Posted on 08/28/2015 7:45:43 AM PDT by Hojczyk
That was the point I was trying to make, but not very well I’m afraid. In Bundy’s case he didn’t think the federal gov’t had the right to charge him for grazing but he was willing to pay the local government. I guess the courts didn’t do him any good so he stood up for what he thought was right a different way.
As for the selling of the federal lands the article I linked says this:
“Disposal” does not require handing real estate over to state government. On the contrary, in many situations doing so would conflict with federal officials’ duties of trust. In each instance, disposal should be effectuated so as to further the general welfare. In the case of some parcels, it may mean transferring to state government. But it may also require selling to the highest bidder, or, in the case of environmentally sensitive lands, transferring to perpetual environmental trusts, as is commonly done in England.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.