What's new
By:

Yesterday - Bundy Ranch

Yes free speach zones are bs.

The idea that the Bundy's have a right to graze on public land without a permit is also bs. I am for the fed turning over blm land to the states but I cannot support this. Over grazing is a problem and it isn't fair to other ranchers or wildlife. I view what they are doing exactly the same way I view poaching.
 
^ I don't have time to debate this (at least right now) on a message board, but reading that post tells me exactly which article(s) you read after a quick google search on the matter.

I assure you, had you spent the day and evening with the Bundy's as I had, understood more details from their perspective, you'd see it a bit differently.

I'll admit there are two sides, but to believe either side is patently correct is to merely read a force-fed newstory and not understand the issues from the core basic elements of the real lives involved.
 
PKM said:
I just got home. Spent the evening with the Bundy kids. Good people.
The real issue is they have been raising cattle for more than a hundred years on the land. In times of financial hardship they freely fed surrounding communities and in times of uptick they profited. Later, the feds come in and demand payment for the grazing lands... they've been arguing the validity. Now the feds want to remove all livestock in an interest to provide more land for the desert tortoise (what an immense pile of ****). The ranchers are being called trespassers.. but they counter, "who is the trespasser here."

I have to say.. I am PISSED. I've never been one to be anti-government, but I learned A LOT tonight and our abuse of power and govt WASTE is on FULL display in Bunkerville, NV.

Imagine, the govt is saying they will spend $3mm rounding up 900 cattle. Thats something 3 or 4 cowboys on horse could do in a few days.

Disgusting. Going back on Saturday.

Godspeed to the Bundy's.
Click to expand...

Well according to the law the Bundy's are the trespassers. According to the article I read none of the other ranchers are supporting the Bundy's because they all got permits to have their cows use public land to graze. The court issued a decision that said they were not allowed to have their cows graze on public land and they ignored it. Now I am not for the sniper action but in the article I read there were quotes from other ranchers criticizing the family. I am not a pro-government person either but I do believe in following the law and it seems like reasonable people could have avoid this situation.
 
cowhide said:
Well according to the law the Bundy's are the trespassers. According to the article I read none of the other ranchers are supporting the Bundy's because they all got permits to have their cows use public land to graze. The court issued a decision that said they were not allowed to have their cows graze on public land and they ignored it. Now I am not for the sniper action but in the article I read there were quotes from other ranchers criticizing the family. I am not a pro-government person either but I do believe in following the law and it seems like reasonable people could have avoid this situation.
Click to expand...

I totally understand this point of view. Tbh, this was mine, entirely, before I spent time with them. Here are some FACTS that differ from the articles being written (someone has to feed the story to the 'journalists' (aka, bloggers) so it's not hard to see where they are getting their info.

1) The 'ranchers not supporting them' thing is TOTAL bs. I was there, with them, and there were hundreds of people there supporting them, including other ranchers (there are not many, at all, remaining). Nonetheless, they have far more local support than not. Of that I am certain.

2) These permit-paying ranchers are the johnny-come-lately's. They were not there grazing in the 1800's. Part of the Bundy's claims is they have been supporting their neighbors, when in need, with beef for more than a century and now they're being told they have to pay the federal government without any acknowledgment of their past good deeds.

I can see where the vast majority of Americans would find little to no sympathy for Clive Bundy. It's simply the law. However, we have been passively giving over more and more of our freedoms and inalienable rights to the federal government, continuously, for two centuries.. and now the pace has seemed to have quickened.

Alexis de Tocqueville rearing its head? Have we been 'recreated' to the point we've fallen asleep and simply get in line and follow the law regardless? The answer is yes.

A few questions.
Could the government possibly pass laws that are unconstitutional and unfair to the people?
Is there a point at which for you, personally, you draw the line and refuse to follow the law (think of China and baby girls)?
If there is a point we feel the government (other 'men') can cross into our civil liberties, what is that line.. and, specifically, do you believe that line is different for different people?

I TRULY believe we have become the cattle in America. UGLI is not the only robot on this forum. We are slowly handing over our rights and I fear too few people will have the eyes to see it in time... I am almost certain, in fact.
 
Interesting tidbit:

Back in the day, when Yellowstone became the first national park, shepherds would try to use the land anyway. The army would come in, drive their herd out of the park north and escort the shepherds out of the park to the south. This was catastrophic, but proved to be effective after a few years.
 
PKM, dude. You can't blame someone for getting their info from a newspaper or online while telling them that they are biased and one sided and then in the same breath expect people to believe what you say is true -- especially when you pretty much say, "I'm right, you're wrong, if you don't believe what I'm saying, you're a moron." I don't doubt what you're saying, but at the end of the day, it appears you also only have one side of the story. For those of us that don't know these people and who really can only get our info from what is reported, it seems logical to basically say, "You break the law, you pay the price." If you read the comment sections of KSL and the Trib, you'll find a lot of people claiming that the Bundy's threatened violence, etc. if anyone touched their cattle. If true, then what did they expect?
 
