Support NeoGAF

[besada]

Why should we side with the feds in this matter? Why do we assume that the feds know better than locals how to manage local land? Why is it justified that they are putting two men away for five years for carrying out controlled burns?

Because a court of law found them guilty of arson on federal lands. They, by definition, weren't controlled burns. It's not a question of management here, it's a question of a local farmer slaughtering deer on federal lands, then setting a fire to cover it up that burned 100+ acres.

The judge erroneously sentenced them to 90 days, ignoring federal minimums. The case was legally appealed, and higher courts found the sentencing constitutional, so the local judge enacted it. Both Hammonds intend to turn themselves in on Monday.

 

[Lambtron]

If they media is too chickenshit to call them terrorists, they should at least call them what they are: Seditionists.

 

[RPGCrazied]

Did you see ABC's news tweet? My gosh.

I like the fix up though.

 

[radios shipping overview]

I got a bunch shit I need to burn, literally and figuratively. I'm also looking to try out a couple rifles. Could you give me your address so I could come over and burn my stuff and maybe hunt around on your property. Don't worry about consenting, I'm just gonna do it no matter what.

This seems disingenuous.

Because a court of law found them guilty of arson on federal lands. They, by definition, weren't controlled burns. It's not a question of management here, it's a question of a local farmer slaughtering deer on federal lands, then setting a fire to cover it up that burned 100+ acres.

The judge erroneously sentenced them to 90 days, ignoring federal minimums. The case was legally appealed, and higher courts found the sentencing constitutional, so the local judge enacted it. Both Hammonds intend to turn themselves in on Monday.

This makes sense. Like in Nevada, the main dispute seems to be over the legitimacy of the federal government/BLM's claim to certain land and its use, and the way the feds make examples of people who flaunt it. I could understand why a farmer with no other alternative would shoot deer that they saw to be ruining their crops, when that deer mainly lived on nearby federal land. It's good to hear that the Hammonds are doing the right thing.

But the Bundy group sound like violent opportunists and I don't support what they're doing.

 

[fixedpoint]

Currently there are no lives or property at risk, and armed police intervention will only make that worse. All you have to do is surround them, wait for them to give up and then take them all to jail for a very long time.

The real issue is not how the authorities are handling this, but rather the media's tone in their coverage of it.

I agree that there is a problem with the current reporting on this; very few outlets are referring to this as domestic terrorism.

Unfortunately for these chucklekfucks, according to 18 U.S. Code § 2331, this is domestic terrorism.

(5) the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that—
(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended—
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.

Why should we side with the feds in this matter? Why do we assume that the feds know better than locals how to manage local land? Why is it justified that they are putting two men away for five years for carrying out controlled burns?

Their arson was not a "controlled burn"; it was an uncontrolled fire on federal land intended to remove evidence of their poaching.

Here's some affiliated crazy from the internets:
http://youtu.be/sbGdMKpHDDE

Dude's cognitive dissonance is astounding: apologizing to his family for not being there, discussing his fate as if he's preparing to be a suicide bomber. He also uses the phrase "intestinal fortitude".

 

[Crocodile]

Relevant pic on my twitter feed:

 

[Futureman]

so is the building surrounded by police? Do the people inside have food? The one militia guy says they plan to "stay here for years." yea....

 

[RPGCrazied]

so is the building surrounded by police? Do the people inside have food? The one militia guy says they plan to "stay here for years." yea....

I think the police said something like stay away, but no, far as I can tell there is no police presence there.

 

[aeolist]

so is the building surrounded by police? Do the people inside have food? The one militia guy says they plan to "stay here for years." yea....

given the people they're dealing with i'd bet they have a bunch of MREs

 

[FartOfWar]

This event in and of itself isn't racist. But seeing the National News and police response to this incident does show quite clearly racial bias. Unarmed black protesters in the street receive a police response with military equipment. National news has helicopters and 24/7 live coverage.

Bunch of armed white men take over a Government building and it's not a big deal for the national news, and police response is very stand-offish.

