Militia Takes Over Wildlife Refuge In Oregon

[LP1]

Is it me, of do these guys seem like they're pining for a fight? What do you guys think is the proper way to handle this. I'm all for setting up a perimeter, cutting off power, and starving them out. They're all free to leave, but once you leave, you're not going back in.

Pretty much what you said, and arrest them on the way out.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I'm not talking about the underlying reason--nobody cares why they're doing it. They didn't care about the other episode(s) either. They painted the grim enough to picture, portrayed the human beings as being dangerous, and something needed to be done about it now, before it all got out of hand--and nobody cared. What's interesting is the political lines along which the rhetoric is coming.

The left wants them to go the Waco way. The non-supportive right wants the government to stay it's hand, for the guys to leave, and that being then end of it. I fall somewhere in the middle. There should be consequences.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

The left wants them to go the Waco way. The non-supportive right wants the government to stay it's hand, for the guys to leave, and that being then end of it. I fall somewhere in the middle. There should be consequences.

Based on what I know at this time, I agree.

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

As long as after they scatter, they're rounded up (at least the leadership) and prosecuted, I'd be ok with that.

If I may be so bold... might I ask what happened to the leaders of Occupy This or That, that caused some of the other "Terrorist" riots that you agreed to above? For the record - my concern is not over race or ideology. I've got no dog in the fight. I do think that all who incite stuff like this deserve similar treatment. And while we are prosecuting those who protest in a far flung corner of podunk Oregon , we should equally prosecute those who likely did far more damage in the Occupy Wall Street protests in Oakland CA, Baltimore, St Louis and other places.

Whether I agree with these folks or not, they have taken this action as a protest. The Feds HAVE taken a lot of their lands and made their lives difficult. As such, they are protesting. If we round these folks up and prosecute, I do think that it is fair to ask the question about those who have done similar stuff in other places.


CLARIFICATION - I believe that we _should_ prosecute. That said, I'm not sure that we have done so when the causes were more liberal in nature. I'm not sure why that is....

 

[IrishSon of Liberty]

I guess you've never heard of a place called Jordan? Lots of respect extended to the guy running that place. Ill give you 3 tries at guessing his name.

Yes, I'm well aware. Currently it's King Abdullah, but his father, King Hussein died in '99 after receiving a lot of medical attention here in the States, if memory serves. Ironically, the real King is willing to call radical Islam for what it is, but I digress. That's for a different thread.

 

[dusty88]

The left wants them to go the Waco way. The non-supportive right wants the government to stay it's hand, for the guys to leave, and that being then end of it. I fall somewhere in the middle. There should be consequences.

I have yet to see anyone advocate they get off with zero charges. I'm sure some random person on the internet said that, but I haven't seen it. I don't care how severe the charges are, but they need something. Ammon Bundy kind of makes me mad. I have sympathy with his cause and understand why he is fed up. But he also just really damaged what a lot of good people did by standing up for his family last year.

 

[IrishSon of Liberty]

Getting back on topic, I don't believe there is an easy or clear cut answer. I don't recall any arrests or prosecutions for those that trashed public property during the 'Occupy' encampments. Furthermore, Eric Holder participated in an armed take over of an ROTC building (I believe at Columbia) in 1973, and he went on to sell guns to Mexican drug cartels without prosecution as well. So I'd say the group at the Wildlife center has a ton of room before arrest and prosecution should be considered. Goose & gander right?

 

[actaeon277]

occupy a city, trash the place, cause problems for local businesses, but identify with big government, and you'll be a hero to the press (Occupy Wallstreet)


occupy a small building in the middle of no where..... not so much

 

[caverjamie]

I think the federal officials should go back to work, while the armed folks protest outside, and they just coexist. The guys with the guns just need to promise not to bother the federal employees while they are on duty - maybe they can even eat lunch together and have some engaging dialogue. (I amused myself for a moment imagining that scenario anyways)

 

[DRob]

Since Bundy has been shown in the news issuing open invitations, I fear this thing will be seen as a call-to-arms by some radical numb-nuts militia types. If it goes badly downhill, you know it will be the NRA's fault!

 

[bwframe]

Based on what I know at this time, I agree.

They're not blocking roadways or looting and burning down neighborhoods. Quit paying them attention and let them dissipate?
They surely have plenty of surveillance on them and know who they are. They can pick them up one at a time later...

 

[Kutnupe14]

If I may be so bold... might I ask what happened to the leaders of Occupy This or That, that caused some of the other "Terrorist" riots that you agreed to above? For the record - my concern is not over race or ideology. I've got no dog in the fight. I do think that all who incite stuff like this deserve similar treatment. And while we are prosecuting those who protest in a far flung corner of podunk Oregon , we should equally prosecute those who likely did far more damage in the Occupy Wall Street protests in Oakland CA, Baltimore, St Louis and other places.

Whether I agree with these folks or not, they have taken this action as a protest. The Feds HAVE taken a lot of their lands and made their lives difficult. As such, they are protesting. If we round these folks up and prosecute, I do think that it is fair to ask the question about those who have done similar stuff in other places.


CLARIFICATION - I believe that we _should_ prosecute. That said, I'm not sure that we have done so when the causes were more liberal in nature. I'm not sure why that is....

All the leaders of these type of events, where there is criminal action that they sanctioned, should be arrested. Honestly, I have no idea who the Occupy leaders were. But if you take the case of Mike Brown dad, that moron should have been arrested.

 

[ArmedProgrammer]

Since Bundy has been shown in the news issuing open invitations, I fear this thing will be seen as a call-to-arms by some radical numb-nuts militia types. If it goes badly downhill, you know it will be the NRA's fault!