PKM said:
I totally understand this point of view. Tbh, this was mine, entirely, before I spent time with them. Here are some FACTS that differ from the articles being written (someone has to feed the story to the 'journalists' (aka, bloggers) so it's not hard to see where they are getting their info.

1) The 'ranchers not supporting them' thing is TOTAL bs. I was there, with them, and there were hundreds of people there supporting them, including other ranchers (there are not many, at all, remaining). Nonetheless, they have far more local support than not. Of that I am certain.

2) These permit-paying ranchers are the johnny-come-lately's. They were not there grazing in the 1800's. Part of the Bundy's claims is they have been supporting their neighbors, when in need, with beef for more than a century and now they're being told they have to pay the federal government without any acknowledgment of their past good deeds.

I can see where the vast majority of Americans would find little to no sympathy for Clive Bundy. It's simply the law. However, we have been passively giving over more and more of our freedoms and inalienable rights to the federal government, continuously, for two centuries.. and now the pace has seemed to have quickened.

Alexis de Tocqueville rearing its head? Have we been 'recreated' to the point we've fallen asleep and simply get in line and follow the law regardless? The answer is yes.

A few questions.
Could the government possibly pass laws that are unconstitutional and unfair to the people?
Is there a point at which for you, personally, you draw the line and refuse to follow the law (think of China and baby girls)?
If there is a point we feel the government (other 'men') can cross into our civil liberties, what is that line.. and, specifically, do you believe that line is different for different people?

I TRULY believe we have become the cattle in America. UGLI is not the only robot on this forum. We are slowly handing over our rights and I fear too few people will have the eyes to see it in time... I am almost certain, in fact.
Click to expand...

You seem loyal almost to a fault. It has nothing to do with the thread really, just an observation I've noticed over time.

In other news, the first E.J. Wells post I clicked on redirected me to a red screen saying my web security had blocked something on the page. Weird.
 
It's a sign. Teh Governments are going to take yer gunz. Time to start caching 3D printers.
 
PKM said:
^ I don't have time to debate this (at least right now) on a message board, but reading that post tells me exactly which article(s) you read after a quick google search on the matter.

I assure you, had you spent the day and evening with the Bundy's as I had, understood more details from their perspective, you'd see it a bit differently.

I'll admit there are two sides, but to believe either side is patently correct is to merely read a force-fed newstory and not understand the issues from the core basic elements of the real lives involved.
Click to expand...

Well your personal feelings can also be part of the problem. Yes I don't know the whole story but it is rather black and white for me. If any rancher is using public land for his cows to graze on then they need to follow the law just like everyone else. So if the Bundy's can provide us a reason why or show that they have a permit than I am going to side with the law. I know the law can be wrong but it seems like a simple situation. Since you have inside information, are you saying that the Bundy's have a permit or they are using private land? If so then I can certainly jump on the anti-gov't train.
 
PKM said:
I totally understand this point of view. Tbh, this was mine, entirely, before I spent time with them. Here are some FACTS that differ from the articles being written (someone has to feed the story to the 'journalists' (aka, bloggers) so it's not hard to see where they are getting their info.

1) The 'ranchers not supporting them' thing is TOTAL bs. I was there, with them, and there were hundreds of people there supporting them, including other ranchers (there are not many, at all, remaining). Nonetheless, they have far more local support than not. Of that I am certain.

2) These permit-paying ranchers are the johnny-come-lately's. They were not there grazing in the 1800's. Part of the Bundy's claims is they have been supporting their neighbors, when in need, with beef for more than a century and now they're being told they have to pay the federal government without any acknowledgment of their past good deeds.

I can see where the vast majority of Americans would find little to no sympathy for Clive Bundy. It's simply the law. However, we have been passively giving over more and more of our freedoms and inalienable rights to the federal government, continuously, for two centuries.. and now the pace has seemed to have quickened.

Alexis de Tocqueville rearing its head? Have we been 'recreated' to the point we've fallen asleep and simply get in line and follow the law regardless? The answer is yes.

A few questions.
Could the government possibly pass laws that are unconstitutional and unfair to the people?
Is there a point at which for you, personally, you draw the line and refuse to follow the law (think of China and baby girls)?
If there is a point we feel the government (other 'men') can cross into our civil liberties, what is that line.. and, specifically, do you believe that line is different for different people?

I TRULY believe we have become the cattle in America. UGLI is not the only robot on this forum. We are slowly handing over our rights and I fear too few people will have the eyes to see it in time... I am almost certain, in fact.
Click to expand...