Except it's literally the top story on all major US media:

Examples:
http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/03/us/oregon-wildlife-refuge-protest/index.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...d=hp_hp-top-table-main_no-name:homepage/story

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/04/u...n-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

The militarization of American police as well as the confrontational approach to policing civil protest against racist policies are certainly crucial issues. However the attempts to compare these with what is happening in Oregon are misguided. As demonstrated, the national news response shows none of the clear bias you claim. As for the fed's response, other's have taken the time to point you to information on the results of clashes with such militias prior to the turn of the century. Fallout from Waco and Ruby Ridge resulted in adjustments to the ways in which enforcement agencies approach these groups that actively attempt to instigate an armed response. Are you arguing that the government agencies (including Texas law enforcement) which confronted the Davidians and the Weavers were somehow less racist then, and that now in 2016, these same agencies have become markedly more racist by not going in guns blazing when the criminals are white? Again, these terrorist outfits deliberately seek to provoke armed response in a sort of self-fulfilling prophesy, and your response is that not immediately surrounding them with drawn guns is evidence of racism.

 

[RPGCrazied]

Also, aren't these people breaking the law by US code 930?

Just look at point a:

(a) Except as provided in subsection (d), whoever knowingly possesses or causes to be present a firearm or other dangerous weapon in a Federal facility (other than a Federal court facility), or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 1 year, or both.

 

[FartOfWar]

Did you see ABC's news tweet? My gosh.

I like the fix up though.

This isn't real. You're arguing against straw men: https://twitter.com/ABC

 

[riotous]

1) Build a huge wall around the compound
2) Gather 10,000 poisonous snakes
3) Dump snakes over wall
4) Proft?

 

[RPGCrazied]

This isn't real. You're arguing against straw men: https://twitter.com/ABC

You sure? They could have since deleted that. I wouldn't exactly call them militia either though. But whatever.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

This isn't real. You're arguing against straw men: https://twitter.com/ABC

?

https://twitter.com/ABC/status/683508836716687360

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

Collective nouns for humans in America.

 

[Damaniel]

Don't these people have jobs?

I'm guessing that most of them are on some combination of Social Security and disability (depending on their age). No gainfully employed person can go off the job just to have their whiny, anti-American little protests at the drop of the hat.

The Bundys and their redneck ilk should have been thrown in jail when they staged their last little 'protest', and I hope that's where they'll be heading after their little libertarian temper tantrum is over.

 

[FartOfWar]

?

https://twitter.com/ABC/status/683508836716687360

I stand corrected. I wasn't able to find that tweet on their page. It appears they tweeted variations on the same story at least three times. Perhaps they've been slowly walking it back.

 

[Kimawolf]

1) Build a huge wall around the compound
2) Gather 10,000 poisonous snakes
3) Dump snakes over wall
4) Proft?

lol this made me laugh so hard. Sounds like Donald trump's plan to deal with the situation.

 

[KurtSloane]

Their stand in defending some arsonists? Fuck outta here with that noise. I'd support them if they were consistent in their views of "government oppression" to American citizens. Doubt they give two fucks when it's the police gunning down unarmed innocent people.

No, I will direct my anger right as them because while they get to be "armed protestors" I'm seeing black people get gunned down for having a BB gun. And I have a lingering feeling they don't see anything wrong with that.

I don't think the point these people are defending / taking is worthwhile, I did not intend to make it seem so.


As much as I agree that they probably don't care about black people being gunned down, they don't have to either, nor does not caring inhibit their right to "protest" what ever they wish to, right or wrong.

They get to be armed protestors while unarmed black people get shot because of the government. They set the standards for treatment, not these idiots.


Your anger is misdirected. It is the state / federal government that deal with these people in a manner that allows them to do what they are doing.

 

[Dai101]

Collective nouns for humans in America.

No lies detected.

 

[TAJ]

By these wackos' own "logic" it wouldn't be a crime if the authorities burned the building down with them in it.

Because a court of law found them guilty of arson on federal lands. They, by definition, weren't controlled burns. It's not a question of management here, it's a question of a local farmer slaughtering deer on federal lands, then setting a fire to cover it up that burned 100+ acres.

