oregon situation

tipsntails7 said:
No I don't think the hammonds are terrorists they were convicted of arson, I've not seen them called that either.
Click to expand...

It has to do with the Federal statues they were convicted under having the word "terrorism" in them. Folks that do not read regulations pick up on select words and then cast a broad screed with no fundamental understanding of anything. The only people using the word "terrorist" or "terrorism" are the protesters.

Here is a link containing two press releases about the case. A jury of their peers convicted them, not the Feds. Why do people loose sight of that.
 
Ray said:
Article 1, Section 8, Clause 17 of the constitution makes it clear that the Feds are not to own more than 10 square miles in any state to support its offices, forts, or ports, unless purchased from or ceded by the states. This is the basis for many federal land issues in western states.
Click to expand...

Ray,

That is the clause frequently cited by these pretenders, but of course, it doesn't say what they think it says. It says the "Seat of the United States" or capital should be no more than 10 square miles. It goes on to say that the Federal Government should have "like Authority" over all other Federal property.

Furthermore the Constitution is clear the US can own and manage property in the truly applicable clause: Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2.

"The Congress shall have the Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State."

It is my personal opinion that land "transfer" is the biggest current threat to public recreation, including hunting.
 
mtluckydan said:
This link was posted earlier in a kifaru forum. If half of what is said in this story is true, this family has been getting railroaded by the our government. I don't think the Bundy clan had any business to do what they did, but these folks probably don't deserve the treatment they have received either.


http://theconservativetreehouse.com...uge-in-protest-to-hammond-family-persecution/
Click to expand...

That's about the most non objective article I may have ever read. In truth I didn't read all of it as I thought I would drown in the BS that was that article..

He didn't have a single link, example or anything substantiating any of those claims.
 
Last edited:
tipsntails7 said:
Tuff to tell anything from that video, did he pull out a gun or what?
Click to expand...

Well he certainly ran the roadblock dangerously, and looked like he was reaching for a pocket. They found a loaded 9mm in the pocket it appeared he was reaching for.
 
tipsntails7 said:
That's about the most non objective article I may have ever read. In truth I didn't read all of it as I thought I would drown in the BS that was that article..

He didn't have a single link, example or anything substantiating any of those claims.
Click to expand...

Yeah, me too; especially when the 2nd point said there were no native Americans when the native Americans in the area are holding press conferences telling the idiots to get out.

tipsntails7 said:
Tuff to tell anything from that video, did he pull out a gun or what?
Click to expand...

IMO it doesn't really matter after he already almost ran over that agent. Had there been 4" less snow that agent would've been dead. He was known to be armed and was reaching into his jacket. It doesn't sound like from their own admission that he had drawn before they shot, but all of the other circumstances were plenty.
 
tipsntails7 said:
Tuff to tell anything from that video, did he pull out a gun or what?
Click to expand...
Pretty sure it went like this:

LEO: "Keep your f#cking hand in the air!!"
Finnicum reaches for waist the first time.
LEO: "Keep your hands in the air or I will shoot you!"
Finnicum reaches a second time.
LEO shoots Finnicum.

POC in the country have been shot for a whole lot less than that. As he damn near plowed over another officer and has publicly stated he wouldn't spend his life in a concrete box, looks pretty much like suicide by cop. It was also stated he had a 9mm on his side, whether that was seen prior to or afterward really makes no difference.
 
I'm surprised they didn't just lite the truck up as it approached the road block! Dude was on a suicide mission and he got what he wanted.
 
Seems to me that the whole issue boils down to this: is the use of public lands a right or a privilege?

As to the Hammons. I think their lack of support of the occupiers has more to do with their wanting a pardon and not their personal beliefs.

The shooting was justified. Lavoys statements to the press implyed he would use force agains police if arrested. He knew he had a warrant. He attempted to elude the arrest by car and foot. He almost killed a officer when fleeing thus using force to elude arrest. He reached into a pocket 2 times when ordered not to, at least we can assume the officers were telling to show his hands or somethink like that. The officer on the flank had reason to beleive he was a threat and willing to use force to elude arrest. The officer had no other way short of shooting him to stop that threat.
 
There sure seems to be a lot of speculation here with little if any facts, so I will throw my hat into that ring.

The police officer that seemingly jumped out from behind the vehicle barricade appeared to know what he was doing, which was reckless in my opinion. It looked to me like the Militia vehicle actually tried to swerve up the hill further into the bank to miss him...either to keep from hitting him or because they were taking fire? After that, the shooting of the man outside of the vehicle was completely justified it appears. Not sure if shooting people in the rig was justified, if that happened in addition to the flash grenades.

I don't agree with the tactics of the militia at all (especially since they weren't protecting private property) and I do not know who is most at fault with how this all started originally with the Hammonds. But saying that the Hammonds are completely in the wrong with the Feds not having any responsibility in all of this (with the federal handling of ranchers water rights and road access, terrorism charges, & questionable prosecution practices, etc.) may be a stretch at this point?

