Better?
Posted on 07/09/2013 11:39:27 AM PDT by Sopater
Two Wisconsin lawmakers have asked the president of Gogebic Taconite to remove armed security guards from the company’s proposed mining site in Ashland and Iron counties.
Bob Seitz, Gogebic Taconite spokesman, told the News Tribune that the company began employing private security guards after teams of mining opponents “dressed in black and wearing masks violently attacked our drill site” in June.
State Sen. Bob Jauch, D-Poplar, and Rep. Janet Bewley, D-Ashland, on Monday sent a letter to Gogebic Taconite President Bill Williams, calling on him to immediately remove “the heavily armed masked commando security unit recently hired to protect the company’s property in the Penokee Hills.”
Several photographs of armed guards dressed in military-style camouflage and combat gear, apparently working for the Arizona-based Bulletproof Securities Force, have appeared on anti-mining blogs in recent days. In one photo, one of the guards, armed with an assault-style rifle, appears to be masked.
The lawmakers called the photos “horrifying” and the action by the company to hire the high-security Arizona firm “appalling.”
“These kinds of security forces are common in Third World countries but they don’t belong in northern Wisconsin,” Jauch and Bewley said in a press
release.
The company is now conducting test drills, working toward construction of Wisconsin’s first modern taconite mining operations, including an open-pit iron ore mine and processing plant.
The project was pushed by Wisconsin Republicans as a way to create jobs in the region but is opposed by several Ojibwe and environmental groups and activists who say the project will damage the environment. The company reported several incidents last month with drilling crews confronting mining opponents at the drilling sites. One woman was charged after an altercation over a camera.
Seitz said opponents erected roadblocks to slow the response of local law enforcement officials, spurring the company to hire round-the-clock security.
“Sen. Jauch is entitled to his opinion. But I would have hoped he would be more interested in the safety of Wisconsin workers” on the company’s mine sites, Seitz said.
He would not confirm or deny that Bulletproof is the company providing the security guards. He said Gogebic had no intention of removing the guards or hiring a more moderate force to do the job.
“We have to protect our workers,” Seitz said.
Although the security guards are at Iron County drill sites, one drill hole was in Ashland County. Ashland County Sheriff Mick Brennan told Wisconsin Public Radio he doesn’t see the need for the assault-style rifles.
“Yeah, it always concerns law enforcement any time we have someone who is carrying a firearm, open carry or not,” Brennan said. “My concern if it was in Ashland County is the need for it and what the circumstances that maybe prompted them to change their security forces that they have.”
Jauch and Bewley acknowledged the company’s right to protect its property, but they called the decision to hire the security firm an effort to intimidate citizens. “No one in their right mind can justify the excessive force. These individuals are not deputized; they can’t arrest anyone. What they can do is unjustifiably scare people, and that appears to be your intention.”
Jauch and Bewley added that the company could improve its relationship with local residents by reversing its decision.
They're not paying the drillers to beat up eco-freaks. They're paying the drillers to drill. They're paying the security people to make sure that the drillers can spend their time drilling.
I’d hire security people if others were illegally on my business property damaging equipment. If they are scary looking it may stop others from coming onto the property without incident. works for LEOs.
“These kinds of security forces are common in Third World countries...And what difference are these assholes drawing? WE ARE a Thirld World Country now. I worked for a diamond mine in RHODESIA for the same reason. Keeping the assholes out.
I can actually remember a time when liberals were at least somewhat pro-liberty and would be appalled at all the surveillance and IRA attacking groups because of their political beliefs.
how did jouch come to a determination it is excessive force? What excessive force has actually been used to this point?
Jouch is really a democrat. If you follow WI state politics he likes to be the McCain of the WI state senators here.
Hey...they hunt turkey’s in Florida...and California too!! : )
appears to be masked...Looks like a black dude to me.
Kinda like the homos and the muslims that way...
want tolerance of all points of view (theirs) until they get the power to be intolerant.
Just like the cut up Zimmerman phone call.
Private industry protecting itself doesn’t bother ...I sincerely believe they won’t take your property or disenfrenchified your vote, but I dunno know.
Force has not been used how can it be excessive?
Capability is not force
This story can be summed up with a Bismarck quote:
“The great questions of the day will not be decided by speeches and the resolutions of majorities...but by blood and iron.”
Gogebic will provide the iron. The environazis can provide the blood.
they hunt turkey’s in Florida....Ain’t the gators got ‘em all?
At least he has the honesty to BE a Dem, vs. McStain who claims to be a Republican.
From the article:
State Sen. Bob Jauch, D-Poplar, and Rep. Janet Bewley, D-Ashland
I didn’t even need to read the article to know the lawmakers were rats.
Not yet!!
Much.
You make a good point.
If you look at the labels on the axis; you’ll see that it’s really a “social authoritarian — social libertarian” scale. That’s a more narrow focus, than a scale measuring the extent that governments use coercive force on its citizens. It does leave out use of force to (say) redistribute property.
I was originally going to comment on the on-line tests, such as the one that Sopater mentioned above. That test also rates you on a “social authoritarian — social libertarian” scale.
You could construct many different models of the political realm — as I said before, none of them would be perfect. However, it’s likely that a 2D model is better than a 1D model.
Your libinlaw might just not want such an “in your face” display of what government coercive force looks like. Like an anti-hunting urbanite, who buys meat at the supermarket — she wants her socialism; but, she doesn’t want to know where it came from.
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.