The judge erroneously sentenced them to 90 days, ignoring federal minimums. The case was legally appealed, and higher courts found the sentencing constitutional, so the local judge enacted it. Both Hammonds intend to turn themselves in on Monday.

So mandatory minimums are no longer enforceable? Great. That's the real story here.

 

[mcfrank]

This isn't real. You're arguing against straw men: https://twitter.com/ABC

It was a real tweet last night.

 

[chadskin]

1) Build a huge wall around the compound
2) Gather 10,000 poisonous snakes
3) Dump snakes over wall
4) Proft?

 

[Hellwarden]

1) Build a huge wall around the compound
2) Gather 10,000 poisonous snakes
3) Dump snakes over wall
4) Proft?

...I don't know.

What if the snakes join forces with these assholes?

 

[FartOfWar]

It was a real tweet last night.

I saw. Straight from The Onion.

 

[Jonm1010]

This seems disingenuous.



This makes sense. Like in Nevada, the main dispute seems to be over the legitimacy of the federal government/BLM's claim to certain land and its use, and the way the feds make examples of people who flaunt it. I could understand why a farmer with no other alternative would shoot deer that they saw to be ruining their crops, when that deer mainly lived on nearby federal land. It's good to hear that the Hammonds are doing the right thing.

But the Bundy group sound like violent opportunists and I don't support what they're doing.

These people are protesting a couple of ranchers that illegally hunted on federal land and then set a fire to cover it up. In the process endangering the land, people and animals in the area. Claiming the group that bought the land - the federal government - in a state that recognizes the Federal governments legitimacy, has no legitimacy. Which is backed up by nothing.

The point with my question was to show you the absurdity of the behavior and logic you are defending.

 

[MoonsaultSlayer]

...I don't know.

What if the snakes join forces with these assholes?

"Don't tread on me"

 

[Nivash]

...I don't know.

What if the snakes join forces with these assholes?

That's what happened last time.

Snakes are not to be trusted.

 

[RPGCrazied]

So, do you think they will get their way? They still are breaking laws. Saying they will kill or be killed if the demands aren't met. Having weapons in a federal building. How are these protesters again?

 

[DrForester]

"#YallQaeda" is trending on Twitter.

 

[RPGCrazied]

"#YallQaeda" is trending on Twitter.

So is #OregonUnderAttack

 

[GnawtyDog]

Interesting.

We'll see what comes out of this.

Edit: Just saw a few pics. That's a bunch of mature, grown white males there...actually a lot.

Gets more interesting. So what are their demands exactly? Cause expulsion by force will require a sizable contingent.

 

[aeolist]

So, do you think they will get their way? They still are breaking laws. Saying they will kill or be killed if the demands aren't met. Having weapons in a federal building. How are these protesters again?

the hammonds are 100% going to prison. they were legally sentenced in federal court, accepted that fact, and are reporting to prison as required.

i imagine the government is hoping these guys will clear out after a few days once the hammond thing is resolved, no idea how likely that is though. after they're out of the building and split up i wouldn't be surprised to see some of them arrested and charged.

 

[CarpeDeezNutz]

"#YallQaeda" is trending on Twitter.

Just saw that one and that they are doing #YeeHawd

 

[Darknight]

It should be directed at both. They're armed, talking about potential for violence, and are currently occupying a federal building. They(and the media) deserve to be mocked as hard as humanly possible.

Pretty much.

The double standards are ridiculous in this case.

 

[TarNaru33]

They get to be armed protestors while unarmed black people get shot because of the government. They set the standards for treatment, not these idiots.


Your anger is misdirected. It is the state / federal government that deal with these people in a manner that allows them to do what they are doing.

A lot of what you are saying is in fairy-land. The amount of people that supports these guys, is pretty high, even if they are not as bold. People been "protesting" the government for a long time already, know what is keeping that from making faster change? You guessed it, the idiots that supports the very guys you are saying people shouldn't direct their anger against.

It is the anger against these people, that will also cause the government to change their mind, just like anger towards racists have employers fire them when they become aware.

It has an indirect role in causing action, do not mistake that.