So you want to go back to the 1800s? Your friend sounds nice and it seems he was doing a good deed by feeding and helping people out. However I don't know how this gives him rights to use land that isn't his without paying to do so. Yes there have and still are bad laws but that is why you have courts to decided what you can and can't do. Somehow just because he has been doing it since 1800, still doesn't give him the right to do it. I am sure that slave owners used that way of thinking when they defended slavery. Ok maybe that is a little exaggeration but my point is that just because he did if for years doesn't mean he can keep doing it. What is the big deal about getting a permit? Like you said other people have them.

I keep hearing that we are losing more and more rights each day (mostly from republicans) but what rights have you lost that weren't already lost once the constitution was signed/ The constitution allows for the federal govt to designate land for gov't use (eminent domain). It has been that way before the Bundy's started ranching. It doesn't really matter to me if there are or aren't supporters. I was just going by the article I read. You can discount the article if you want and I could say that the crowd was filled with anti-gov't people who are always whining about the gov't.

It doesn't really matter since it comes down to this: is this guy wanting special treatment? So some people get permits but he doesn't because he is a nice guy and has been doing it forever. So he has been breaking the law for ever according to the courts. No? It is ok since you think it is a bad law. Then why not change it especially if you have all the support you claim there is.

I am not trying to be a jerk. I respect that you see it differently and that you want to help a friend but I see it as people wanting special rights and bypassing the law.

A few questions.
Could the government possibly pass laws that are unconstitutional and unfair to the people? No this is not possible but a reality i.e. slavery
Is there a point at which for you, personally, you draw the line and refuse to follow the law (think of China and baby girls)? Yes, but doesn't mean I won't go to jail or be fined.

If there is a point we feel the government (other 'men') can cross into our civil liberties, what is that line.. and, specifically, do you believe that line is different for different people? What civil liberties are you talking about? The right to use public land for an individual's benefit. I would say a resounding NO! I think all people should follow the law or they should change the law or make a decision that going to jail is worth keeping their civil liberties. This is where we disagree, how is he losing his civil liberties (freedom doesn't allow you to do whatever you want - that is anarchy). Yes, I think our country thinks there are different laws for rich and poor and black and white folk. I also think that there are people who think only the laws that they like or benefit from are the ones they follow. I don't see this as a civil liberties issue. Unless you can specifically tell me what liberties he lost before he broke the law then I can't really see the rational behind the complaint. However, we can agree to disagree but I respect your opinion PKM and you seem like a genuine person so I hope it all works out and no one gets hurt.
 
Last edited:
Of course the same federal government spending millions to deal with these cows has almost ceded entirely their duty to deal with illegal immigration. Those cows didn't cross the border, the border crossed them!
 
You're not going to find too many ranchers that are siding with the Bundy's on this one.

I think the BLM went over the top in the way they handled it, but they're on the right side of the law.

This is essentially an imminent domain case, and they don't have a choice but to cooperate. It's not the most fair thing in the world, but neither is them not paying the fees they were supposed to.
 
framer said:
Of course the same federal government spending millions to deal with these cows has almost ceded entirely their duty to deal with illegal immigration. Those cows didn't cross the border, the border crossed them!
Click to expand...

It is also the same federal government that refuses to do anything about the feral horse population in Iron County, Utah because it would be too costly to do so.
A couple hundred grand takes care of the feral horses. Several million is what they are spending to haul off the cattle.
 
Farmer.Tan said:
I guess you haven't been out there to see the support, huh? Your statement is simply false.
I have been out there. It is unreal.
Click to expand...

Well I guess it's different out there.

I know how it is here, so that's what I'm going off of.

Legally, the Bundy's don't have much to stand on, and some of their claims are fairly idiotic, to be honest.
 
Farmer.Tan said:
I guess you haven't been out there to see the support, huh? Your statement is simply false.
I have been out there. It is unreal.
Click to expand...

Look at how many people show up to protest soldier funerals. Just because masses of ignorant sheep group up with cardboard signs doesn't change facts. Sorry about that.
 
Hantlers said:
Well I guess it's different out there.

I know how it is here, so that's what I'm going off of.

Legally, the Bundy's don't have much to stand on, and some of their claims are fairly idiotic, to be honest.
Click to expand...

I can certainly see both sides of the argument, I really can. I can totally see the point of view of the BLM. And the Bundy clan, while good folks, can be an arrogant bunch. I know this because I know them (and I am related to them), but the handling of this by the BLM/Feds is unbelievable. It is scary. It is hypocritical. It is the federal government trying to flex their muscles and show their power.
And like someone else in this thread said (PKM maybe?) depending on the article, you don't get the entire story (probably from either side, to be honest).
But one thing is certain....snipers and surveillance and helicopters and heavy artillery and feds everywhere?? A little over the top.
 
E.J. Wells said:
Look at how many people show up to protest soldier funerals. Just because masses of ignorant sheep group up with cardboard signs doesn't change facts. Sorry about that.
Click to expand...

Doesn't change what facts? hantlers said you wouldn't find many ranchers siding with the Bundys. I responded that there were several. It wasn't a question of right or wrong....i was responding to his misinterpreted understanding of the situation.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top