|
|
 Accident Prone
Posts: 22277
   
Location: 100 miles from Nowhere, AR | musikmaker - 2014-04-10 6:57 AM river runner - 2014-04-10 5:29 AM I don't think people in the east can understand what it is like to run cattle in the west. Not really like leasing land from your neighbor! If that's the case then they should just sit back and watch...that's the entire problem, people in the east believing they have a voice concerning our so-called 'public land' here in the west. Divide and conquer. In real life we don't get involved in issues we don't comprehend. What a mess, though...I live next to the future Red Rock Wilderness (if the enviro terrorists have their way) & getting support from like-minded folks is so hard cuz we're not brought up that way...yet, in order to maintain our Freedom, we need to fight fire with fire...it really goes against our grain to stick our nose where it doesn't belong...sure doesn't bother the 'other side' to cause all these problems, though! Lol...
I admitted on page 1 that I don't understand how all that works. I sure understand clueless people thinking they should get to dictate your agricultural practices tho...and thinking if only they were in your shoes, they could do it better. Have at it people, it's a free country, so what's stopping you? 
When did we get to the point that citizens feel helpless and victimized by the federal government to the point of standing up for nothing? What was the tipping point? Because my parents grew up believing that and I've heard it from them my whole life. Was it the post-civil war reconstruction for the southerners? Because they were obviously ready to fight for their rights before that. What happened in the rest of the country? Brainwashing in public education maybe? | |
| | |
 Nicknameless
Posts: 4565
Location: I can see the end of the world from here! | Three 4 Luck - 2014-04-10 6:45 AM musikmaker - 2014-04-10 6:57 AM river runner - 2014-04-10 5:29 AM I don't think people in the east can understand what it is like to run cattle in the west. Not really like leasing land from your neighbor! If that's the case then they should just sit back and watch...that's the entire problem, people in the east believing they have a voice concerning our so-called 'public land' here in the west. Divide and conquer. In real life we don't get involved in issues we don't comprehend. What a mess, though...I live next to the future Red Rock Wilderness (if the enviro terrorists have their way) & getting support from like-minded folks is so hard cuz we're not brought up that way...yet, in order to maintain our Freedom, we need to fight fire with fire...it really goes against our grain to stick our nose where it doesn't belong...sure doesn't bother the 'other side' to cause all these problems, though! Lol...
Boy...I sure wish I had the answer to that.
I sincerely think it's because we fail to accept that terrible people exist...then we get paranoid and think ALL people are evil!
Lol.
My favorite saying of all time is: "People are only capable of comprehending feelings in other that they feel in themselves."
It explains the hope...the 'log in the eye'...the inability to assess anothers character, thereby protecting ourselves. We just can't grasp the desperate measures others take...or the patience they have to manipulate situations and people. We assume that when a hand is lended it's sincere...because when we lend a hand we're sincere...so, here we are. We need to be much more diligent & much less gullable.
What we really need to do is listen to that 'still voice', the one that leads us to decipher right from wrong...then follow it regardless of how rocky the road may become.
The tipping point...I think it'll always take hard work to keep the wolves at bay. People give up & are relieved to hand over the guard to anyone willing to take it on...it's rarely the good guy that offers, it's the opportunists, the scallywags! Lol! Then we refuse to accept our role in our own demise. Crazy.
The wrong side won the civil war. Actually...we're still fighting that one! States Rights vs Federal. That's all it ever was...so yeah, public schools don't teach the truth. Why would they? What has freed people from religious persecution to slavery was learning the written word...the ability to read and demand liberty & justice...in certain times, that very education was done privately as it was illegal! Yet, when our schools came under the thumb of the fed we lost the control of what our children learn.
As we all know, the victors write the history. Always have & if we're smart we'll keep that in mind...while still respecting our elders. What I'm saying is that to blindly 'believe like my daddy' is foolish...we better arm ourselves with truth instead of pride. We're dealing with many generations of this...and there were times that that was all people had...now we have options, we have info available to us like never before.
| |
| | |
Elite Veteran
Posts: 1094
Location: Idahome | Itsme - 2014-04-09 8:39 PM
Dude took 3 shots from a tazer liker a champ!!
Just watched this and I really feel bad for the poor dogs that get put into the middle of this mess. I will say though, that to me it looks like the feds are outnumbered by the amount of people supporting Cliven. If the feds would put their weapons away there is no doubt in my mind they would get their azz handed to them on a platter by the supporters. I just hope no one gets seriously hurt or killed from all of this. | |
| | |
| So I totally expect to get flamed (zipping up Flame suit) but as a Nevadan and knowing/reading about this story, I totally disagree with the Bundy’s. He never owned the land(with title), he hasn’t paid his grazing right fees in 21 years, he failed to respond to multiple requests from the BLM for him to remove his cattle, he lost 2 federal court case’s and was issued court orders to remove his cattle-in which he didn’t do and is throwing a fit that they are removing them for him.
