If one supports private property rights as it is one of the primary support legs of a free enterprise capitalist economy, then the rights of the state must match and be equal to the rights of the citizens. IOW, the government can exercise the same control and restrictions over government land as the private citizen is able to exert on their land.
If however, one does not support property rights, then the non-owner can claim squatter's rights to exercise control over other people's property. When you open that door, the relationship changes between the citizen and the state and then opens the door for socialism / Marxism as the state then becomes the final arbitrator over who's rights are supreme.
All property should be private. This “public land” thing is how crap like this happens.
Sell off all government holdings and privatize everything.
This isn’t about private property though. This is about the BLM abusing authority it shouldn’t have in the first place.
Period.
Further, Bundy says he’s in compliance with State laws... It’s the Federal laws he’s ignoring.
And rightly so.
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.
You can’t equate a private property right with the states rights. The State “owned” property is actually the collective property of the people and it’s legislative use has been, in the past, strictly defined and then subsequently “regulated” by unconstitutional acting or mandated bureaucracies and the latter instances are almost ALWAYS done to further the interest of some type of connected individual or corporate or organizational interest.
Private property is just that, private.