Burns Oregon Refuge Takeover Ends In Blood

As I've said countless times now, I get why they felt justified. I just think the entire mindset itself is a bit delusional. You don't get to decide you're revolutionaries and heroes. History does.

These guys got a bit ahead of themselves and bought into their own rhetoric a little too hard without realizing the reality of their situation.

This isn't the 1770s. Things work differently. Even the details, goals, and support for the American Revolution weren't as clear cut as we've made it out to be through years of primary school.


Basically this. The world is vastly different from those times. Trying to enact change in the same way may be based in deeply-seeded beliefs they feel are highly moral, but it is ultimately going to get you nowhere good, and most likely land you in jail or dead, a martyr of a cause few people can even really understand.

No I was stating that your assertion would be murdering them in cold blood.


That's the exact opposite of our entire system of government, our Constitution and our nation. I'm obviously inclined to disagree.

Because of this thread, I'm now going to have "Cletus The Slack-Jawed Yokel" stuck in my head.

Amazing how so many people have no clue what all this was about and want to toss out non-informed opinions.

This is what concerns me the most about the whole ordeal. I don't know if this is because the people that took over this reserve suck at getting the message out or people just plain don't care and prefer to think the government can do no wrong.

Out of 5 pages of calling these guys redneck cowboys who just want to cause problems because the government done them wrong. Only two people have bothered to look up why this was happening and only one of them came up with a half descent answer.

Things are not looking good for the future of our country if people cannot be bothered to even try and understand why this has been happening and why. This group has done a horrible job at getting its message out and that is the real tragedy here. The fact that the message has not gotten out in this day and age, is as much of a cause for concern as the entire reason this whole thing started.

No, the real problem here is that people think going in armed and occupying a government building is okay.

I'm not saying to shoot them.

But I am saying they're wrong regardless of their intent.

Look at it like the bad guy in The Rock. In fact, it's almost the exact same scenario just pared down for reality vs. Hollywood drama.

Great intentions, maybe. At least from one point of view.

But it was a *** horrible idea.


This also makes a hell of an assumption in thinking that people automatically would agree "if only they understood why it's happening."

Some of us get why it's happening, we just think their reasoning and expectations are wrong.

I, personally, would vote against ever returning state or federal public lands to private owners -- or protected federal lands over to the state, for that matter -- because that's basically saying, "Yep. Here you go. Please take these protected lands and instead strip them for resources."

Not okay with me.

Edit: And I want to be very clear here who is saying this. I was born and raised in the heart of the Allegheny National Forest, the son of -- and husband to the daughter of -- railroad, farm, and forest workers. I have a great respect for people who work on and with the land, and am a proponent of responsible resource harvesting.

But nothing I've seen the past two decades indicates to me that anyone operating harvesting operations is interested in anything but the bottom line, and that they will happily skirt regulations if it means making more *** money.

you'll have to forgive us if we don't all collectively hold our breath waiting for you to explain it to us in a way our feeble minds can grasp....

seeing as we're all helpless without your wisdom and insight...

Oregon Blood Trail.

Did someone die of dysentery?

At least in some cases people poaching or fishing out of season are doing it for sustenance. I still don't condone it, but I can forgive that a little more readily.

There's really no call for clear cutting, or tearing a hilltop completely off to extract the minerals inside, or destroying a water supply for the sake of extracting oil.

Bundy himself doesn't understand what the *** he's doing there so why would anyone else sympathize. The two convicts he's protesting for set fire to public land to cover up illegal poaching then hampered fire fighting efforts in a later year by setting another fire that spilled into a no burn zone after it got out of their control. The mandatory sentence comes from a provision under the unfortunately named Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996.

No they weren't convicted of *** terrorism. Part of the law states that you can't set fire to public lands (like, no ***). They plead guilty and were convicted of arson.

No one wants these idiots there. The Hammond's don't. The locals don't. Other ranchers don't. The vast majority of ranchers have no issues with government land agencies. Only *** like the Bundy's, who have no problem racking up a million in fines by stealing resources on land they don't own, are the one's crying and waving around guns. They have no larger support other than extreme anti-government fringe groups. They're a laughing stock to anyone else.

Eh. The arson issue was just a convenient excuse to "act now" and draw in some more support. Management and ownership of federal lands was always the issue.

The real question is do hillbillies believe in Darwinism?
Because this makes a strong case for them to start.

If you'll excuse me, I'm going to charge at Floyd Mayweather and his entourage because what could possibly go wrong?

Probably been a deade since I watched the rock, I forget the bad guys motives. Guess I'll watch it tonight. I know I married the prom queen however...

Savel is the only one who has even came close to what is going on here. I have talked about it in other threads. I'll go into it more later tonight after the rock I guess.

Not one person has acknowledged that the BLM is forcing Ranchers to sell them their land so the federal government can control even more than they already do. This has nothing do do with people mining or chopping down forests.


Regulations that do not go through the legislative process are pretty much illegal and this is what the BLM is doing.


It sure seems that way.


The fire that spilled over onto federal land was started by a lighting strike and the hammonds started a backfire to put it out. They did.. More than likely saved a lot of grassland in the process. Also that fire would have never spread like that if the Federal government would actually care for the land like these ranchers do.



And served the time.. They had no choice but to plead guilty because they already stated they started the backfire to save the majority of grassland. Now they being forced to serve even more time for the SAME crime. That is screwed up.. Even you should see this.

If their lawyers had any sense, they would have invoked Double Jeopardy...

*insert "I'll take Constitutional Law for $800, Alex" joke*

Double Jeopardy doesn't apply because they weren't brought to trial again, the sentence was appealed by the prosecutors and overturned.

Blockburger v. United States states otherwise.


Specifically, if a judge decides to add an additional sentence to the same crime, there has to be something different to apply the additional sentencing.

Now, was there something different when the judge decided to add an additional sentence for the same crime? Can you prove that?

Edit: Never mind, I read that wrong. Sorry.

And the Bundy's went up there and had a protest march, a legal, safe parade, which is fine. However after the parade ended and the Hammond's were still in jail, they up and decided to take over a random forest preserve building armed with weapons. And now, they are going to jail, having accomplished nothing because..there wasn't an actual attainable goal. And the saddest thing they got someone killed over it. For nothing.

They served the time for the original sentencing but those were remanded because the prosecution won the appeal to a higher court. The time they're serving now includes time served. They aren't serving time twice for the same conviction if that's what you're getting at. It's still the same sentence.

I think mandatory minimum sentencing is stupid and lazy, but that's just the springboard for the Bundy hissyfit. These people believe that federal land ownership is illegitimate, which, naturally, has no basis in reality, so a conviction of arson on federal land also has no legal standing (to them).

Don't celebrate too much there Vic.

Something Pleebo and I agree on. The world must have gone mad!

peaceful protests and petitioning should always be your first moves. had they fully exhausted those avenues then maybe people would support them.

Holy ***, something Mosin and I agree on.

These painkillers have warped reality today!

If convicted they are all going to do a lot of time, especially since the initial charge carries a 6 year sentence. The feds haven't even convened a grand jury yet to bring more charges. Not that running for office would go very far, they would never win an election at the federal level, which is where all of their "problems" originate.