Most ranchers in Nevada have been here since the 1800’s and are multi-generational, they have title to the land they own and then they pay AUM rent to run cattle on BLM land-the same land that they originally started grazing on. All have had AUM number decreased due to BLM management-whether the reason was for overgrazing, fires or environmental…I’m sure they weren’t happy with the reductions but they all complied. Basically in my opinion, Bundy wants something for free- when all the rest are paying for the same exact thing. Why is he entitled to graze for free and what makes him entitled to be above the rest of the people who actually pay their fees and take care of their responsibilities? Bundy’s background story is no different than any other ranching family I know-except all the others pay their dues and take care of business. This is nothing but a black eye for the good ranchers who are diligent with managing their stock and grazing grounds. Bundy’s are no different than the Dann Sisters, Crutcher’s or Caseys-who also found out they weren’t entitled to graze illegally and subsequently lost their herds to BLM round-ups because they also refused to remove them. I know most people would rather not have the BLM…but what makes this type of anti-government behavior stop here? My grandparents have lived on the same ranch they owned since the early 1900’s- are they now entitled to quit paying property taxes? Can they just fire the county government because they choose not to recognize them as the authority of the land?
I guess for me, this isn’t any different than someone who lives off tax payers, quits paying their mortgage, fails to respond to eviction notices and then is mad that the sheriff comes to remove them and the bank takes all the possessions in the home to pay for the back owed debt… I don’t see too many people waging war in these scenarios- basically would call it life and not taking care of responsibilities to ensure they kept their house. If you refuse to pay for your house, you don’t just miraculously get it for free-you get to move and figure something else out…
| |
| | |
  That's White "Man" to You
Posts: 5515
| bscanchaser - 2014-04-10 9:54 AM So I totally expect to get flamed (zipping up Flame suit) but as a Nevadan and knowing/reading about this story, I totally disagree with the Bundy’s. He never owned the land(with title), he hasn’t paid his grazing right fees in 21 years, he failed to respond to multiple requests from the BLM for him to remove his cattle, he lost 2 federal court case’s and was issued court orders to remove his cattle-in which he didn’t do and is throwing a fit that they are removing them for him.
Most ranchers in Nevada have been here since the 1800’s and are multi-generational, they have title to the land they own and then they pay AUM rent to run cattle on BLM land-the same land that they originally started grazing on. All have had AUM number decreased due to BLM management-whether the reason was for overgrazing, fires or environmental…I’m sure they weren’t happy with the reductions but they all complied. Basically in my opinion, Bundy wants something for free- when all the rest are paying for the same exact thing. Why is he entitled to graze for free and what makes him entitled to be above the rest of the people who actually pay their fees and take care of their responsibilities? Bundy’s background story is no different than any other ranching family I know-except all the others pay their dues and take care of business. This is nothing but a black eye for the good ranchers who are diligent with managing their stock and grazing grounds. Bundy’s are no different than the Dann Sisters, Crutcher’s or Caseys-who also found out they weren’t entitled to graze illegally and subsequently lost their herds to BLM round-ups because they also refused to remove them. I know most people would rather not have the BLM…but what makes this type of anti-government behavior stop here? My grandparents have lived on the same ranch they owned since the early 1900’s- are they now entitled to quit paying property taxes? Can they just fire the county government because they choose not to recognize them as the authority of the land?
I guess for me, this isn’t any different than someone who lives off tax payers, quits paying their mortgage, fails to respond to eviction notices and then is mad that the sheriff comes to remove them and the bank takes all the possessions in the home to pay for the back owed debt… I don’t see too many people waging war in these scenarios- basically would call it life and not taking care of responsibilities to ensure they kept their house. If you refuse to pay for your house, you don’t just miraculously get it for free-you get to move and figure something else out…
If we so willingly give up our rights, how long will it take to become subjects? Things that used to be a right are now a privlege. That privlege will become a crime. That crime will become a death sentance. You can stand where you want on this issue, but when it's your freedom, family and religion that are taken away, remember YOU allowed it to happen.