Sadly - I fear that you are right, sir.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

They're not blocking roadways or looting and burning down neighborhoods. Quit paying them attention and let them dissipate?
They surely have plenty of surveillance on them and know who they are. They can pick them up one at a time later...

I'm fine with this. My position is I don't see any reason for bloodshed over what's been done and said yet.

 

[Route 45]

It kills me that our idiot president sticks his nose into all kinds of things that truly are local matters, but when faced with the takeover of a federal facility by an armed group (regardless of their political bent or demands), he calls it a local matter. It is certainly a federal matter. Chris Christie is not my favorite person, but he was right about the "feckless weakling."

 

[cobber]

Just thinking here. I know INGO is a gun forum, but it would have been nice if they had done this without arms. Rather employ the Alinsky-ite 'peaceful' occupation. And gain and keep the moral high ground. Show that people don't have to riot or loot to make a point about injustice.

If anyone was going to up the ante, let it be the feds...

The issue in Oregon wasn't guns. But now it will be.

 

[kiddchaos]

Jail.
Of Ranchers And Rancor: The Roots Of The Armed Occupation In Oregon : The Two-Way : NPR
Eastern Oregon Ranchers Convicted of Arson Resentenced to Five Years in Prison | USAO-OR | Department of Justice

 

[jamil]

I also just found it in the Oregonian. Sometimes the local sources of these stories are much more thorough and not as prone to partisan bias.

That's what I've found. The local news reports I've seen have pretty much presented the the points of view from both sides.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Given the whole birther controversy... it seems a LOT more rational to me to ascribe the comments to disagreement over citizenship. In general, I find it more useful to look to the more obvious and straightforward explanation as being more probable.

But I guess we can all find what we want to find.

And ID1776 can speak for himself.

As for the "lighten up, Francis" part... I think that's good advice for all of us, in these crazy times.

I would assign a 100% chance that you are correct.

When you call the President a Kenyan you show your true colors in more way than one.

I could continue, but I don't know if it is within the board rules to point out blatant racism and a tendency towards the extreme right wing.

Now to address an acute case of cranial-rectal inversion...

1. As an article of faith, I separate all individuals on the face of the planet into two groups which particularly matter, based on faith and not upon any genetic characteristics. Further subsets stem from that basic division.

2. I would like to know what true colors you are referring to. I would like a good explanation why there is something wrong with my inclination toward believing in a particular set of ideas pertaining to Obama's nationality and origins, starting with his grandmother plainly declaring that she witnessed his birth in Kenya. That, in itself, makes him a Kenyan.

3. More true colors: I don't give a f**k what color he or anyone else is, if there is a question regarding eligibility it should have to be resolved up front, and I don't mean Nancy Pelosi writing out a document declaring that he is good enough for her therefore good enough for everyone else as well. If there is nothing to hide, why has he spend time, effort, and fantastic amounts of money to hide the evidence? Why did he put out a computer-generated birth certificate that fell apart even under my computer-inept handling? Why is it that we really don't have any information on the man prior to his public career other than what he chooses to tell us and expect us to take at his word? Why is it magically racist to question any of this? Do you really believe that ANY Republican candidate for anything, including Carson, Cain, West, or Thomas would have skated without scrutiny? Hell not, they wouldn't and they didn't.

4. While I am at it, unqualified persons in office is unacceptable across the board. I don't give a flying f**k if they are British, Irish, Canadian, or Austrialian. Since you are having such a difficult time dealing with any possible explanation other than race, let me make this abundantly clear: IF THEY ARE NOT PROVEN TO BE ELIGIBLE, THEY DO NOT BELONG ON THE BALLOT REGARDLESS OF WHAT COLOR THEY MAY BE.

5. If, just for fun, I wanted to slam Obama based on race, I could do what you inspired me to do and turn to Google, which produced plenty of lists just in case I found myself having trouble finding a suitable racial insult. I addressed his nationality because eligibility which seems very much open to reasonable doubt is the issue under consideration.

Now, can you offer me some explanation aside from being too damned stupid to breath why most liberals:

1. ...assign any criticism of a liberal who is part of any racial minority as automatically racist? Why is it so hard to accept the notion that if I suggest malfeasance on his part it is because I believe malfeasance to exist as opposed to the tanness of his hide? Why, conversely, is it that a conservative minority member will get run through the political wood chipper with a vengeance? IS IT NOT RACIST TO AUTOMATICALLY DEMAND THAT A BLACK MAN BE A LEFTIST, IN WHICH CASE HE IS HELD ABOVE REPROACH, BUT IF HE HAS THE AUDACITY TO THINK FOR HIMSELF AND COME TO DIFFERENT CONCLUSIONS HE CAN REST ASSURED THAT HE WILL FACE THE DOUBLED-DOWN FURY OF THOSE WHO PRESENT THEMSELVES THE GUARDIANS OF EQUALITY YET DEMAND THAT HE PHILOSOPHICALLY REMAIN ON THEIR PLANTATION?

2. ...cannot wrap their heads around the fact that conservative are very much capable of seeing past color and very often do not care in the least about it. Just for fun, I have a favorite Supreme Court Justice. He just happens to be black. I measure him by the work he does on the court, not by his outward appearance. I trust him with my constitutional rights more than any other person on that panel of judges. That is what matters to me.

3. ...routinely attack the bearers of messages they don't like in ways that are manufactured from whole cloth. Case in point: I make a reference to reasonable doubts about a certain office holder's national origin, hence eligibility for office. You counter by calling me a racist. There are only two potential explanations which are dishonesty and stupidity. Why are we going down this path?

 

[KG1]

Great post Dave. It seems to me that people from the left for the most part are the ones who are constantly obsessed with bringing race into any kind of political issue.

I guess to some one that only sees things in racial terms they see "Black" when you say "Kenyan". Context plays no part in their world.