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 ...
Open Range isn’t “ended” in Nevada. I just bought a section over there in 2013 and it was stated right in the documents. If you don’t want livestock on your land it’s your duty to fence them out.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3142504/posts?page=26#26
The Center for Biological Diversity has plenty of friends in high places, and many of them have worked in the US Justice department.
What’s your political stance, anyway?
Based on your comments on this thread, you certainly seem to be in favor of an ever expanding federal government.
http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/about/staff/
...
Well, if he were Black or a large contributor to Dingy, he could get a Bammy E.O.
The gov’t militia or a people’s militia?
If I own property, it has been paid for and maintained with my or my family’s money. How does the gov’t do this? By extortion from we the people.
Paying for and maintaining the property is one possible use. Allowing it to go fallow and sit is another. Generally speaking the government lets land sit unless it can make money off of:
- timber leases
- mineral leases
- grazing leases
No extortion is involved. If you don’t want to pay the lease agreements, don’t expect to get the timber, the minerals or the grazing.
This whole issue has only arisen because there's a proposal to build a windfarm on a piece of condor range. That's why the builders asked for a waiver before they got started. Maybe it will kill condors when it's built, but so far it hasn't been built and hence no condors have been killed by it.
Of course, if you're so concerned about the condors, you must also back banning lead ammunition, because that actually has been documented as killing a few of the birds.
First off, my reasoning is based on the conservative principle of property rights and is FAR from “statist philosophy”. Until you can understand and recognize that point, there really is no need for further discussion.
Lt Col Lakin, the guy that call out to Obama, You Lie, and a host of others were all severely chastised by those who were supposedly of the same mind as they before the enemy took a shot at them.
Last but not least, as you were saying, it is not about cattle or paying or not paying a fee. It is about power and control. The Central or Federal Government in our case is taking control of the food supply. Once they accomplish this, it is over.
With a property tax, one’s property is not, in actuality.
I was referring to the extortion of the taxpayer, being forced to pay the Federal gov’t for things they don’t have a constitutional right to do.
We already have to pay local property taxes in order to keep the property we privately own.
Still looking for your “proper” solutions....
Well until you can show how under our system of laws, either the government does not own the land or how squatters have greater rights that the property owners, your arguments don’t hold water and are not in alignment with the current legal situation.
No I am not ok with “any law congress makes” and please stop using the liberal tactic of trying to win an argument with false straw men arguments. Please stick to facts, the constitution and laws to support your arguments. I understand that you don’t want to do that because your arguments fail when confronted with the logic of private property rights.
So lets review the facts of the case.
1) The land belongs to the US government.
2) The US government charges a fee for the use of the public land for grazing
3) There is a law passed by Congress and has long been upheld by SCOTUS that allows for the collection of these fees
4) The rancher, Bundy did pay these fees at one time in agreement with the law and thus gained the right to graze some cattle on the US government land.
5) At no time did the US government transfer ownership of that land to Bundy
6) At some time, Bundy stopped paying the fees to use the land and thus lost the right to have his cattle on government land
7) The BLM and National Forest service has gone many times to the courts to get court orders to stop Bundy from intentionally grazing his cattle on their land
8) During those court hearings Bundy had the opportunity to present his side of the case and was not successful.
9) When Bundy failed to comply, the government took the rare and extraordinary action of rounding up the cattle on the land.
Care to dispute any of those facts?
Ok. I get it. You’re a supporter of wind farms. N/m
You forgot a number of facts, like what apparently happened in 1998 and the details of how that came to be. Also the details of how all of the other near neighbor ranchers were economically driven off their land.
I think the land belongs to La Raza.
It's going to be funny when something like this is happening to someone you care about.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aTCDry_zKlc
Nor offered any alternatives to rolling over and dying.
If did watch some of it.... repeating the same false assertions does not create a fact.
Fact - the land does not belong to him. He does not get to make the decision of who runs the land for the US government. He can not fire the BLM as the land is not his.
Again, address the facts by either refuting them or accept the facts and lose the debate.
I don't much care about wind farms either way. I just don't like to see people saying things that are simply untrue, like that condors are being slaughtered by them. It doesn't help make a case.
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.