• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Why the Feds Chickened Out on a Nevada Ranch

Help Support Ranchers.net:

Oldtimer said:
Tam said:
loomixguy said:
Then explain why you so virtuously defend your Dear Leader & AG Holder who seem to break, circumvent, and ignore the laws of the land on a daily basis?

If that's OK, then why should anybody else follow the rule of law?
Click to expand...

Do you really want to live in a nation of THEY ALL DO IT is a defense for every illegal action, you seem to have a big problem when Oldtimer uses that defense of his hero Obama's actions?

This is what I don't get in this whole mess, the right (including myself) do nothing but complain about the laws broken by this Government, but there seems to have been Federal laws being broken for over 20 years (three Administration both Democrat and Republican) by someone in the ranching community and everyone seems to be rallying behind the law breaker with their guns drawn. :?

Do I like what happen to the Bundy family NO I DON"T it should not have happened and the BLM could have handled this whole mess without all the public hoopla if they had any common sense but then so could have the Bundy family. But if you are demanding law breakers in this Government are to pay for their misdeeds of trespassing on your privacy by snooping or targeting you through the IRS, then why not the Bundy family that have been illegally trespassing on a land owner that happens to be the Hated Federal Government? :?

Personally I wish when the courts ruled Bundy had not proven his case and that they were illegally trespassing on the Federal public land in Nevada, the local sheriff would have quietly went to the ranch and arrested Cliven on a misdemeanor charge that he was guilty of according to Nevada Livestock laws and held him until the family dealt with the cattle themselves. If the family did not want to comply to the court orders then hold him on Contempt of Court charges until they did comply. No calling in the guns on either side and risking the showdown that could have very well ended far different than it did considering Bundy's own promise to do whatever it took to hold off the legal court order seizer of his cattle that brought out the Government snipers in the first place.

Again let me repeat myself I don't like what happen to the family but when you break a law on either side of the political table there needs to be repercussions to show US LAWS MEAN SOMETHING. and if they don't then who gets to decide which ones are followed and with ones are ignored. Hold them all accountable or nobody which is it going to be? :?
Click to expand...

I agree again Tam - handled flat-a$$ wrong... Should never have let him get away with it as long as he did- then had the judge charge him with interference with a court order... If I had been calling the shots- and those attempting to cross security lines or block trucks and kicking at police dogs would not have been thrown to the grown or tazed---- they would have been cuffed, stuffed and sitting behind bars....
Click to expand...

I agree it was defiantly handled wrong,but you are ready to cuff and jail the people that were sticking up for the Bundys,what would you have done with the sworn officiers that defiantly crossed the line,would you have charged them also or just turned a blind eye?
 
Don't hold your breath....Judge Roy Bean won't even answer my simple question...though he's been all over this website since I posted it... :roll:
 
3words said:
Oldtimer said:
Tam said:
Do you really want to live in a nation of THEY ALL DO IT is a defense for every illegal action, you seem to have a big problem when Oldtimer uses that defense of his hero Obama's actions?

This is what I don't get in this whole mess, the right (including myself) do nothing but complain about the laws broken by this Government, but there seems to have been Federal laws being broken for over 20 years (three Administration both Democrat and Republican) by someone in the ranching community and everyone seems to be rallying behind the law breaker with their guns drawn. :?

Do I like what happen to the Bundy family NO I DON"T it should not have happened and the BLM could have handled this whole mess without all the public hoopla if they had any common sense but then so could have the Bundy family. But if you are demanding law breakers in this Government are to pay for their misdeeds of trespassing on your privacy by snooping or targeting you through the IRS, then why not the Bundy family that have been illegally trespassing on a land owner that happens to be the Hated Federal Government? :?

Personally I wish when the courts ruled Bundy had not proven his case and that they were illegally trespassing on the Federal public land in Nevada, the local sheriff would have quietly went to the ranch and arrested Cliven on a misdemeanor charge that he was guilty of according to Nevada Livestock laws and held him until the family dealt with the cattle themselves. If the family did not want to comply to the court orders then hold him on Contempt of Court charges until they did comply. No calling in the guns on either side and risking the showdown that could have very well ended far different than it did considering Bundy's own promise to do whatever it took to hold off the legal court order seizer of his cattle that brought out the Government snipers in the first place.

Again let me repeat myself I don't like what happen to the family but when you break a law on either side of the political table there needs to be repercussions to show US LAWS MEAN SOMETHING. and if they don't then who gets to decide which ones are followed and with ones are ignored. Hold them all accountable or nobody which is it going to be? :?
Click to expand...