 

[Warm Machine]

So I was reading the think piece or blog or whatever that suggests this whole thing is due to 100 years of government erosion of a family's claim to a massive ranch/grazing area. Is that the deal?

 

[Zubz]

"#YallQaeda" is trending on Twitter.

Seriously, though, it aggravates me how the media goes out of their way to refer to white terrorists as such. For so long, we've had "lone wolves," but now that we've seen a group of them congregate, they're a "militia." Are all the big stations just too afraid of getting "called out" by racists for using an accurate term? Or are they just completely racially prejudiced themselves? I'm willing to bet both.

Still, I'm glad no one's gotten hurt. But if these guys are planning on starting a terrorist organization in that wildlife refuge, action needs to be taking. There's no way this situation is going to get better with time.

 

[Slayven]

So is #OregonUnderAttack

it is hilarious and sad at the same time

 

[linkboy]

So I was reading the think piece or blog or whatever that suggests this whole thing is due to 100 years of government erosion of a family's claim to a massive ranch/grazing area. Is that the deal?

That was last year with the Bundy's (who are pulling this stunt), although it was more due to him just not wanting to pay the grazing fee, even after numerous courts have told him he has to pay up.

Debunking the Bundy's claims

They, being the family, believes that the federal government doesn't own the land, and therefore they don't have to pay the fee. He believes the state of Nevada is the rightful owner and will only pay it to them. In their mind, the federal government shouldn't exist at all.

The state of Nevada says it's federal land and the feds have to take the money, they can't.

Basically, it's a bunch of idiots who hate the federal government throwing a fit.

 

[Stinkles]

These people are traitors whose primary beef with government is either wholly imagined and paranoid or race based. They have zero legitimate complaints and are risking people's lives based on their original watching of Rambo.

 

[radios shipping overview]

The point with my question was to show you the absurdity of the behavior and logic you are defending.

You assumed I was defending it. I was asking questions.

 

[Zaphod]

This seems disingenuous.



This makes sense. Like in Nevada, the main dispute seems to be over the legitimacy of the federal government/BLM's claim to certain land and its use, and the way the feds make examples of people who flaunt it. I could understand why a farmer with no other alternative would shoot deer that they saw to be ruining their crops, when that deer mainly lived on nearby federal land. It's good to hear that the Hammonds are doing the right thing.

But the Bundy group sound like violent opportunists and I don't support what they're doing.

You assumed I was defending it. I was asking questions.

Your questions are missing question marks.

 

[Stinkles]

You assumed I was defending it. I was asking questions.

You were asking astoundingly stupid questions that have been answered in law and in this thread accurately and uncontroversially.

 

[theignoramus]

Why make this racial?

Would it be acceptable on this forum for an event to take place within a black community or by members of the black community and for posters to come on here and write a post ended with "black people"?


I would assume, and rightfully so you would be banned for racial stereotyping / profiling.

I would be keen to see the same action take place in this instance also.

Hahaha.......hahaha....
Oh man.
Wow.

 

[Fantastapotamus]

America is probably a safre country if they stay in that building for years. I say keep them there. It's a win-win

 

[Lonewolf_92]

They backed down from the first Bundy confrontation for that very reasoning, and it only empowered them. They are from Nevada, wtf are they doing in Oregon? They need be punished for breaking the damn law or they are going to keep escalating.

Exactly. If these were bank robbers holed up in some barn without hostages they'd be tear gassed and any coming out armed would be shot. Pussyfooting around these criminals just because they have a pseudo-political reasoning for what they do is only emboldening the nutso crowd to greater offenses, it's time we as a country came down hard on these terrorists.

 

[Liu Kang Baking A Pie]

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/01/cnn...otesters-because-theyre-not-looting-anything/

Stelter pointed out that many activists had complained if the militia members were “Black Lives Matter protesters or if these were peaceful Muslim Americans [then] they would be treated very differently by law enforcement.”

“This is a very rural area,” Roderick replied. “It is out in the middle of nowhere. What are they actually doing? They’re not destroying property, they’re not looting anything.”

 

[DrForester]

Isn't forcibly taking control of a building effectively looting the property itself?