Cliven Bundy

gimmesometruth27 · April 2014

"Maybe the Bundy's have a legitimate concern with the BLM being untrustworthy."

i doubt it.

Halifax2TheMax · April 2014

unsung said:
So it's speculation that he's the only one left in that county? Are you telling me that the other 52 that were there all just rode off into the sunset willingly? The BLM didn't put any restrictions that made doing business unprofitable? No, government never does that.

You. You, get serious. 53 ranchers were in that county, one is left. Why?

Life is full of choices. Not all of them with your desired outcome.

Has the First Amendment been suspended? The right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances? Why aren't these 53 standing with Bundy? What petition have they made? Or maybe the profit margin on grazing cattle in scrub desert isn't as profitable as it once was. You know, with factory farming and all. And maybe the government found leasing the land for solar arrays was a better deal for the taxpayers and was less destructive to the land with requirements that the land be restored after the installation. Again, have you read the BLM report you linked to? No, you'd rather believe in conspiracy theories. If a business is cut throat to increase profit, why is it an issue if the government is cut throat to increase revenue? Not that I think the government has been cut throat mind you but isn't the American way about maximizing profits? Where do you stand on Keystone pipeline? You realize some STATE governments are contemplating eminent domain to run the pipeline through PRIVATELY held land. How do you feel about that?

Peace.

Cosmo · April 2014

Again...
The reason WHY the Feds has to bring in a large force is because the initial small force was met with a large force of armed protestors.
It is the SAME thing that would happen to you or me if...
1. We were living in a house that didn't belong to us and we lost our court case to remain there because we've been living there for a long time.
2. We met the 2 Sheriffs trying to evict us from the home with guns and the possibility of gun fire.
3. We had all of our drinking buddies and the guys in our softball league in the front yard, many of them with guns.
...
We would be idiots to think it would end there... with the 2 Sheriffs driving away. If we were smart, we would KNOW that they would be coming back with a lot of Sheriffs, along with SWAT Teams and helicopters and a ton of guns. Really... only an idiot would think they can defeat Law Enforcement in America. If you do win... they will keep coming at you with more and more of them.
You would have to murder a whole lot of uniformed officers to do so... and in doing so, you deserve to die a violent death because you would be a mass murdering criminal.

Cosmo · April 2014

unsung said:
So it's speculation that he's the only one left in that county? Are you telling me that the other 52 that were there all just rode off into the sunset willingly? The BLM didn't put any restrictions that made doing business unprofitable? No, government never does that.

You. You, get serious. 53 ranchers were in that county, one is left. Why?

...
I'm guessing that the other 52 understood the meaning of 'Land Usage' and didn't think that Public Lands belongs to them... and went elsewhere to graze their cattle.
...
Am i right?

Cosmo · April 2014

unsung said:
This entire thing reinforces my belief that we are nothing but slaves.

Don't pay a bill? Armed men show up to collect.
Not really. I didn't pay my water bill and the water company sent me a notice they would be shutting off my water supply... so, i went down to the local office and paid my bill. No guns showed up at my house... violent comfrontation that would end with me on the shit end of the stick averted.

Don't pay your tax? Armed men drag you away and throw you in a cage.
Not really. The IRS will send you plenty of notices and place fines on what you owe. You will eventually end up in jail because you would be in violation of the U.S. Constitution (hint: 16th Amendment). and yes, eventually, some armed officers will come to arrest you because they would have a bench warrant on their side and you would have diddly-squat on your side. Plus, it is kind of an asshole move to avoid paying taxes, yet, benefitting from some of the stuff taxes go towards.

A lot of criticism on putting women on the front; where's the criticism over federal agents targeting their snipers on these women?
Seriously? You wouldn't stand behind you wife and daughter if faced with gunfire... like a stinking Saddam Hussein asshole, would you? No, i didn't think so. You would take a bullet for them, so they might live, right?
So, in what Universe do you defend this blatant act of cowardice?

This isn't about rule of law, this is about keeping the machine fed.

Thirty Bills Unpaid · April 2014

Cosmo said:

unsung said:
So it's speculation that he's the only one left in that county? Are you telling me that the other 52 that were there all just rode off into the sunset willingly? The BLM didn't put any restrictions that made doing business unprofitable? No, government never does that.

You. You, get serious. 53 ranchers were in that county, one is left. Why?
...
I'm guessing that the other 52 understood the meaning of 'Land Usage' and didn't think that Public Lands belongs to them... and went elsewhere to graze their cattle.
...
Am i right?

