed to go this far. LE would have burned them out with no thought to whether they lived or died. The lawbreakers would not have been free to pursue their agenda. No way, no how. They are breaking the law! They have threatened the lives of others.

(01-20-2016, 02:01 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: In your opinion, Maggot. To which you're entitled.

You and the Bundys can work to affect change in many ways that don't include threatening lives and committing other crimes.

To the best of my knowledge, Cliven's still grazing without paying taxes or back taxes, walking around free talking about how Jesus and the Book of Mormon justify his crimes, and about how negros were better off as slaves, and whatnot.

So, while his sons may also be charged, it's my hope that they and Cliven are actually pursued by law enforcement, not just allowed to dodge court appearances and carry on breaking the law- same as it ever was.

You don't think they will face charges?

(01-20-2016, 02:29 PM)Maggot Wrote:

(01-20-2016, 02:01 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: In your opinion, Maggot. To which you're entitled.

You and the Bundys can work to affect change in many ways that don't include threatening lives and committing other crimes.

To the best of my knowledge, Cliven's still grazing without paying taxes or back taxes, walking around free talking about how Jesus and the Book of Mormon justify his crimes, and about how negros were better off as slaves, and whatnot.

So, while his sons may also be charged, it's my hope that they and Cliven are actually pursued by law enforcement, not just allowed to dodge court appearances and carry on breaking the law- same as it ever was.

You don't think they will face charges?

Probably, hopefully. As I said: 'while his sons may also be charged, it's my hope that they and Cliven are actually pursued by law enforcement, not just allowed to dodge court appearances and carry on breaking the law- same as it ever was.'

Eh, those guys don't bother me much there are more ruthless people living in Chicago dodging the system, slipping court and not paying their fines for less worthless causes than these jokers. They use the terrible boom stick too.

I understand the views you've expressed Maggot.

If LEOs shoot and kill a lone non-criminal kid in a city park, because those LEOs didn't approach the scene correctly nor leave time to assess the situation, it's the kid's fault or his parents' fault. It's wrong to question those law enforcement officers' actions because they had no way of knowing that the city kid wasn't a criminal in possession of a real gun who might threaten their lives.

BUT, if a gang of rural anti-government criminals points loaded firearms at law enforcement officers and threaten to kill the LEOs if they try to do their jobs, meh. It's the right thing for the LEOs to assess and stand back, and no big deal if LE doesn't aggressively pursue those criminal jokesters after-the-fact.

Neither the kid nor the clowns nor the 'terrible boom stick' scare me, personally. We just see things very differently.

(01-20-2016, 03:03 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: I understand the views you've expressed Maggot.

If LEOs shoot and kill a lone non-criminal kid in a city park, because those LEOs didn't approach the scene correctly nor leave time to assess the situation, it's the kid's fault or his parents' fault. It's wrong to question those law enforcement officers' actions because they had no way of knowing that the city kid wasn't a criminal in possession of a real gun who might threaten their lives.

BUT, if a gang of rural anti-government criminals point loaded firearms at law enforcement officers and threaten to kill the LEOs if they try to do their jobs, meh. It's the right thing for the LEOs to assess and stand back, and no big deal if LE doesn't aggressively pursue those criminal jokesters after-the-fact.

Neither the kid nor the clowns nor the 'terrible boom stick' scare me, personally. We just see things very differently.

No you do not. A child getting shot in a park is much more different than people taking over a government outpost.
A bunch of gangbangers shooting a child in an apartment is not the same either. both use guns only one has shot the gun.
You understand your own understanding correct or not.

(01-20-2016, 03:15 PM)Maggot Wrote: No you do not. A child getting shot in a park is much more different than people taking over a government outpost.
A bunch of gangbangers shooting a child in an apartment is not the same either. both use guns only one has shot the gun.
You understand your own understanding correct or not.

What part of my restatement of the views you've posted was wrong?

I don't agree with your minimization of the militia's crimes and your characterization of them as "jokers". They're no better than other criminals committing the same types of crimes anywhere else, in my view.

And, those armed criminal militiamen certainly shouldn't be pursued less aggressively by LEOs than people (kids or otherwise) with undrawn weapons (real or otherwise) in open carry areas where there are no bystander lives endangered when the LEOs approach the scene - no matter what part of the country the encounter occurs. The 'assess and stand back' strategy should be applied equally in all such approaches -- unfortunately it's the opposite of what happened in the city park scenario, which you considered justified.

Anyway, I want rioters and looters in the city (Chicago or Cleveland or NYC...) arrested. I want city gangsters who steal and threaten people arrested. And, I want criminal gang members in the wilderness who steal and deface government property and threaten LEOs arrested too.

If you want to make an apples to apples comparison so that your introduction of Chicago into the equation applies, just put the group of armed protesters making demands of the government in Chicago. Put them in a pay-by-the-hour federal day care building where they're threatening to kill LEOs who try to evict them and stay as long as it takes to get what they want. Make them a group of disgruntled auto parts workers demanding the building be turned into a free city day care center so they can keep more of their incomes, a cause for which they're using media in attempt to recruit other armed protesters to join them and failing because the majority of working parents in and outside of Chicago disagree with their criminal methods.

