Bundy Ranch Standoff

Should you squeeze the toothpaste tube in the middle or from the end?
Post Reply
Spartan_Warrior
Posts: 1680
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am

Bundy Ranch Standoff

Post by Spartan_Warrior » Wed Apr 16, 2014 1:40 pm

This came up in the DOOM! thread and I didn't want to continue derailing it. Apparently the Bureau of Land Management had a standoff over the weekend with a Nevada Rancher named Cliven Bundy and hundreds of protestors who arrived to prevent the BLM from confiscating his cattle. I hadn't even heard about it in the MSM (surprise, surprise).

http://rt.com/usa/ron-paul-bundy-ranch-688/

http://scgnews.com/bundy-ranch-what-you ... being-told

And my favorite:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQb0qJLhea8

"This is what the government calls an attempt to resolve the matter administratively and judicially, which is: give us all your cattle which we will sell to pay the fines we imposed upon you to save a tortoise that we are currently murdering ourselves, or--we will shoot your family."

:lol:

Not sure what to make of all this, but it sure is crazy.

workathome
Posts: 1300
Joined: Sat Jun 29, 2013 3:06 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Standoff

Post by workathome » Wed Apr 16, 2014 2:03 pm

I think this is a good test case for DHS and other agencies to see how armed citizens react to certain situations. They can use it to adapt future policies in case of domestic emergencies (e.g. what happens if the government needs to confiscate farm food during a famine and the farmer isn't willing to take fiat currency?)

I'm guessing drones will be more useful in a future situation, though I've seen years ago on some TV show a vehicle that could use sound, or launch tear gas, etc. Small arms won't penetrate armored vehicle and if they want to shoot at drones it's not-a-big-deal. If someone like DHS was willing to use additional non-lethal force, I think the protestors could safely be arrested without the government having to resort to real violence.

User avatar
JohnnyH
Posts: 2007
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 6:00 pm
Location: Rockies

Re: Bundy Ranch Standoff

Post by JohnnyH » Wed Apr 16, 2014 2:33 pm

I'm just glad the feds had the wisdom and restraint to do what they did.... The loss of face must be hard for some of them to accept. We'll see what happens next (hopefully no swat death squads).

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 3973
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Bundy Ranch Standoff

Post by Ego » Wed Apr 16, 2014 4:16 pm

On Friday, Paul told Cavuto that the Bundy family “had virtual ownership of that land because they had been using it,” yet the law is “not clean enough.”
My family has been using the sidewalks in our neighborhood for generations. If I want to put a food cart on "our" sidewalk I would have to get a permit and pay a fee. How does this differ?

ffj
Posts: 1798
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 3:16 am

Re: Bundy Ranch Standoff

Post by ffj » Wed Apr 16, 2014 4:25 pm

The guy didn't pay the fees necessary to lease land that didn't belong to him; the government sought payment through confiscation of his cattle. Isn't that the gist of it? Am I missing something here?

What would have happened if he had paid the leasing fees for the last twenty years? This thing has turned into a circus with each side airing their conspiracy theories and grudges. We can talk about turtles and fracking and when the BLM was created and how long his family has resided there ( I'm sure they paid a fair price to the Native Americans), but I have a sneaking suspicion this guy is a drama queen looking for a cause and he is going to get someone hurt or killed.

Spartan_Warrior
Posts: 1680
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 1:24 am

Re: Bundy Ranch Standoff

Post by Spartan_Warrior » Wed Apr 16, 2014 4:27 pm

@Ego: From what I can gather, the difference is that in your example, your family has already been running the food cart for generations before the government decides to start hassling you with fees and permits. Additionally, even after paying the fees, the government puts an arbitrary limit on how many hot dogs your food court can sell.

At the end of the day, though, it seems pretty obvious that the Bundy family is, legally speaking, in the wrong--eminent domain and all that.

The more interesting part of the story to me is all the conspiracy theories--from Harry Reid and Chinese solar panels to the endangered desert tortoise. Also, the broader question of whether what the government claims as its legal right is, in fact, right, i.e. just/moral.

User avatar
Chad
Posts: 3863
Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 3:10 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Standoff

Post by Chad » Wed Apr 16, 2014 5:05 pm

Don't forget the NWO. The comments on the one video were completely delusional.

User avatar
jennypenny
Posts: 5742
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2011 2:20 pm
Location: Stepford USA

Re: Bundy Ranch Standoff

Post by jennypenny » Wed Apr 16, 2014 5:20 pm

firefighterjeff wrote:
jennypenny wrote:It doesn't matter if the Nevada rancher was right or not. My point was that the word went out (my inbox lit up that day) and people immediately headed to Nevada to help. That's the part that's significant to my mind. It made me think that people who've bunkered up aren't necessarily alone after all. A loose network of people with similar mindsets seems to be developing.
Well, I would disagree about being right or wrong. But yes, people will band together and can thwart immediate action. The government doesn't want another Waco. I really dislike using law enforcement as pawns for your agenda however. Every jackass out there has a phone with video capabilities that they are hoping to use to their advantage, even if it involves provocation and heavy editing.
I guess I see this as the federal government using Bundy and others as pawns to further their agenda, too. Did it seem like an appropriate use of force? It seemed like a show of force more than an attempt to resolve the situation to me. I am very supportive of local law enforcement. I'm a little sick of it at the federal level. Does every government agency need a swat team?