Or the cost effectiveness of paying the grazing fees didn't make much business sense.

unsung · April 2014

Grazing fees that didn't exist when they started using the land, right?

mickeyrat · April 2014

unsung said:
Grazing fees that didn't exist when they started using the land, right?

They , who? Cliven or his Father or Grandfather? His rights begin with his ownership of HIS ranch. Think the BLM had been created by then. As far as I can see the "rights" chain was broken when title passed to him. He was paying them up to a point , correct? As a taxpayer, I want what is owed for MY/OUR land. Thank you.

unsung · April 2014

Heading to Texas next...

http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/04/21/The-Eyes-of-the-BLM-are-on-Texas

Cosmo · April 2014

unsung said:
Grazing fees that didn't exist when they started using the land, right?

...
Wasn't land management caused by things such as over grazing by ranchers?
Perhaps, if Mr. Bundy managed the 160 acres of private property he actually owns... he wouldn't need to graze on an property that is not privately held by him.
What is Mr. Bundy doing with the 160 arces he owns?

brianlux · April 2014

Cosmo said:

unsung said:
Grazing fees that didn't exist when they started using the land, right?
...
Wasn't land management caused by things such as over grazing by ranchers?
Perhaps, if Mr. Bundy managed the 160 acres of private property he actually owns... he wouldn't need to graze on an property that is not privately held by him.
What is Mr. Bundy doing with the 160 arces he owns?

It was supposed to work that way only too many big ranchers have had too many politicians in their pocket for too long. Imagine that! Same thing with mining outfits. Screw the land, buy off the politicians, rake in the dough and then bitch like hell when someone finally says , "enough".

Halifax2TheMax · April 2014

Cosmo said:

unsung said:
Grazing fees that didn't exist when they started using the land, right?
...
Wasn't land management caused by things such as over grazing by ranchers?
Perhaps, if Mr. Bundy managed the 160 acres of private property he actually owns... he wouldn't need to graze on an property that is not privately held by him.
What is Mr. Bundy doing with the 160 arces he owns?

Keeping it lush for his personal enjoyment. I wonder how he'd feel if 2000 folks wanted to show up and say host a BBQ keg party with live music on his 160 acres. Maybe a 3 month rave or lollapalooza. I wonder what his argument would be? Its private property, get off my land. Well sir, get your cows off MY land and pay your back grazing fees, thief.

Ever hear of the dust bowl? Ever wonder how water was captured and regulated so deserts could become the bread basket of America? Thank the big bad oppressive Government. What a bunch of ungrateful selfish welfare leeches.

Peace.

Cosmo · April 2014

unsung said:
Grazing fees that didn't exist when they started using the land, right?

"Lets begin with a bit of history.

The area known as the Bunkerville Allotment came into the possession of the United States when it was ceded to us by Mexico at the end of the Mexican-American war. Most of the land in Nevada is still owned by the Federal government, including that area, basically because people didn’t move there and buy it when the Federal government was willing to sell it. As a result, and because Nevada could not afford that much land (and didn’t want to own and therefore be responsible for a bunch of empty desert, anyway), it remained in the hands of the Federal government.

In 1934, Congress passed the Taylor Grazing Act (TGA). It allowed farmers to graze on many areas of Federal lands, provided that they got a permit and paid a fee.

In 1954 or thereabouts, Cliven Bundy and his father began grazing their cattle in the Bunkerville Allotment, paying the fee and keeping up the proper permits to do so.

(Cosmo notes: If I do my math right... 1954 minus 1934... equals... carry the... no... **erase-erase-erase*... ah, 20! It was 20 years AFTER the permits were required. That means... if I did the math correctly... that the establishment of permit use for grazing in the Bunkerville allotment was there... BEFORE the bundys used that land for grazing.
So, YES... the Grazing Fees DID exist before the Bundys started using the land.... er... NO, the Grazing Fees didn't not exist before 1954... if the truth is that 1932 comes before 1954.)."

ref. http://therenaissancemillenial.wordpress.com/2014/04/17/cliven-bundy

unsung · April 2014

And as he has stated the BLM, or it's predecessor, used to do things for those fees and now they don't or haven't for some time.

BHealy · April 2014

unsung said:
And as he has stated the BLM, or it's predecessor, used to do things for those fees and now they don't or haven't for some time.

The fees are a steal, and its a "user fee" not a charge for a service.

unsung · April 2014

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

unsung said:
And please, please, don't insult me with the bs of the anarchy that would ensure if the Feds stayed out of this. We are both smarter than that.