I'd wanna see LE assess and stand back at the Chicago occupation if there were no bystander lives at risk upon their arrival. I'd wanna see the Chicago occupiers appropriately charged and have those charges aggressively pursued after eviction, even though I sympathize with the cause. If you would instead consider the Chicago occupiers 'jokers' like you do the criminal occupiers in Burns, then again we see things differently.

Like a real estate agent says "location,location,location" I don't believe what the ranchers are doing is right but what they are doing is only hurting themselves vs. hurting someone else. If they did not have some type of legitimate grievance I'm sure they would have been squashed by now. As it is no one has been hurt yet except someone's pride. Marching down main st. saying "kill the pigs" and taking over a park for weeks runs along the same lines as what these jokers are doing. I predict a negotiator goes in and takes them peacefully away and I'm sure they have been in contact with government representatives by now. But I could be wrong although I don't believe their cause is worth dying for and neither do they.

The legitimacy, or lack thereof, of their grievance has nothing to do with why LE hasn't squashed them Maggot. LE doesn't want a blood bath and doesn't want to give these guys the showdown they want (and inspire more violent confrontations with extremists). That's how I see it.

These guys look foolish because LE hasn't taken the bait and the militia's video releases show that at least some of them are just unstable anti-government types, probably with PTSD, searching for a cause. The Bundys seem desperate for armed bodies and will take what they can get. It's kind of sad, but still criminal and still dangerous. If you watched any of the Ritzheimer videos I posted in the "is this racism" thread, I think you could see how he and other such 'patriots' at the scene could easily go off. They look like jokes to me, but they're not jokers. More than one has said they're willing to kill or die at the scene, something which even other patriot militias have condemned.

In any event, you don't think they're hurting anyone Maggot. But, that's not how the people being hurt by them feel.

--The local community feels infringed upon and wants them to get out; luckily the Bundys have failed big time in attracting a large armed militia and turning the wildlife center into their national anti-government headquarters, which was one of their stated goals. That would have been an even more egregious infringement on the local community.

--The local native American tribe fears that parts of their history are being destroyed at the refuge and wants them to get out.

--The people who relish the wildlife center, which their taxes support, are being ripped off by the Bundy gang and don't appreciate it. They've led protests asking the Bundys and company to get out.

--LE is having to spend time and money monitoring the situation, at both the state and federal level, and have repeatedly asked the Bundys to vacate.

--Other militias seem to feel that they're being viewed as clowns by extension.

People are being hurt. But, I'm glad no one has been physically hurt and hope it stays that way.

Mounting Pressure on Feds to Take Action


Exasperated by a tense situation that has caused fear among some southeastern Oregon residents since it began Jan. 2, ^ Gov. Kate Brown said at a news conference Wednesday that federal officials "must move quickly to end the occupation and hold all of the wrongdoers accountable."

The occupation has cost Oregon taxpayers nearly half a million dollars. "We'll be asking federal officials to reimburse the state for these costs," Brown said. Federal, state and local law enforcement officers have been sent to the remote area but so far have avoided doing anything that might provoke a confrontation.


Harney County Judge ^ Steve Grasty has been at the forefront of efforts among locals to show Bundy and his followers they are not welcome. Grasty said Bundy — who is not from Oregon — should get the point that he and his followers need to go back to their home states and leave Harney County alone.

"It seems like he's out of touch with reality," Grasty told the AP from Burns. Grasty said he would like law enforcement to turn up the heat on Bundy and his fellow occupiers — perhaps isolate them by closing off roads leading to the refuge. "I hope they lock it down. People shouldn't be coming and going. Maybe it's time," he said.


The Bundy group's spokesman — ^ LaVoy Finicum — told Oregon Public Broadcasting on Wednesday they have "no plans to leave." "We are very strong, very firm. This facility will not go back to the federal government, ever," Finicum told OPB.

Source: http://tucson.com/news/national/oregon-g...ium=direct

Sniff , sniff , sniff , I smell another Waco type situation brewing.

I hope it doesn't come to that F.U. It's possible in this case that the militia can have all electricity, water, and comings and goings cut off and be driven out. That has not been attempted yet.

If Bundy militia members end up getting killed by themselves or LE, it will be way less sad to me than WACO -- it will be by their own orchestration. I get the sense that at least a couple of them are looking for a cause to martyr themselves over anyway.

In WACO the government tried to drive the cult out of their own home/compound. More than 50 adult members were willing (or forced?) to die and let their children die rather than leave the compound and their leader. The Branch Davidians weren't trying to provoke an armed conflict with LE when they were descended upon by the ATF, they were instead trying to stay off the radar.

The Oregon situation is different. The Bundy Bunch aren't in their own home. They're outsiders. They're not trying to hide from the government's view and avoid conflict, they're very publicly trying to provoke a stand-off with the government using criminal means and demanding ransom.

If any of the Bundy militia members have brought in their children from out of state to join the illegal occupation (thereby using them as shields/buffers to LE action), they're fucked up child abusers too. I hope they're not such low-lifes as to have done that.

Ammon Bundy should do the right thing and fold, his demands won't be met and he has very little support from the very people he claims to be championing. But, I don't know whether he has the courage to do that, nor whether he has much control over the bunch he's managed to wrangle up.