To go back to Ego's example, if authorities tried to shut the family business down, I would be very pleased to see all of the neighbors come out to show support and make sure Ego's family was treated fairly. That's what I think happened here (minus the ubiquitous youtube idiot brigade present at any newsworthy event).

ffj
Posts: 1798
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 3:16 am

Re: Bundy Ranch Standoff

Post by ffj » Wed Apr 16, 2014 9:01 pm

I did a little bit of research early today and although there are a lot of accusations and speculation about the motives for the BLM taking action now, nowhere could I find concrete proof other than people's imaginations. What is clearly documented is Mr. Bundy's behavior even before he stopped paying his lease 20 years ago.

Are they trying to shut his family business down to reclaim the land for tortoises, solar plants, fracking for natural gas, because they are evil? I don't know. And I would venture to guess nobody else does either. I am truly interested if there is proof out there that the authorities are trying to shut him down for their own gain. I can't find it.

What we do know is that he has failed to honor his end of the bargain, and when called out on it, has no problem bringing every zealot out of the woodwork to claim tyranny. I assume he runs his ranch for profit, and that he has profited from using the BLM land at no cost. Why wouldn't he be held accountable? Because he looks like the Marlboro Man? It seems to me that if he had wanted to avoid this predicament and protect his heritage then he would have avoided non-payment. Assuming the government was out to get you, why would you open that door for them to shut you down? Makes no sense to me.

Regarding the swat team reference, law enforcement is screwed whatever they do or don't do. They are placed in a no-win situation every day of their careers and I guarantee you that none of them are enjoying being part of this circus. There are real ramifications for screwing something like this up, Oklahoma City comes to mind, and these protesters will exploit and leverage that to the hilt. The freedom to make erroneous accusations and denigrate others while crying about oppression and tyranny is a contradiction lost on many people.

Seneca
Posts: 915
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 4:58 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Standoff

Post by Seneca » Wed Apr 16, 2014 9:09 pm

Ego wrote:
On Friday, Paul told Cavuto that the Bundy family “had virtual ownership of that land because they had been using it,” yet the law is “not clean enough.”
My family has been using the sidewalks in our neighborhood for generations. If I want to put a food cart on "our" sidewalk I would have to get a permit and pay a fee. How does this differ?
Actually, if you let your neighbor build their fence over your property, eventually in many places it becomes theirs. There are similar rules for access/use as well. It is even less straightforward when it comes to cattle and grazing- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-range_grazing

A friend sent me a couple links about this, and I think the context JP originally posted it in is right, a few armed people can stop the government (as if we need this demonstrated after the wars in the ME)...at least while we're still in the epoch of the gun...but regarding who was wrong here, I have no idea and don't care to guess...

User avatar
JohnnyH
Posts: 2007
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 6:00 pm
Location: Rockies

Re: Bundy Ranch Standoff

Post by JohnnyH » Wed Apr 16, 2014 9:51 pm

firefighterjeff wrote:The guy didn't pay the fees necessary to lease land that didn't belong to him; the government sought payment through confiscation of his cattle. Isn't that the gist of it? Am I missing something here?
Yes you are... Many of the traditional western occupations have basically been shutdown through federal policies... I imagine Nevada rancher is a difficult life. Here's some background:
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/co ... are-coming

"He notes that more than 50 other ranchers have been bankrupted, intimidated, and forced to give up their land and legal property rights. He is, he points out, “the last man standing”; and now that generations of ranching families have been driven out"
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/co ... v-face-off

This has been his family's way of life for 150 years... I'm not saying he is right, but he clearly feels like he doesn't have a lot of options.
firefighterjeff wrote:Regarding the swat team reference, law enforcement is screwed whatever they do or don't do. They are placed in a no-win situation every day of their careers and I guarantee you that none of them are enjoying being part of this circus.
I've had jobs I didn't like, jobs I didn't agree with morally, jobs that were too dangerous, jobs that were thankless... You know what I did? I refused orders and sometimes I found another job.

George the original one
Posts: 4501
Joined: Wed Jul 28, 2010 3:28 am
Location: Wettest corner of Orygun

Re: Bundy Ranch Standoff

Post by George the original one » Wed Apr 16, 2014 11:12 pm

@JohnnyH - both links say the Bundy land is being confiscated and that Bundy is being denied grazing permits. As far as I can tell, Bundy never held title to the land and the grazing rights/permits can continue as long as he pays the fees. Bundy hasn't paid the fees... he said he tried to pay the county, which naturally declined the payment since it's Federal land these days. Bundy refuses to pay the fees to the current manager of the lands. Federal agents/contractors are removing the trespassing cattle... those cattle are consuming resources that rightfully can be used by ranchers who have paid their grazing fees. I don't see any Bundy-titled land being confiscated, so it seems to be hyperbole on the part of his backers.