Edited by Whiteboy 2014-04-10 10:25 AM
| |
| | |
 Swiffer PIcker Upper
Posts: 4015
Location: Four Corners Colorado | Whiteboy - 2014-04-10 9:20 AM bscanchaser - 2014-04-10 9:54 AM
So I totally expect to get flamed (zipping up Flame suit) but as a Nevadan and knowing/reading about this story, I totally disagree with the Bundy’s. He never owned the land(with title), he hasn’t paid his grazing right fees in 21 years, he failed to respond to multiple requests from the BLM for him to remove his cattle, he lost 2 federal court case’s and was issued court orders to remove his cattle-in which he didn’t do and is throwing a fit that they are removing them for him.
Most ranchers in Nevada have been here since the 1800’s and are multi-generational, they have title to the land they own and then they pay AUM rent to run cattle on BLM land-the same land that they originally started grazing on. All have had AUM number decreased due to BLM management-whether the reason was for overgrazing, fires or environmental…I’m sure they weren’t happy with the reductions but they all complied. Basically in my opinion, Bundy wants something for free- when all the rest are paying for the same exact thing. Why is he entitled to graze for free and what makes him entitled to be above the rest of the people who actually pay their fees and take care of their responsibilities? Bundy’s background story is no different than any other ranching family I know-except all the others pay their dues and take care of business. This is nothing but a black eye for the good ranchers who are diligent with managing their stock and grazing grounds. Bundy’s are no different than the Dann Sisters, Crutcher’s or Caseys-who also found out they weren’t entitled to graze illegally and subsequently lost their herds to BLM round-ups because they also refused to remove them. I know most people would rather not have the BLM…but what makes this type of anti-government behavior stop here? My grandparents have lived on the same ranch they owned since the early 1900’s- are they now entitled to quit paying property taxes? Can they just fire the county government because they choose not to recognize them as the authority of the land?
I guess for me, this isn’t any different than someone who lives off tax payers, quits paying their mortgage, fails to respond to eviction notices and then is mad that the sheriff comes to remove them and the bank takes all the possessions in the home to pay for the back owed debt… I don’t see too many people waging war in these scenarios- basically would call it life and not taking care of responsibilities to ensure they kept their house. If you refuse to pay for your house, you don’t just miraculously get it for free-you get to move and figure something else out…
If we so willingly give up our rights, how long will it take to become subjects? Things that used to be a right are now a privlege. That privlege will become a crime. That crime will become a death sentance. You can stand where you want on this issue, but when it's your freedom, family and religion that are taken away, remember YOU allowed it to happen.
That it right there. Honestly the BLM has done a crappy job managing the land anyway. If they were doing their jobs right shouldn't the land be in better condition? They need to take a look at how these ranchers improve the range. Maybe they should take a look at the work of Allan Savory and really make things better for the "endangered" species and the cattle/sheep/horses. They can co-exist. But it's not about that, it's about money and CONTROL. | |
| | |
Accident Prone
Posts: 22277
Location: 100 miles from Nowhere, AR | bscanchaser - 2014-04-10 9:54 AM
So I totally expect to get flamed (zipping up Flame suit) but as a Nevadan and knowing/reading about this story, I totally disagree with the Bundy’s. He never owned the land(with title), he hasn’t paid his grazing right fees in 21 years, he failed to respond to multiple requests from the BLM for him to remove his cattle, he lost 2 federal court case’s and was issued court orders to remove his cattle-in which he didn’t do and is throwing a fit that they are removing them for him.
Most ranchers in Nevada have been here since the 1800’s and are multi-generational, they have title to the land they own and then they pay AUM rent to run cattle on BLM land-the same land that they originally started grazing on. All have had AUM number decreased due to BLM management-whether the reason was for overgrazing, fires or environmental…I’m sure they weren’t happy with the reductions but they all complied. Basically in my opinion, Bundy wants something for free- when all the rest are paying for the same exact thing. Why is he entitled to graze for free and what makes him entitled to be above the rest of the people who actually pay their fees and take care of their responsibilities? Bundy’s background story is no different than any other ranching family I know-except all the others pay their dues and take care of business. This is nothing but a black eye for the good ranchers who are diligent with managing their stock and grazing grounds. Bundy’s are no different than the Dann Sisters, Crutcher’s or Caseys-who also found out they weren’t entitled to graze illegally and subsequently lost their herds to BLM round-ups because they also refused to remove them. I know most people would rather not have the BLM…but what makes this type of anti-government behavior stop here? My grandparents have lived on the same ranch they owned since the early 1900’s- are they now entitled to quit paying property taxes? Can they just fire the county government because they choose not to recognize them as the authority of the land?