I agree again Tam - handled flat-a$$ wrong... Should never have let him get away with it as long as he did- then had the judge charge him with interference with a court order... If I had been calling the shots- and those attempting to cross security lines or block trucks and kicking at police dogs would not have been thrown to the grown or tazed---- they would have been cuffed, stuffed and sitting behind bars....
Click to expand...

I agree it was defiantly handled wrong,but you are ready to cuff and jail the people that were sticking up for the Bundys,what would you have done with the sworn officiers that defiantly crossed the line,would you have charged them also or just turned a blind eye?
Click to expand...

YOU BET- but once they gave an order to leave that area so they could execute a Court Order issued by a sitting Federal Judge - anyone that got in the way would have been arrested... I saw nothing in any video's that were opposite standard operational guidelines for an operation where someone threatened violence (rangewar) or claimed not to recognize authority (federal law enforcement)..

Example- The largest landowner/taxpayer in the county had his wife divorce him... Not an amicable split... Relatives on both sides fighting- gunplay- shots fired in several confrontations- luckily no one hit....They could not agree on a split of everything/anything on property- so the Judge seized it all- and ordered it to be sold- with half going to each...
With all the gunplay/feuding the truckers would not haul cattle (1000 head) or wheat ( thousands of bushels in the bins) without law enforcement protection....

So I went to the Judge and asked for an order to pay compensation/overtime to cover all security duties we had to perform - which the Judge granted along with an order that neither party interfere in any way or be anywhere in the area during the carrying out of the order-- or be arrested..
Long story short- The ex husband showed up at the start of the hauling of the grain ranting and waving saying they couldn't keep him from being on his property - the Chief Reserve Deputy on the scene called me- I told him to put us on speaker phone- and after a couple minutes of this nutcases right wing nut ranting about the Constitution, I told my Deputy that if he wasn't gone in 2 minutes to cuff, stuff, and transport him- and he could explain to District Judge Cybulski why he didn't like his order... He was in his outfit and gone in a minute because he knew I meant business...

The best part came when they divided the cows... Several brand inspectors worked them- overseen by Deputy Sheriffs- and in between tirades of rage, all were settled to ownership except for one old multi branded crooked horned Hereford cow... So the Judge decided since ownership for either couldn't be decided- she should be sold and the profits from her split...
Brand guys hauled her to the sales ring- where both showed up and ran her to record high prices ( a couple thousand dollars back when cows weren't worth $500) before she dumped her on him- and he had to pay her a whores price for an old worthless cow-- and in the long run paid brand inspectors and Deputies thousands of extra dollars in overtime.... :wink:

But this happens too often when you let emotion or principle override common sense... Been there and seen it too many times... Kind of sounds like what happened here...
 
hypocritexposer said:
So...is Agenda 21, Constitutional?
Click to expand...

Agenda 21

Agenda 21 is a non-binding, voluntarily implemented action plan of the United Nations with regard to sustainable development. It is a product of the UN Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 1992. It is an action agenda for the UN, other multilateral organizations, and individual governments around the world that can be executed at local, national, and global levels. The "21" in Agenda 21 refers to the 21st Century. It has been affirmed and modified at subsequent UN conferences.
---------------------

U.S. support

The United States is a signatory country to Agenda 21, but because Agenda 21 is a legally non-binding statement of intent and not a treaty, the United States Senate was not required to hold a formal debate or vote on it. It is therefore not considered to be law under Article Six of the United States Constitution. President George Bush was one of the 178 heads of government who signed the final text of the agreement at the Earth Summit in 1992, and in the same year Representatives Nancy Pelosi, Eliot Engel and William Broomfield spoke in support of United States House of Representatives Concurrent Resolution 353, supporting implementation of Agenda 21 in the United States.
Click to expand...

My take is that it probably is only binding as a proposed direction (not a law) until overturned by another President, Congress, or a Court.. Only a proposed direction of action- not a binding law....
 
hypocritexposer said:
So a President could direct the Country in the "proposed direction"?
Click to expand...

Sure- I think they and Dept heads make admistrative direction every day- and have for over 200+ years... If they are going the wrong way- its up to the Congress and the Courts to rein them in........
 
hypocritexposer said:
Are the Courts ever wrong? Say in a case like Citizen's United?
Click to expand...