User avatar
Felix
Posts: 1272
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:30 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Standoff

Post by Felix » Thu Apr 17, 2014 11:50 am

What I see is a guy who dodged the fees for the use of land for 20 years now using guys with guns to enforce that state of affairs against the law.

Imagine the land were privately owned.

The whole circus looks completely absurd to me.

User avatar
JohnnyH
Posts: 2007
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 6:00 pm
Location: Rockies

Re: Bundy Ranch Standoff

Post by JohnnyH » Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:30 pm

So the fact that his family had been grazing this [almost useless and uninhabited] land since before there was a BLM or before there were any fees is irrelevant?

User avatar
Ego
Posts: 3973
Joined: Wed Nov 23, 2011 12:42 am

Re: Bundy Ranch Standoff

Post by Ego » Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:44 pm

JohnnyH wrote:So the fact that his family had been grazing this [almost useless and uninhabited] land since before there was a BLM or before there were any fees is irrelevant?
Tragedy of the commons. Regulation is often a necessary evil.

User avatar
JohnnyH
Posts: 2007
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 6:00 pm
Location: Rockies

Re: Bundy Ranch Standoff

Post by JohnnyH » Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:52 pm

I don't think TotC is coming into play (we're talking 1 struggling rancher w/ less than 1k cattle)... People who have been using the land since before the regulatory body existed should get some kind of Grandfathering. Federal regulatory body shouldn't be able to redefine the rules and fees at their whim.

For native Americans this is accepted as a matter of course... For white rancher, even though the time frame is very close to the establishment of many reservations, not so much.

BLM land should be managed by the states, that seems very clear.

User avatar
Felix
Posts: 1272
Joined: Fri Nov 05, 2010 6:30 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Standoff

Post by Felix » Thu Apr 17, 2014 12:56 pm

JohnnyH wrote:So the fact that his family had been grazing this [almost useless and uninhabited] land since before there was a BLM or before there were any fees is irrelevant?
Yes. Can't whoever owns land begin to impose a fee? If it were a private landowner suddenly commanding a fee for the use of his land, would not paying those fees be justified? Or do they have a right to free government land as a subsidy to their cattle business? I really try to see the case here, but I just can't.

User avatar
JohnnyH
Posts: 2007
Joined: Thu Jul 22, 2010 6:00 pm
Location: Rockies

Re: Bundy Ranch Standoff

Post by JohnnyH » Thu Apr 17, 2014 1:05 pm

@Felix: In the American west there are countless examples of people using the land before it was even part of a state. Their use precedes any supposed government ownership (We claim this land for Spain!).

Secondly, the federal government is NOT a private landowner, this is PUBLIC land... More and more they're excluding access to it, frustrating people who have historically earned a living from it.

Seneca
Posts: 915
Joined: Sat Nov 24, 2012 4:58 pm

Re: Bundy Ranch Standoff

Post by Seneca » Thu Apr 17, 2014 1:14 pm

JohnnyH wrote:@Felix: In the American west there are countless examples of people using the land before it was even part of a state. Their use precedes any supposed government ownership (We claim this land for Spain!)...
The Western US is much different from most places, and it is hard for most people to comprehend some of this. The ranchers were recently prohibited from grazing the BLM land that abuts our property, and they are still very pissed.

ffj
Posts: 1798
Joined: Thu Aug 26, 2010 3:16 am

Re: Bundy Ranch Standoff

Post by ffj » Thu Apr 17, 2014 1:14 pm

JohnnyH wrote:
"He notes that more than 50 other ranchers have been bankrupted, intimidated, and forced to give up their land and legal property rights. He is, he points out, “the last man standing”; and now that generations of ranching families have been driven out"
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/co ... v-face-off

Proof? With 50 other rancher families having been forced out of their land there should be reams of examples of how the government forced them off of their land. It may all be true, but I haven't yet seen proof other than inflammatory statements by people who author articles for outlets such as The NewAmerican. They talk about the tortoises and solar farms but consider this:

http://www.snopes.com/politics/conspiracy/nevada.asp

Or this:

http://aattp.org/debunked-cliven-bundy- ... -projects/

Are my sources listed above true? Maybe, but at least they are offering more than inflammatory language.
JohnnyH wrote:
I've had jobs I didn't like, jobs I didn't agree with morally, jobs that were too dangerous, jobs that were thankless... You know what I did? I refused orders and sometimes I found another job.
In some professions by refusing orders (legitimate orders), that automatically implies you will be looking for another job shortly. Before we beat up on law enforcement too much consider having to deal with people like this:

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2014/04/15/f ... -standoff/

Some people are crazy, and people in uniform make handy-dandy targets for deranged people. Somebody has to deal with these idiots.

Post Reply