I guess for me, this isn’t any different than someone who lives off tax payers, quits paying their mortgage, fails to respond to eviction notices and then is mad that the sheriff comes to remove them and the bank takes all the possessions in the home to pay for the back owed debt… I don’t see too many people waging war in these scenarios- basically would call it life and not taking care of responsibilities to ensure they kept their house. If you refuse to pay for your house, you don’t just miraculously get it for free-you get to move and figure something else out…
What would have happened if at the beginning, they had all stood together and refused to acknowledge federal authority? I wish the previous generations of farmers had done that rather than trade freedom for security. Because now we are dealing with an industry that has evolved around federal market control and manipulation and must bear the burden of hypocrisy to survive. | |
| | |
 Semper Fi
Location: North Texas | Three 4 Luck - 2014-04-10 10:34 AM
bscanchaser - 2014-04-10 9:54 AM
So I totally expect to get flamed (zipping up Flame suit) but as a Nevadan and knowing/reading about this story, I totally disagree with the Bundy’s. He never owned the land(with title), he hasn’t paid his grazing right fees in 21 years, he failed to respond to multiple requests from the BLM for him to remove his cattle, he lost 2 federal court case’s and was issued court orders to remove his cattle-in which he didn’t do and is throwing a fit that they are removing them for him.  Â
Most ranchers in Nevada have been here since the 1800’s and are multi-generational, they have title to the land they own and then they pay AUM rent to run cattle on BLM land-the same land that they originally started grazing on. All have had AUM number decreased due to BLM management-whether the reason was for overgrazing, fires or environmental…I’m sure they weren’t happy with the reductions but they all complied. Basically in my opinion, Bundy wants something for free- when all the rest are paying for the same exact thing. Why is he entitled to graze for free and what makes him entitled to be above the rest of the people who actually pay their fees and take care of their responsibilities? Bundy’s background story is no different than any other ranching family I know-except all the others pay their dues and take care of business. This is nothing but a black eye for the good ranchers who are diligent with managing their stock and grazing grounds. Bundy’s are no different than the Dann Sisters, Crutcher’s or Caseys-who also found out they weren’t entitled to graze illegally and subsequently lost their herds to BLM round-ups because they also refused to remove them. I know most people would rather not have the BLM…but what makes this type of anti-government behavior stop here? My grandparents have lived on the same ranch they owned since the early 1900’s- are they now entitled to quit paying property taxes? Can they just fire the county government because they choose not to recognize them as the authority of the land?
I guess for me, this isn’t any different than someone who lives off tax payers, quits paying their mortgage, fails to respond to eviction notices and then is mad that the sheriff comes to remove them and the bank takes all the possessions in the home to pay for the back owed debt… I don’t see too many people waging war in these scenarios- basically would call it life and not taking care of responsibilities to ensure they kept their house. If you refuse to pay for your house, you don’t just miraculously get it for free-you get to move and figure something else out…
Â
How many readers of this forum are familiar w/ these quotes:
Ben Franklin Quotes
“They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
Ben Franklin
”Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither.”
”He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security.”
”He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither.”
”People willing to trade their freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both.”
”If we restrict liberty to attain security we will lose them both.”
”Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
”He who gives up freedom for safety deserves neither.”
”Those who would trade in their freedom for their protection deserve neither.”
”Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security.”
Ben Franklin
In other words The Feds can KISS MY AZZ! | |
| | |
Semper Fi
Location: North Texas | bscanchaser - 2014-04-10 9:54 AM
So I totally expect to get flamed (zipping up Flame suit) but as a Nevadan and knowing/reading about this story, I totally disagree with the Bundy’s. He never owned the land(with title), he hasn’t paid his grazing right fees in 21 years, he failed to respond to multiple requests from the BLM for him to remove his cattle, he lost 2 federal court case’s and was issued court orders to remove his cattle-in which he didn’t do and is throwing a fit that they are removing them for him.  Â
Most ranchers in Nevada have been here since the 1800’s and are multi-generational, they have title to the land they own and then they pay AUM rent to run cattle on BLM land-the same land that they originally started grazing on. All have had AUM number decreased due to BLM management-whether the reason was for overgrazing, fires or environmental…I’m sure they weren’t happy with the reductions but they all complied. Basically in my opinion, Bundy wants something for free- when all the rest are paying for the same exact thing. Why is he entitled to graze for free and what makes him entitled to be above the rest of the people who actually pay their fees and take care of their responsibilities? Bundy’s background story is no different than any other ranching family I know-except all the others pay their dues and take care of business. This is nothing but a black eye for the good ranchers who are diligent with managing their stock and grazing grounds. Bundy’s are no different than the Dann Sisters, Crutcher’s or Caseys-who also found out they weren’t entitled to graze illegally and subsequently lost their herds to BLM round-ups because they also refused to remove them. I know most people would rather not have the BLM…but what makes this type of anti-government behavior stop here? My grandparents have lived on the same ranch they owned since the early 1900’s- are they now entitled to quit paying property taxes? Can they just fire the county government because they choose not to recognize them as the authority of the land?
