Posted on 04/09/2014 8:18:46 AM PDT by FBD
LAS VEGAS -- The son of a rural Nevada cattle rancher has been freed from federal custody, a day after his arrest by agents working to remove cattle from disputed grazing areas northeast of Las Vegas.
A U.S. attorney's office spokeswoman in Las Vegas said Monday that 37-year-old Dave Bundy is accused of refusing to disperse and resisting officers.Bundy's mother, Carol Bundy, says U.S. Bureau of Land Management agents arrested her son Sunday in a parked car on State Route 170 near Bunkerville.
Pictures obtained by the 8 News NOW I-Team show where David Bundy had parked his car to take pictures of the cattle eviction.
Bundy says he was only exercising his First Amendment rights when federal officers told him to leave the area and when he didn't, they grabbed him."Two officers surround me, third one in front of me. They jumped me and took me to the ground. You can see they scraped up my face," Bundy said.Bundy's father, Cliven Bundy, says his cattle are entitled to graze in the Gold Butte area."They steal my cattle, and that is bad enough. But they make my son a political prisoner," Cliven Bundy said.
This weekend wranglers, hired by the federal government, started removing cattle owned by Bundy from a stretch of land near the Virgin River Gorge.
(Excerpt) Read more at 8newsnow.com ...
All of that land was available to homestead for over a hundred years. There's a reason no one ever claimed it. The "arable" land--by definition what's farmable--is what they did take, leaving the scrub and desert and marginal grazing lands to the feds, who acquired it all from Mexico via war.
Actually... Yeah there is.
for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings.
Excellent thanks for posting. I was researching this when my tablet froze and closed all my windows
Trespassing on the king’s land.
You mean that slaughter that hasn't killed a single condor yet?
Who acquired it from the indigenous peeps who acquired it from other indigenous groups before them.
I found this comment at the conservative tree house, and it applies to many of the posters here:
“Short version though is Nevada and this sheriff are the real losers, they should have stopped this a long time ago. This same thing happened to another rancher in another county and that sheriff told the BLM if they arrived with rifles they would be met with the same and the BLM backed off. That has worked in other instances around the country as well. This man took a stand and hoped he could force his state to do the same, they have failed him.
A lot of people talk about fighting for what’s right and pushing back, stopping the federal government, yet when a person acts instead of talks, not only does he face the wrath of the government, he’s slandered by those same Americans for doing what they talk about doing. It’s never been about the cows or paying a fee, but I can see we have many that won’t ever be able to grasp that.”
Turns out that Turtles can survive better when water filled cow poop is available.
The BLM needs to have greater Congressional oversight, but as we know from the performance of E. H0lder, the bureaucracy disagrees and most of Congress acquiesces.
Although honestly, I don't think most of the indigenous inhabitants of Nevada had ever heard of Mexico, much less seen a Mexican, when the land was transferred to the US.
It's apparently on now.
The turtles aren’t a reason; the turtles are an excuse.
(Just in case it’s not obvious to anyone reading here).
Blindingly obvious.
This is the FedGov herding us off the open space and into more easily controlled spaces. Some call it Agenda 21, I call it basic human need to abuse power.
No, actually there is not. Read further down where there is an “and”
“To make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution the foregoing powers, and all other powers vested by this Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any department or officer thereof “
So exclusive legislative authority ... plus ... exercise like authority ... plus ... over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature .... plus ... make any laws which shall be necessary.
That is a pretty well enumerated power that gives Congress full authority over that parcel of land. The “for the errection” clause is descriptive, not restrictive by providing examples of how it may be used. Further, that clause also states “other needful buildings”. That is how we know it is descriptive.
The Federal government has been slowly reclaiming land everywhere in the west, under the guise of protecting endangered species. In my area they just expanded a federal park. Then they blocked all further development within the “view shed” of that park. The Columbia gorge area is one prime example of this. See this story about how a couple was forced to tear down their house, then get back to me about how generous the feds are:
So you are in the "any law Congress makes is ok" camp. Despite there being clear limitations and outright prohibitions on making some of those laws.
You also have no idea how prefatory clauses, operative clauses, and subordinate clauses work in a sentence. Luckily, the Committee of Style did when they wrote it.
You are wrong.
Terrorist everywhere and this is what they spend time on.
WAKE THE F UP AMERICA!
I think Mr. Bundy is supposed to be on Sean Hannity. I have it on now. Earlier today him who cannot be named Mr. Bundy said if they can get enough people they are going in and take his cattle back by force.
This think is poised to go hot.
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.