Sure - BUT they are the law of the land and until changed by an Appellate or Superior Court ruling/Constitutional amendment their ruling stands... I don't agree with Citizens United because it overruled a Montana law with years of history that most on both sides of the aisle supported...

But it is the law of the land now...

Which is much better than every individual following what he thinks the law/Constitution says/or should say/or he wants it to say.... Which means every rightwingernut has his interpretation- and every leftwingernut has his interpretation- and neither may be close to what our forefathers or our Supreme Court intended....



When we throw out the rule of law- we have anarchy!!!
And altho many of the blowhards waving their AR-15's and Colt .45's love to shout it-- and backslap their politicians that scream secession/civil war-- I would wonder how many would be willing to watch their families suffer thru the events to follow if it really came to be.. :???:
 
redrobin said:
Are you for deporting illegal aliens as the law says oldtimer?
Click to expand...

Yes- I would love to see it ... I feel that if my forefathers/relatives had to go thru all the legal methods to get into the country- so should everyone else...Altho now with 12 million or so in the country I don't know if we could handle the logistics to do it :???:

The last President to follow immigration law was Ike- when he implemented Operation Wetback... Since then NO President has enforced the law which has set about 50 years of precedent... We used to turn illegals over to the Border Patrol/Immigration that would give them a ticket to appear in front of an Immigration Judge 6 months later... Guess how many showed up for their deportation hearing :???:

Reagan signed the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 which gave amnesty to a large amount of illegals in the country BUT was supposed to take care of the problem by making it a crime to hire an illegal...
Problem is- neither Reagan nor any President since him enforced it....

NO immigration is a total tossup- neither party is any better than the other... Both have refused to enforce the laws- the only difference I see now is that Obama is doing it openly where the others were more secret about it ....
 
There is a substantial difference between both parties not enforcing the law and one party encouraging illegal immigration.

Do you not have to confiscate property(tax) to pay for these illegal immigrants
 
Let's all be honest for a minute about immigration - you're US gov't doesn't enforce it because big corporations like Tyson, Perdue and many others need a steady supply of cheap laborers that keep their heads down and asses up. That's it. That's all. They need them to feed the machines, and dump them like worn out tools. If it weren't for immigrant labor in both our countries we'd have a hard time floating our economies because we wouldn't have enough bodies to fill boots. Too many North American born kids are too good for pouring coffee or shovelling **** or gutting chickens. They want the white hat and benefits as soon as they finish school.
 
PureCountry said:
Too many North American born kids are too good for pouring coffee or shovelling s*** or gutting chickens. They want the white hat and benefits as soon as they finish school.
Click to expand...


BINGO!!!


I can't tell you the number of late teens/early 20's kids that have come to me wanting a job. Wellllll...come to find out the job I had for them was WAY WAY below their preconceived standard!!


They did want to work on the crew, they wanted to boss the crew.
 
M Gravlee said:
Hey, folks! Let's stay on topic here. This discussion is about the Nev. BLM problem.
Click to expand...



????? What??


After all the twists and turns other posts take, the personal levels they go to and the outright attacks on posters....you step in on this?


Really???
 
kolanuraven said:
PureCountry said:
Too many North American born kids are too good for pouring coffee or shovelling s*** or gutting chickens. They want the white hat and benefits as soon as they finish school.
Click to expand...


BINGO!!!


I can't tell you the number of late teens/early 20's kids that have come to me wanting a job. Wellllll...come to find out the job I had for them was WAY WAY below their preconceived standard!!


They did want to work on the crew, they wanted to boss the crew.
Click to expand...

Kind of like the song by the Oak Ridge Boys:

"Nobody wants to play rhythm guitar behind Jesus.

Everybody wants to be the lead singer in the band."
 
Soapweed said:
kolanuraven said:
PureCountry said:
Too many North American born kids are too good for pouring coffee or shovelling s*** or gutting chickens. They want the white hat and benefits as soon as they finish school.
Click to expand...


BINGO!!!


I can't tell you the number of late teens/early 20's kids that have come to me wanting a job. Wellllll...come to find out the job I had for them was WAY WAY below their preconceived standard!!


They did want to work on the crew, they wanted to boss the crew.
Click to expand...

Kind of like the song by the Oak Ridge Boys:

"Nobody wants to play rhythm guitar behind Jesus.

Everybody wants to be the lead singer in the band."
Click to expand...


You saw the notification....stay on the topic!!!! This post of yours is not about Nevada!!! ;-)
 

Latest posts

Top