I guess for me, this isn’t any different than someone who lives off tax payers, quits paying their mortgage, fails to respond to eviction notices and then is mad that the sheriff comes to remove them and the bank takes all the possessions in the home to pay for the back owed debt… I don’t see too many people waging war in these scenarios- basically would call it life and not taking care of responsibilities to ensure they kept their house. If you refuse to pay for your house, you don’t just miraculously get it for free-you get to move and figure something else out…
Â
Does your Flame Suit have eyes to READ The Constitution and a Mind to Comprehend The Constitution?
So I suppose you support The Federal Government and expect The Feds to take care of you and yours?! HA!
Hope you enjoy being a Subject! | |
| | |
 Expert
Posts: 1857
| foundation horse - 2014-04-10 11:18 AM
bscanchaser - 2014-04-10 9:54 AM
So I totally expect to get flamed (zipping up Flame suit) but as a Nevadan and knowing/reading about this story, I totally disagree with the Bundy’s. He never owned the land(with title), he hasn’t paid his grazing right fees in 21 years, he failed to respond to multiple requests from the BLM for him to remove his cattle, he lost 2 federal court case’s and was issued court orders to remove his cattle-in which he didn’t do and is throwing a fit that they are removing them for him.  Â
Most ranchers in Nevada have been here since the 1800’s and are multi-generational, they have title to the land they own and then they pay AUM rent to run cattle on BLM land-the same land that they originally started grazing on. All have had AUM number decreased due to BLM management-whether the reason was for overgrazing, fires or environmental…I’m sure they weren’t happy with the reductions but they all complied. Basically in my opinion, Bundy wants something for free- when all the rest are paying for the same exact thing. Why is he entitled to graze for free and what makes him entitled to be above the rest of the people who actually pay their fees and take care of their responsibilities? Bundy’s background story is no different than any other ranching family I know-except all the others pay their dues and take care of business. This is nothing but a black eye for the good ranchers who are diligent with managing their stock and grazing grounds. Bundy’s are no different than the Dann Sisters, Crutcher’s or Caseys-who also found out they weren’t entitled to graze illegally and subsequently lost their herds to BLM round-ups because they also refused to remove them. I know most people would rather not have the BLM…but what makes this type of anti-government behavior stop here? My grandparents have lived on the same ranch they owned since the early 1900’s- are they now entitled to quit paying property taxes? Can they just fire the county government because they choose not to recognize them as the authority of the land?
I guess for me, this isn’t any different than someone who lives off tax payers, quits paying their mortgage, fails to respond to eviction notices and then is mad that the sheriff comes to remove them and the bank takes all the possessions in the home to pay for the back owed debt… I don’t see too many people waging war in these scenarios- basically would call it life and not taking care of responsibilities to ensure they kept their house. If you refuse to pay for your house, you don’t just miraculously get it for free-you get to move and figure something else out…
Â
Does your Flame Suit have eyes to READ The Constitution and a Mind to Comprehend The Constitution?
So I suppose you support The Federal Government and expect The Feds to take care of you and yours?! HA!
Hope you enjoy being a Subject!
| |
| | |
| I could understand if this was his private land but it’s not... I could understand if he was being removed after paying his dues but that didn’t happen either. I have asked several times on several different discussions and have yet to have someone answer- what makes him have concrete rights to this land that he doesn’t own? Beyond the bleeding heart story, this is basically a Democrat rancher who is living off the government and people because he, himself, determined that he is entitled to free grazing. Again, if he would have taken care of business then this would be a non-issue and as it is now his rights to the land are the same as everyone else’s meaning no grazing rights because Clark County bought out the permit and elimated the area from grazing rights to protect the tortis- Ever wonder why the Clark county sheriff hasn't intervened since it’s his jurisdiction? Probably because they leased the rights and are pushing for the trespasser to be removed. The reason Clark county wouldn’t accept his money for grazing payment is because they don’t want him there either.
Since both of you live in the western states, I know you understand the land. Why shouldn't the BLM be able to reduce or revoke AUM's? Seriously, when Nevada catches on fire it’s not a nice little campfire- its typically huge acreage loss and with the average of 7" of precipitation per year it takes a while (years/decades) to re-vegetate. I’m by no means an environmentalist or government supporter, but why should this particular rancher’s grazing come before anything else? BLM land isn’t designated for only cattle; People use these areas for hunting, trail rides, hiking, sight-seeing, photography... if the lands not supported then none of the other uses will be either.
