I have the right to use government land (now with slavery!)

[Imperializt Russia]

Its not so much what, its the principle. This nations was supposed to be land of the free, home of the brave. Where everyone has a chance, yet only if you use their rules, and do what they say, do you get anything. If you don't do exactly what they say, then you get label a traitor for no good reason.

No, he's been labelled a criminal for non-payment of federal fees, which is a federal offence.
There's no invention of charges here, that's just what happened.

[Roski]

1: It is.
2: They apparently owned it at one point
3: So thousands of "Patriot Militias" did not try to point guns at the BLM? Ok.
4: But, it does...

1: Wrong. A fee is not a tax. The land-use fee is no different than any other lease payment.
2: No, the Bundy family never owned the land. In the past they paid the land use fee to have access to the land for grazing. Then they stopped paying the fee.
3: Ignorant rednecks pointing guns at police officers is not "militarizing Nevada".
4: Two bulls=/=mass grave.

1: A fee that is taken from the pockets of people and put to use in the government (for any reason, to be used for any reason) is a tax.
2: Hmm.. if you can source this...
3: It is, but is not Government militarization.
4: And where did I explicitly state in my own opinion it was a mass grave?

[Dyakovo]

Its not so much what, its the principle. This nations was supposed to be land of the free, home of the brave. Where everyone has a chance, yet only if you use their rules, and do what they say, do you get anything. If you don't do exactly what they say, then you get label a traitor for no good reason.

Taking up arms against the lawful government because you broke the law is actually a pretty damn good reason to label you a traitor...

[Roski]

Not sure what the Feds are going to do with 1/4th of an acre of land.

Apparently he's expecting the to feed the nation off of it...

I would have to level my house just to feed my own family with my land...

[Death Metal]

Its not so much what, its the principle. This nations was supposed to be land of the free, home of the brave. Where everyone has a chance, yet only if you use their rules, and do what they say, do you get anything. If you don't do exactly what they say, then you get label a traitor for no good reason.

You do realize Adolf Hitler was an an anti-establishment "freedom fighter" before he took power right?

Blindly trusting anti-authority is setting yourself up for the firing squads when they take over.

[Pandeeria]

Its not so much what, its the principle. This nations was supposed to be land of the free, home of the brave. Where everyone has a chance, yet only if you use their rules, and do what they say, do you get anything. If you don't do exactly what they say, then you get label a traitor for no good reason.

You do realize Adolf Hitler was an an anti-establishment "freedom fighter" before he took power right?

Blindly trusting anti-authority is setting yourself up for the firing squads when they take over.

I don't know whats up with this edgy anti-authority fad right now.

[Imperializt Russia]

There's also this line from an interview CNN quotes:

"My forefathers have been up and down the Virgin Valley ever since 1877. All these rights I claim have been created through pre-emptive rights and beneficial use of the forage and the water. I have been here longer. My rights are before the BLM even existed," Bundy told the station.

This isn't how the law works, Cliven.

The formation of new federal arms trump the status quo and bring federal subjects into line under them.
Otherwise, no federal statute could ever be enforced.

You can apply the same logic to the NFA acts of 1934 or 1968 if you want, and unless you're an idiot, it will sound ridiculous.

[Nazi Flower Power]

federal agents have admitted to shooting the cattle.

Ummm... So why am I supposed to be outraged exactly? What is the point of trying to make it out like they are exposing the government's dirty secrets when it is something the government has already admitted? Or am I supposed to be upset about cows not getting a proper Christian burial?

Maybe I am making painfully obvious that I have lived my entire adult life in cities that are too densely settled to graze cattle, but I really don't get why I am supposed to be upset. Are basic human rights being violated? No. Does it affect me in any way? No. Would it have been difficult for Bundy to prevent this? No.

[Roski]

You do realize Adolf Hitler was an an anti-establishment "freedom fighter" before he took power right?

Blindly trusting anti-authority is setting yourself up for the firing squads when they take over.

I don't know whats up with this edgy anti-authority fad right now.

The Conservatives and Tea Party have some members that can talk to the people properly, and the President isn't helping the Government's case.

[Death Metal]

You do realize Adolf Hitler was an an anti-establishment "freedom fighter" before he took power right?

Blindly trusting anti-authority is setting yourself up for the firing squads when they take over.