Remember when everything sucked and the government solved all of our problems? Me neither.
You don't think that there are inherent problems with people being 'selective' with regards to which laws they think they should comply with and which laws they shouldn't?

You give people way too much credit.

Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't you one of those that gave me a hard time for being a prepper?

I mean in a collapse of society will people be good or will there be people who will try to take using force?

I'm saying in a complete collapse there would be problems, and that is unlike what would happen if the Feds became limited to the Constitution.

Thirty Bills Unpaid · April 2014

unsung said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

unsung said:
And please, please, don't insult me with the bs of the anarchy that would ensure if the Feds stayed out of this. We are both smarter than that.

Remember when everything sucked and the government solved all of our problems? Me neither.
You don't think that there are inherent problems with people being 'selective' with regards to which laws they think they should comply with and which laws they shouldn't?

You give people way too much credit.

Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't you one of those that gave me a hard time for being a prepper?

I mean in a collapse of society will people be good or will there be people who will try to take using force?

I'm saying in a complete collapse there would be problems, and that is unlike what would happen if the Feds became limited to the Constitution.

I could have been- but not with any malice. If you are feeling like you need to prepare for an impending disaster, that is your prerogative. I'd also say that to live life preparing for a societal meltdown is not- to my way of thinking- living life as it is intended.

What does it have to do with my post you quoted though? If people followed rules and regulations... the 'impending collapse' you fear will likely be thwarted. Anarchy is achieved when law and order fails to exist. When the government enforces the laws of the land... it is doing its part to prevent the bleak scenario you claim you are preparing for. You should be supportive of such measures.

Cosmo · April 2014

unsung said:
And as he has stated the BLM, or it's predecessor, used to do things for those fees and now they don't or haven't for some time.

...
I thought Mr. Bundy CHOSE to not renew his permit because The Bureau of Land Management was "Managing the Land" by limiting the number of cattle each rancher was allowed to graze on the public property. So, the fees for land mangement went to managing the land.
It sounds like Mr. Bundy 'believes' that he should be allowed to have as many cows on that land as he wants.
...
Think of it like this... you like to go camping, right? Well, so do I. But, just because i purchase a camping permit... it does not mean I can use up the whole campground for myself. I get an allotment for one site, which typically carries a limit on the number of vehicles i can park in the campgound. I cannot buy one permit, and bring 55 trucks to the site.

Cosmo · April 2014

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

unsung said:

Thirty Bills Unpaid said:

unsung said:
And please, please, don't insult me with the bs of the anarchy that would ensure if the Feds stayed out of this. We are both smarter than that.
Remember when everything sucked and the government solved all of our problems? Me neither.
You don't think that there are inherent problems with people being 'selective' with regards to which laws they think they should comply with and which laws they shouldn't?
You give people way too much credit.
Correct me if I'm wrong but weren't you one of those that gave me a hard time for being a prepper?
I mean in a collapse of society will people be good or will there be people who will try to take using force?
I'm saying in a complete collapse there would be problems, and that is unlike what would happen if the Feds became limited to the Constitution.
I could have been- but not with any malice. If you are feeling like you need to prepare for an impending disaster, that is your prerogative. I'd also say that to live life preparing for a societal meltdown is not- to my way of thinking- living life as it is intended.

What does it have to do with my post you quoted though? If people followed rules and regulations... the 'impending collapse' you fear will likely be thwarted. Anarchy is achieved when law and order fails to exist. When the government enforces the laws of the land... it is doing its part to prevent the bleak scenario you claim you are preparing for. You should be supportive of such measures.

...
I don't think anyone here has a problem with disaster preparedness. In fact, i believe we all FAVOR being prepared for localized natural disasters, such as Hurricanes, Tornadoes, Earthquakes, etc...

But, we also think that only crazy people store up arms and supplies for a Zombie Apocalypse, Alien Invasion and Extinction Level Event.

Cosmo · April 2014

BHealy said:

unsung said:
And as he has stated the BLM, or it's predecessor, used to do things for those fees and now they don't or haven't for some time.
The fees are a steal, and its a "user fee" not a charge for a service.

...
Yes. It is the same thing you get when you pay for a camping permit. It fees go for land management... ie. any source water, fire pits, Tables/benches and a littl plot where you can set up your encampment.
The permit does not allow you to cut down trees or clear brush (or let your damn cows get fat on the vegitation so you can sell them for a higher market price) to fit your wants.

Cliven Bundy

Comments

Categories