As far as “rights” go...laws were put into place to protect common people. Whether it’s at the city, county, state or federal level majority of people seem to abide by everything other law so why is this one different? | |
| | |
| FlyingJT - 2014-04-10 11:50 AM foundation horse - 2014-04-10 11:18 AM bscanchaser - 2014-04-10 9:54 AM
So I totally expect to get flamed (zipping up Flame suit) but as a Nevadan and knowing/reading about this story, I totally disagree with the Bundy’s. He never owned the land(with title), he hasn’t paid his grazing right fees in 21 years, he failed to respond to multiple requests from the BLM for him to remove his cattle, he lost 2 federal court case’s and was issued court orders to remove his cattle-in which he didn’t do and is throwing a fit that they are removing them for him.
Most ranchers in Nevada have been here since the 1800’s and are multi-generational, they have title to the land they own and then they pay AUM rent to run cattle on BLM land-the same land that they originally started grazing on. All have had AUM number decreased due to BLM management-whether the reason was for overgrazing, fires or environmental…I’m sure they weren’t happy with the reductions but they all complied. Basically in my opinion, Bundy wants something for free- when all the rest are paying for the same exact thing. Why is he entitled to graze for free and what makes him entitled to be above the rest of the people who actually pay their fees and take care of their responsibilities? Bundy’s background story is no different than any other ranching family I know-except all the others pay their dues and take care of business. This is nothing but a black eye for the good ranchers who are diligent with managing their stock and grazing grounds. Bundy’s are no different than the Dann Sisters, Crutcher’s or Caseys-who also found out they weren’t entitled to graze illegally and subsequently lost their herds to BLM round-ups because they also refused to remove them. I know most people would rather not have the BLM…but what makes this type of anti-government behavior stop here? My grandparents have lived on the same ranch they owned since the early 1900’s- are they now entitled to quit paying property taxes? Can they just fire the county government because they choose not to recognize them as the authority of the land?
I guess for me, this isn’t any different than someone who lives off tax payers, quits paying their mortgage, fails to respond to eviction notices and then is mad that the sheriff comes to remove them and the bank takes all the possessions in the home to pay for the back owed debt… I don’t see too many people waging war in these scenarios- basically would call it life and not taking care of responsibilities to ensure they kept their house. If you refuse to pay for your house, you don’t just miraculously get it for free-you get to move and figure something else out…
Does your Flame Suit have eyes to READ The Constitution and a Mind to Comprehend The Constitution? So I suppose you support The Federal Government and expect The Feds to take care of you and yours?! HA! Hope you enjoy being a Subject!
Yep those dang "First Amendment" zones... They would be useless if he would have paid his fees or removed his cattle. Could you imagine the sight of seeing a "first Amendment" zone set up in the middle of no-where and for absolutely no reason? | |
| | |
Nicknameless
Posts: 4565
Location: I can see the end of the world from here! | Here ya go...everything you asked, from the horses mouth!
In the words of my son:
The level-headedness of Mr. Bundy is quite clear as is his motives. Time to put on our boots ladies and gentleman and stand behind him. He's walking a straight line, so must we.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rkWljeiAhYI
| |
| | |
Semper Fi
Location: North Texas | bscanchaser - 2014-04-10 12:07 PM
I could understand if this was his private land but it’s not... I could understand if he was being removed after paying his dues but that didn’t happen either. I have asked several times on several different discussions and have yet to have someone answer- what makes him have concrete rights to this land that he doesn’t own? Beyond the bleeding heart story, this is basically a Democrat rancher who is living off the government and people because he, himself, determined that he is entitled to free grazing. Again, if he would have taken care of business then this would be a non-issue and as it is now his rights to the land are the same as everyone else’s meaning no grazing rights because Clark County bought out the permit and elimated the area from grazing rights to protect the tortis- Ever wonder why the Clark county sheriff hasn't intervened since it’s his jurisdiction? Probably because they leased the rights and are pushing for the trespasser to be removed. The reason Clark county wouldn’t accept his money for grazing payment is because they don’t want him there either.
Since both of you live in the western states, I know you understand the land. Why shouldn't the BLM be able to reduce or revoke AUM's? Seriously, when Nevada catches on fire it’s not a nice little campfire- its typically huge acreage loss and with the average of 7" of precipitation per year it takes a while (years/decades) to re-vegetate. I’m by no means an environmentalist or government supporter, but why should this particular rancher’s grazing come before anything else? BLM land isn’t designated for only cattle; People use these areas for hunting, trail rides, hiking, sight-seeing, photography... if the lands not supported then none of the other uses will be either.