I don't know whats up with this edgy anti-authority fad right now.

Because we don't have enough examples of genocides causes by "revolutionaries" I guess.

[Pandeeria]

I don't know whats up with this edgy anti-authority fad right now.

The Conservatives and Tea Party have some members that can talk to the people properly, and the President isn't helping the Government's case.

The problems with Barack Obama have been so exaggerated to hell and back. Lots of people hate him just because he's Obama.

[Quintium]

The land was federally owned.

It's not a matter of law here. Yes, the law is on their side, but then they were the ones who have tasked themselves with creating and carrying out the law. No, what's at play here is something bigger, a matter of power. They could have dropped the matter, or they could have offered him a settlement, or they could have acted with a lot less show of force, but they chose not to. They chose to make this into a statement, to show others that the federal government is not to be trifled with. This was about the role of the federal government in relation to the role of individual states and counties.

And in a United States that's getting more and more divided and polarized on the role and the power of the federal government, this is an interesting development. These people didn't just turn up to defend the man's rights - they turned up to stand against the federal government, because many in the United States - especially in areas that are not urban - do not want it to be as powerful as it is.

[AiliailiA]

The case of United States v. Bundy played out over many years in the United States District Court for the District of Nevada. It involved court orders, injunctions, and notices. Bundy argued that the land belongs to the state.[3]

What do you mean by "[3]" ..?

Oh. I see. You're just copy-pasting stuff without attribution. Plagiarism.

[Pandeeria]

I don't know whats up with this edgy anti-authority fad right now.

Because we don't have enough examples of genocides causes by "revolutionaries" I guess.

Then plot twist, when the revolutionaries take power it will be a lot worse then whats currently going on.

These political fads are silly.

[Dyakovo]

1: Wrong. A fee is not a tax. The land-use fee is no different than any other lease payment.
2: No, the Bundy family never owned the land. In the past they paid the land use fee to have access to the land for grazing. Then they stopped paying the fee.
3: Ignorant rednecks pointing guns at police officers is not "militarizing Nevada".
4: Two bulls=/=mass grave.

1: A fee that is taken from the pockets of people and put to use in the government (for any reason, to be used for any reason) is a tax.
2: Hmm.. if you can source this...
3: It is, but is not Government militarization.
4: And where did I explicitly state in my own opinion it was a mass grave?

1: No, it isn't.
2: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the ... overnment/
3: Ignorant rednecks with guns=/=military, so no.
4: You're the one that chose to use infowars as a source, and based your thread title off their false story. The fact that you have since edited the infowars link out of the OP is immaterial.

[Quintium]

The formation of new federal arms trump the status quo and bring federal subjects into line under them.

What you're saying isn't that important, but your wording is.
"To bring federal subjects into line."
That's what they tried to do here, and thankfully they failed.

[Roski]

federal agents have admitted to shooting the cattle.

Ummm... So why am I supposed to be outraged exactly? What is the point of trying to make it out like they are exposing the government's dirty secrets when it is something the government has already admitted? Or am I supposed to be upset about cows not getting a proper Christian burial?

Maybe I am making painfully obvious that I have lived my entire adult life in cities that are too densely settled to graze cattle, but I really don't get why I am supposed to be upset. Are basic human rights being violated? No. Does it affect me in any way? No. Would it have been difficult for Bundy to prevent this? No.

This is the reason people are upset, and the "neglect" of the Cattle, as Bundy puts it, has led to many deaths in them.

Many had to be put down, as per Bundy, and if this were true, the BLM has seriously lost this.

This will not help to calm the "storm" of "patriots" that are attempting to attack the government.
In fact, this may fuel some sort of revolt. I do not know why or what type of revolt will occur, but there are some news sources that are afraid that many tax violations are going to occur.

Which means the possibility of militarization.

[Tekania]

Well, to me its wrong for anyone to take another person property without buying it.

Not applicable. Let's say, for example that you wanted to store a car on my land and I was charging you $x per day storage fee. Now, after a period of time you decide you no longer will pay me $x and say you will store it there for free. So, I send you notice that you need to pay $x and you refuse again... so I send you notice to remove your car from my land. After a time I go to court, I get a judgement against you for penalty fees for the car there and an order for you to remove the car..... after a time I go to court again and get the judgement modified and now you have an order to remove it in x days and I am given the power in the judgement to seize the car if it is still present after x days. After X days you still have no removed it.