I don't know any of the exact facts any more than anyone else here, but having met ranchers down there, and many years ago spending some time on the refuge doing small mammal studies makes me a little skeptical about the Feds story being 100% accurate...especially any part of that story told by the Oregonian newspaper.

The ranchers that I met were all salt of the earth people, and some of the ranches were there over 100 yrs ago developing irrigation networks and roads/trails out of a wilderness when the area was wild with bands of Paiute Warriors still passing through occasionally and no federal employee anywhere to be seen. And it amazes me how people here know anything about the appropriateness of grazing fees when they don't seem to know that much of the area is an actual desert with very limited production...and which is even more limited by the BLM increasingly restricting how much of the available grass can be grazed. This battle about the feds wanting to bring back the native bunch grasses and ranchers wanting to maintain their way of life has been going on for at least 30 yrs that I know of...but only one side in that battle has ultimate power that can possibly be abused in the eyes of some when you get an overzealous federal employee just following orders to squeeze the ranchers out?
 
beachbunny said:
do you think vid was shot from drone or chopper?
Click to expand...

If you watch the full 30 minute uncut video it is obvious that it is fixed wing because it is circling and going behind trees. It is also traveling slow enough and circling tight enough that I am relatively certain it is a smaller fixed-wing UAV and not a small one (ascertained by the good video quality and high zoom).
 
And someone who should be hung for high treason is continuing to run for president.
If you haven't figured it out we are held to a different set of laws than the feds.
The Feds want the resource rich land and will get it anyway the can.
 
gwl79902 said:
Seems to me that the whole issue boils down to this: is the use of public lands a right or a privilege?

As to the Hammons. I think their lack of support of the occupiers has more to do with their wanting a pardon and not their personal beliefs.

The shooting was justified. Lavoys statements to the press implyed he would use force agains police if arrested. He knew he had a warrant. He attempted to elude the arrest by car and foot. He almost killed a officer when fleeing thus using force to elude arrest. He reached into a pocket 2 times when ordered not to, at least we can assume the officers were telling to show his hands or somethink like that. The officer on the flank had reason to beleive he was a threat and willing to use force to elude arrest. The officer had no other way short of shooting him to stop that threat.
Click to expand...

The use of public lands by the public for personal use is a right, but could be seen as a privilege in many ways. For the federal refuge system the taxes we pay as part of the purchase price of our hunting and fishing gear cover the majority of our cost to use the federal refuge system. Unless our personal use will place the land or other people in danger, then BLM and USFS lands are open to our personal use within a system of basic rules.

The use of public lands for commercial gain is a privilege and the public needs to be compensated for that commercial use. You're making money off the public commons and are at the mercy of the public and its rule making system.

It was well documented that Lavoy wore a shoulder holster under his left arm. It appears in many videos when he is inside and without a coat, including a video recorded and broadcast that morning before the drive to John Day. Any LEO that is even remotely awake will be aware of that fact, have been briefed on it, and would respond accordingly. Of course if a viewer lacks fundamental knowledge of how to easily carry a handgun while riding, they would miss the obvious clearly seen image and assume that Lavoy was wearing some weird suspenders.

We can be sure Lavoy was getting multiple conflicting commands as is normal when being confronted by several officers with different vantage points. He was not a hardened urban thug that is use to playing that game with LEO's. His fundamental lack of understanding of the game he tossed himself into had consequences. Very expensive ones.
 
I'm sure Lavoy has watched enough western movies to know that putting your hands up is the universal sign of surrender, regardless of any other circumstances or knowledge of the game.

Not keeping them up leads to bad consequences.
 
IdahoElk said:
And someone who should be hung for high treason is continuing to run for president.
Click to expand...
I'm assuming you mean Hillary. What offenses has she committed that would warrant execution for treason? I don't like her at all because she's a corporate bootlicker but hanging seems a bit much. Not trolling here, just curious.
 
I realize I'm in the minority here but too much of the western lands are owned by the federal masters of the Sodom on the Potomac.

The eastern politicians continue to use the west as their servants and not their equals. Rightfully the land should belong to the states.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ddavis_1313
Need some input on vacuum/chamber sealer
2
Replies
37
Views
1K
Snowwolfe
S
M
Influencing voters
4 5 6
Replies
107
Views
4K
cb2176
C
D
'24 OIL Idaho Cali Bighorn
Replies
5
Views
460
dgfavor
D
mrdeadheadr
Idaho NR Elk/Deer tags 2025 strategy?
Replies
3
Views
229
LFC911
LFC911
T
MT NR draw results
Replies
3
Views
285
Scrappy
Scrappy

Latest posts

Featured Video

Stats

Threads
349,706
Messages
3,684,158
Members
79,992
Latest member
fauxarms

Latest Articles

Back
Top