As far as “rights” go...laws were put into place to protect common people. Whether it’s at the city, county, state or federal level majority of people seem to abide by everything other law so why is this one different?
From my understanding The Cliven Bundy Ranching Claim dates back to the 1880s, predating Nevada as a State I believe. Now on whose Authority and when was the Bureau of Land Management created? Answer 1934 under FDR and His New Deal.
Also, per Cliven Bundy he has made Land Improvements that the unConstitutional BLM has refused to do, all the while offering to pay Grazing Fees first to the unConstitutional BLM and then to Clark County Nevada.
Now another question: Are You (bscanchaser) familiar with The U.S. Constitution? And particularly The 10th Amendment?
Because per The Constitution, The BLM is unauthorized and The 10th Amendment protects States' Rights.
I eagerly await your response(s). | |
| | |
Semper Fi
Location: North Texas | bscanchaser - 2014-04-10 12:13 PM
FlyingJT - 2014-04-10 11:50 AM foundation horse - 2014-04-10 11:18 AM bscanchaser - 2014-04-10 9:54 AM
So I totally expect to get flamed (zipping up Flame suit) but as a Nevadan and knowing/reading about this story, I totally disagree with the Bundy’s. He never owned the land(with title), he hasn’t paid his grazing right fees in 21 years, he failed to respond to multiple requests from the BLM for him to remove his cattle, he lost 2 federal court case’s and was issued court orders to remove his cattle-in which he didn’t do and is throwing a fit that they are removing them for him.  Â
Most ranchers in Nevada have been here since the 1800’s and are multi-generational, they have title to the land they own and then they pay AUM rent to run cattle on BLM land-the same land that they originally started grazing on. All have had AUM number decreased due to BLM management-whether the reason was for overgrazing, fires or environmental…I’m sure they weren’t happy with the reductions but they all complied. Basically in my opinion, Bundy wants something for free- when all the rest are paying for the same exact thing. Why is he entitled to graze for free and what makes him entitled to be above the rest of the people who actually pay their fees and take care of their responsibilities? Bundy’s background story is no different than any other ranching family I know-except all the others pay their dues and take care of business. This is nothing but a black eye for the good ranchers who are diligent with managing their stock and grazing grounds. Bundy’s are no different than the Dann Sisters, Crutcher’s or Caseys-who also found out they weren’t entitled to graze illegally and subsequently lost their herds to BLM round-ups because they also refused to remove them. I know most people would rather not have the BLM…but what makes this type of anti-government behavior stop here? My grandparents have lived on the same ranch they owned since the early 1900’s- are they now entitled to quit paying property taxes? Can they just fire the county government because they choose not to recognize them as the authority of the land?
I guess for me, this isn’t any different than someone who lives off tax payers, quits paying their mortgage, fails to respond to eviction notices and then is mad that the sheriff comes to remove them and the bank takes all the possessions in the home to pay for the back owed debt… I don’t see too many people waging war in these scenarios- basically would call it life and not taking care of responsibilities to ensure they kept their house. If you refuse to pay for your house, you don’t just miraculously get it for free-you get to move and figure something else out…
Â
Does your Flame Suit have eyes to READ The Constitution and a Mind to Comprehend The Constitution? So I suppose you support The Federal Government and expect The Feds to take care of you and yours?! HA! Hope you enjoy being a Subject! Â Â Yep those dang "First Amendment" zones... They would be useless if he would have paid his fees or removed his cattle. Could you imagine the sight of seeing a "first Amendment" zone set up in the middle of no-where and for absolutely no reason?
Does the Constitution require 'zones'? | |
| | |
 Proud to be Deplorable
Posts: 1929
| As soon as some can tell me how the Fed. Gov. retained vast amounts of the west when the same land was granted statehood than I might buy the argument that the BLM has the authority it says it does. I find no such authority granted in the constitution. | |
| | |
Semper Fi
Location: North Texas | jbhoot - 2014-04-10 12:39 PM
As soon as some can tell me how the Fed. Gov. retained vast amounts of the west when the same land was granted statehood than I might buy the argument that the BLM has the authority it says it does. I find no such authority granted in the constitution.
Quite likely the same The Feds have created Constitutional 'Zones'. | |
| | |
 Always Off Topic
Posts: 6382
Location: ND | bscanchaser - 2014-04-10 9:54 AM
So I totally expect to get flamed (zipping up Flame suit) but as a Nevadan and knowing/reading about this story, I totally disagree with the Bundy’s. He never owned the land(with title), he hasn’t paid his grazing right fees in 21 years, he failed to respond to multiple requests from the BLM for him to remove his cattle, he lost 2 federal court case’s and was issued court orders to remove his cattle-in which he didn’t do and is throwing a fit that they are removing them for him.
