Rancher vs. Feds

[TGHusker]

The more I read about this, the more far fringe Bundy and his friends and supporters look.

Agreed.

The initial knee jerk reports / comments in some media outlets stated that this was a liberty issue - fed over reach - the fed vs the individual. But when you look at the facts, the guy is a law breaker, nut case and should be cited for not only the cattle related issues but for inciting a riot if one were to break out - he'd be responsible for any shooting that might occur.

[carlfense]

The more I read about this, the more far fringe Bundy and his friends and supporters look.

Agreed.

The initial knee jerk reports / comments in some media outlets stated that this was a liberty issue - fed over reach - the fed vs the individual. But when you look at the facts, the guy is a law breaker, nut case and should be cited for not only the cattle related issues but for inciting a riot if one were to break out - he'd be responsible for any shooting that might occur.

This is from your WaPo timeline . . . sums it up nicely I think:

Some of Bundy's neighbors aren't impressed by his actions. "I feel that the rule of law supersedes armed militias coming in from all over the country to stand with a law-breaking rancher, which is what he is," one person told a local TV station.

[TGHusker]

The more I read about this, the more far fringe Bundy and his friends and supporters look.

Agreed.

The initial knee jerk reports / comments in some media outlets stated that this was a liberty issue - fed over reach - the fed vs the individual. But when you look at the facts, the guy is a law breaker, nut case and should be cited for not only the cattle related issues but for inciting a riot if one were to break out - he'd be responsible for any shooting that might occur.

This is from your WaPo timeline . . . sums it up nicely I think:

Some of Bundy's neighbors aren't impressed by his actions. "I feel that the rule of law supersedes armed militias coming in from all over the country to stand with a law-breaking rancher, which is what he is," one person told a local TV station.

yep that says it all. But you know in this political climate - any nut case can create another Waco - doesn't matter if it is far left or far right.

[commando]

sure is nice to be able to graze his cattle for free at taxpayer expense.

[carlfense]

yep that says it all. But you know in this political climate - any nut case can create another Waco - doesn't matter if it is far left or far right.

The difference being that the far left protesters would be wielding fair trade shade grown lattes and organic durian smoothies instead of ARs.

 

Worthy of mockery? Probably. Deadly? Generally not.

[carlfense]

sure is nice to be able to graze his cattle for free at taxpayer expense.

He's a taker! Get him!

[BigRedBuster]

To me there are two issues in this.

 

A) The idiot that thinks he can graze his cattle for free. Get the frick off public land if you aren't paying the fees you are supposed to pay. That land is as much my land as your land and you don't have any right to use it if my government doesn't want you to use it. Now, if you disagree with that decision, then get your cattle off the land while you negotiate still using the land and then pay the appropriate fees if and when your cattle are allowed back on the land.

 

B) This part has absolutely nothing to do with part "A" above. Was the land actually federal land before 1993 when the federal government designated it for strict conservation efforts? Or, was it state land that environmentalists found this tortuous on and convinced some bureaucrat i Washington that it needs to be protected thus coming in and "taking over" previously owned land they didn't manage to protect the tortuous?

 

There have been some really stupid things done in the name of protecting some species or wet lands or what ever that are decided on in some far away office that affect local people negatively in the stupidest way.

[BigRedBuster]

Another thing that makes me want to pound my head against the wall about this.

 

I have seen it a couple places now that it was going to cost the government $1,000,000 to round up hundreds of cattle. WTF???? Seriously....my son and are willing to take on the contract. (as long as nobody is shooting at me.)

[TGHusker]

yep that says it all. But you know in this political climate - any nut case can create another Waco - doesn't matter if it is far left or far right.

The difference being that the far left protesters would be wielding fair trade shade grown lattes and organic durian smoothies instead of ARs.

 

Worthy of mockery? Probably. Deadly? Generally not.

GOOD ONE - a fair trade shade grown would sound pretty good right now.

[TGHusker]

Another thing that makes me want to pound my head against the wall about this.

 

I have seen it a couple places now that it was going to cost the government $1,000,000 to round up hundreds of cattle. WTF???? Seriously....my son and are willing to take on the contract. (as long as nobody is shooting at me.)

This is why we have a $17 trillion rat hole debt

[carlfense]

B) This part has absolutely nothing to do with part "A" above. Was the land actually federal land before 1993 when the federal government designated it for strict conservation efforts? Or, was it state land that environmentalists found this tortuous on and convinced some bureaucrat i Washington that it needs to be protected thus coming in and "taking over" previously owned land they didn't manage to protect the tortuous?

Yes. From the Nevada State Constitution:

"That the people inhabiting said territory do agree and declare, that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within said territory, and that the same shall be and remain at the sole and entire disposition of the United States. . . "

http://www.leg.state...st/nvconst.html

[carlfense]

I have seen it a couple places now that it was going to cost the government $1,000,000 to round up hundreds of cattle. WTF???? Seriously....my son and are willing to take on the contract. (as long as nobody is shooting at me.)

There's the rub.

[knapplc]

durian smoothies

 

[EbylHusker]

To explain a little bit more about the land in question (Bunkerville Allotment and Gold Butte) - both have been federal controlled areas since being acquired from Mexico (aka before Nevada even existed as a state). The BLM manages huge amounts of land in the western US. I think Nevada is something like 75% federally owned land, if memory serves. Back in the 90's, both of the areas in question were identified as critical habitat for the desert tortoise and eventually closed to all grazing. I believe there are other conservation factors than just those relating to the desert tortoise, though I don't know if those were present at the time of the closings or have developed since.

 

So it has never been state land, and the BLM has a many decades old mandate from Congress to manage those lands. The thrust of their mandate is to maintain and manage the lands so as to utilize and preserve the resources (which includes pristine Wilderness Areas) within to best meet the needs of both the current and future citizens of the US.

[Ulty]

Here is a time line presented by the Washington Post

 

The more I read about this, the more far fringe Bundy and his friends and supporters look.

 

I'm beginning to think that Bundy and his son are a couple of bricks short of a full load:

After reading all that...Christ, what a bunch of whackjobs.

 

Dangerous lunacy.