Militias coming to the aid of Cliven Bundy

[godkiller]

Why would u advocate Feds killing civilians then? Of course u could be the Feds I didn't think of that.

Feds kill citizens all the time. The main difference is that the Fed kills people who sell drugs rather than this scum.

 

[Digga38]

Feds kill citizens all the time. The main difference is that the Fed kills people who sell drugs rather than this scum.

dawg go get some fresh air

 

[tmonster]

 

[#StarkSet]

Let's get something straight for all you crazy far left liberals


If these people didn't have guns, you best believe the Feds woulda walked right in and taken all the cattle

 

[¯\_(ツ)_/¯]

Let's get something straight for all you crazy far left liberals


If these people didn't have guns, you best believe the Feds woulda walked right in and taken all the cattle

No shyt Einstein I'm sure they would...the cattle was collateral for Bundy grazing on federal government property without paying for it.

What does the IRS do to someones property if they don't pay taxes?

 

[Self_Born7]

mad props. fight for what you believe in... if you gone die, die for a cause, and not for some dumb stupid shyt like we do.
the bigger picture here is someone finally taking a stand verse this tyranny of a government.

and you know, its something big, if its blacked out of the media.. not a peep. yall need to do the knowledge on agenda 21..

 

[Kritic]

Exclusive: Does Cliven Bundy Have Something Called “Prescriptive Rights”, Why The BLM May Be Afraid To Go To Court

In this ongoing story surrounding cattle rancher Cliven Bundy, there are a series of questions media has ignored. For instance, in the 20 years Bundy hasn’t been paying his fees, why hasn’t he been taken to court? Why this year, spend nearly $1,000,000 of taxpayer money to round up 400 cattle that ultimately have to be returned? Why didn’t the BLM just place a lien on the cattle rather than attempting to take them by force and then auction them off? The Bureau of Land Management has suffered a huge black eye this week because of their response to the Bundy situation. Perhaps though, there is a reason the BLM chose force over the courts.

So what exactly are prescriptive rights? Prescriptive right to property is an easement that gives some one the right to use land owned by someone else for a particular purpose. An example is using a path through Party A’s land to get to your land, a prescriptive easement is allowed which gives the user the right to get to his land through A’s property.


In most states, if a trespass or use of land occurs regularly for at least 5 years without the “owner” of the land taking legal action, prescriptive rights come into play. Because Bundy stopped paying his grazing fees to the BLM in 1993 but continued to use the land for over 20 years, it is possible he now has prescriptive rights to the land. That might explain why the BLM has not taken this issue to court and never bothered to file a lien against the cattle.

Exclusive: Does Cliven Bundy Have Something Called “Prescriptive Rights”, Why The BLM May Be Afraid To Go To Court | Ben Swann Truth In Media

 

[CACtain Planet]

support a man who uses women as shields brehs
Bundy Ranch Militia Considered Using Women As Human Shields | Liberaland

Liberal Stand???

negged
dapped/undapped

 

[714562]

So bottom line does that mean Bundy should be exempt from paying any fees for grazing federal government property unlike thousands of other ranchers that DO pay to use the land?

Thousands of ranchers? :hehe:

There are no "thousands of ranchers." He's the only rancher left in southern Nevada because the BLM fukked all of the other ranchers out of business. He stopped paying for that very reason.


I don't understand where this "tough shyt" attitude is coming from all of a sudden. Americans skip out on taxes all the time. Hell, people in 2004 wanted to stop paying taxes to make sure they weren't funding the Iraq War. The left lauded them as heroes :hehe:

Sympathizing is one thing....to say Bundy is above the law and shouldn't have to pay like other ranchers is another.

There ARE NO OTHER RANCHERS because they couldn't pay shyt like this.

This is all irrelevant to the case as to why Bundy feels he shouldn't have to pay fees for grazing on land he doesn't own. It is Federal government land it's their call no matter how fukked the situation is...that's the bottom line...that's the reason Bundy lost his case.

Again, I have no idea where this "tough shyt" attitude is coming from and how you can bifurcate everything that's happened with what the letter of the law happens to say.

The context the law is being applied in matters just as much as the law itself.

 

[¯\_(ツ)_/¯]

Thousands of ranchers? :hehe:

There are no "thousands of ranchers." He's the only rancher left in southern Nevada because the BLM fukked all of the other ranchers out of business. He stopped paying for that very reason.

Thousands of ranchers across the western part of the country that graze (or farm) on public land

I don't understand where this "tough shyt" attitude is coming from all of a sudden. Americans skip out on taxes all the time. Hell, people in 2004 wanted to stop paying taxes to make sure they weren't funding the Iraq War. The left lauded them as heroes :hehe:

Don't agree with that as a method to protest a war because federal taxes fund several operations that benefit people at home...but in any event these people that protested the war didn't have a choice if they were against it, Bundy is voluntarily using the government's land to graze on.

There ARE NO OTHER RANCHERS because they couldn't pay shyt like this.

So what do you presume Bundy should be able to do? Should he just be able to graze on the land for free just because he can't pay for it? What about the environmentalist that genuinely have a concern about the dying tortoise on the land, should the government just ignore them, tell them they're full of sh!t and favor Bundy's right to use the land however he wants? And if so why?

why should the government favor Bundy's plight over other citizens?

Do you see why we have law and order and why its necessary to follow rules?

Again, I have no idea where this "tough shyt" attitude is coming from and how you can bifurcate everything that's happened with what the letter of the law happens to say.

The context the law is being applied in matters just as much as the law itself.

Because your argument is going against the logic of the law. It's not his land to begin with and he, like other ranchers, should be subjected to follow the rules for using the public land. The fact Bundy has stated he doesn't acknowledge the federal government exist is a problem in itself. The context of that statement is saying he is above federal law which is wrong.

 

[thekingsmen]

Thousands of ranchers across the western part of the country that graze (or farm) on public land

Okay....is this suppose to be where the link was? Unsure what you are putting across here.

 

[HollowPoints2]

And you dont think these same militias wont be out hunting for black ppl when the state of emergency takes place?


We would be stupid not to form our own state militias for self defense.

 

[Fillerguy]

fuk that cac

 

[Consigliere]

I hope they send Seal Team 6 to capture this criminal freeloader. Matter fact I hope all the gun toting nutjobs who showed up to support him get tracked down with facial recognition software and get audited by the IRS.

 

[the next guy]

This thread is living proof coli militants are a bunch of phoneys. The same posters here are the first one to claim they are pro black, but they support this white privilege.