Most ranchers in Nevada have been here since the 1800’s and are multi-generational, they have title to the land they own and then they pay AUM rent to run cattle on BLM land-the same land that they originally started grazing on. All have had AUM number decreased due to BLM management-whether the reason was for overgrazing, fires or environmental…I’m sure they weren’t happy with the reductions but they all complied. Basically in my opinion, Bundy wants something for free- when all the rest are paying for the same exact thing. Why is he entitled to graze for free and what makes him entitled to be above the rest of the people who actually pay their fees and take care of their responsibilities? Bundy’s background story is no different than any other ranching family I know-except all the others pay their dues and take care of business. This is nothing but a black eye for the good ranchers who are diligent with managing their stock and grazing grounds. Bundy’s are no different than the Dann Sisters, Crutcher’s or Caseys-who also found out they weren’t entitled to graze illegally and subsequently lost their herds to BLM round-ups because they also refused to remove them. I know most people would rather not have the BLM…but what makes this type of anti-government behavior stop here? My grandparents have lived on the same ranch they owned since the early 1900’s- are they now entitled to quit paying property taxes? Can they just fire the county government because they choose not to recognize them as the authority of the land?
I guess for me, this isn’t any different than someone who lives off tax payers, quits paying their mortgage, fails to respond to eviction notices and then is mad that the sheriff comes to remove them and the bank takes all the possessions in the home to pay for the back owed debt… I don’t see too many people waging war in these scenarios- basically would call it life and not taking care of responsibilities to ensure they kept their house. If you refuse to pay for your house, you don’t just miraculously get it for free-you get to move and figure something else out…
agreed | |
| | |
Semper Fi
Location: North Texas | dhdqhllc - 2014-04-10 12:40 PM
bscanchaser - 2014-04-10 9:54 AM
So I totally expect to get flamed (zipping up Flame suit) but as a Nevadan and knowing/reading about this story, I totally disagree with the Bundy’s. He never owned the land(with title), he hasn’t paid his grazing right fees in 21 years, he failed to respond to multiple requests from the BLM for him to remove his cattle, he lost 2 federal court case’s and was issued court orders to remove his cattle-in which he didn’t do and is throwing a fit that they are removing them for him.  Â
Most ranchers in Nevada have been here since the 1800’s and are multi-generational, they have title to the land they own and then they pay AUM rent to run cattle on BLM land-the same land that they originally started grazing on. All have had AUM number decreased due to BLM management-whether the reason was for overgrazing, fires or environmental…I’m sure they weren’t happy with the reductions but they all complied. Basically in my opinion, Bundy wants something for free- when all the rest are paying for the same exact thing. Why is he entitled to graze for free and what makes him entitled to be above the rest of the people who actually pay their fees and take care of their responsibilities? Bundy’s background story is no different than any other ranching family I know-except all the others pay their dues and take care of business. This is nothing but a black eye for the good ranchers who are diligent with managing their stock and grazing grounds. Bundy’s are no different than the Dann Sisters, Crutcher’s or Caseys-who also found out they weren’t entitled to graze illegally and subsequently lost their herds to BLM round-ups because they also refused to remove them. I know most people would rather not have the BLM…but what makes this type of anti-government behavior stop here? My grandparents have lived on the same ranch they owned since the early 1900’s- are they now entitled to quit paying property taxes? Can they just fire the county government because they choose not to recognize them as the authority of the land?
I guess for me, this isn’t any different than someone who lives off tax payers, quits paying their mortgage, fails to respond to eviction notices and then is mad that the sheriff comes to remove them and the bank takes all the possessions in the home to pay for the back owed debt… I don’t see too many people waging war in these scenarios- basically would call it life and not taking care of responsibilities to ensure they kept their house. If you refuse to pay for your house, you don’t just miraculously get it for free-you get to move and figure something else out…
Â
Do the two of you agree with the heavy handed ways being employed by the Feds in this scenario? | |
| | |
Always Off Topic
Posts: 6382
Location: ND | i watched his interview last night......he is getting what he deserves.........which is a completely separate issue from federal 'ownership' of all the acres.....which is continually increasing........nor is it part of the issue involved with beieng able to video what is taking place.......which is not just a problem with federal enforcers, it is every level of govt enforcement......
but, back to Bundy......run the sucker off..... | |
| |
| |
Folks on-line