Much like the car above, which is no longer yours being still present..... the cattle is no longer Bundy's. When you refused to remove, through the judgement, the car became mine if still present as you have now voluntarily in context of the law relinquished ownership by failure to act..... likewise the cattle became the BLM's after the 45day deadline in the judgement.

[Vazdania]

The Federal Government ought to hand over land to the State of Nevada. This sort of 'volatile semi-revolution' (if you'd like) was completely inevitable.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/gov ... 2_PM-2.jpg

With basically ALL of Nevada being owned by the Federal Government (through agencies) it is no wonder why many citizens are pissed off.

[Pandeeria]

The land was federally owned.

It's not a matter of law here. Yes, the law is on their side, but then they were the ones who have tasked themselves with creating and carrying out the law. No, what's at play here is something bigger, a matter of power. They could have dropped the matter, or they could have offered him a settlement, or they could have acted with a lot less show of force, but they chose not to. They chose to make this into a statement, to show others that the federal government is not to be trifled with. This was about the role of the federal government in relation to the role of individual states and counties.

And in a United States that's getting more and more divided and polarized on the role and the power of the federal government, this is an interesting development. These people didn't just turn up to defend the man's rights - they turned up to stand against the federal government, because many in the United States - especially in areas that are not urban - do not want it to be as powerful as it is.

I will admit the BLM could've avoided coming off as assholes and just dropped it and gave Bundy a slap on the wrist, but they were acting within their legal rights.

It doesn't matter if rural areas like the power of the federal government. If they're taking up arms and making threats when THEY are in the wrong, some arrests should be dished out.

[Roski]

1: A fee that is taken from the pockets of people and put to use in the government (for any reason, to be used for any reason) is a tax.
2: Hmm.. if you can source this...
3: It is, but is not Government militarization.
4: And where did I explicitly state in my own opinion it was a mass grave?

1: No, it isn't.
2: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the ... overnment/
3: Ignorant rednecks with guns=/=military, so no.
4: You're the one that chose to use infowars as a source, and based your thread title off their false story. The fact that you have since edited the infowars link out of the OP is immaterial.

1: By technicality, it is.
3: 'Militia'. Nobody even said that a "Military" is involved. But it is still militarization, just not a federal Military doing it.
4: I took it out because people said it was not a good source. "Mass Graves" is sarcasm.

[Pandeeria]

The Federal Government ought to hand over land to the State of Nevada. This sort of 'volatile semi-revolution' (if you'd like) was completely inevitable.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/gov ... 2_PM-2.jpg

With basically ALL of Nevada being owned by the Federal Government (through agencies) it is no wonder why many citizens are pissed off.

The Federal Government is in the right however.

[Death Metal]

Because we don't have enough examples of genocides causes by "revolutionaries" I guess.

Then plot twist, when the revolutionaries take power it will be a lot worse then whats currently going on.

These political fads are silly.

Ironically, this is something that was warned about in the Federalist Papers. By Hamilton if I recall correctly.

[AiliailiA]

Apparently he's expecting the to feed the nation off of it...

I would have to level my house just to feed my own family with my land...

Frack it bro. The neighbours will be highly amused by the flammable tapwater and exploding toilets!

[Roski]

It's not a matter of law here. Yes, the law is on their side, but then they were the ones who have tasked themselves with creating and carrying out the law. No, what's at play here is something bigger, a matter of power. They could have dropped the matter, or they could have offered him a settlement, or they could have acted with a lot less show of force, but they chose not to. They chose to make this into a statement, to show others that the federal government is not to be trifled with. This was about the role of the federal government in relation to the role of individual states and counties.

And in a United States that's getting more and more divided and polarized on the role and the power of the federal government, this is an interesting development. These people didn't just turn up to defend the man's rights - they turned up to stand against the federal government, because many in the United States - especially in areas that are not urban - do not want it to be as powerful as it is.

I will admit the BLM could've avoided coming off as assholes and just dropped it and gave Bundy a slap on the wrist, but they were acting within their legal rights.

It doesn't matter if rural areas like the power of the federal government. If they're taking up arms and making threats when THEY are in the wrong, some arrests should be dished out.

They risk a revolt. The "Patriots" out there would have started shooting.

Tonight at Ten, the Bloodbath in Nevada