Posted on 04/15/2014 7:42:17 AM PDT by Kaslin
Nevada cattle rancher Cliven Bundy and his well-armed supporters forced the well-armed federal government to back down and return Bundy's seized cows -- which were seized because Bundy, 67, stopped paying grazing fees in 1993. How does anyone get the government to back down?
At first blush, Bundy seemed to have right on his side. He's a cowboy who just wants to keep being a cowboy.
The federal government, which owns more than 80 percent of Nevada land, including the land on which the Bundy family had settled, threatened to put him out to pasture. The Bureau of Land Management told the rancher he would have to cut back cattle grazing on federal lands to accommodate the threatened desert tortoise. So in 1993, Bundy stopped paying federal grazing fees. "They were managing my ranch out of business," Bundy explained, "so I refused to pay."
As the Las Vegas Review-Journal editorialized, the federal government has endangered a Western way of life in deference to "the 'threatened' desert tortoise and a supposedly fragile desert ecosystem that somehow has sustained cattle and the reptiles since the 19th century."
The BLM surely has earned its black-hat reputation in Nevada. In a classic example of federal overreach, the BLM carved out a small "First Amendment Area" for pro-Bundy protesters, which only fueled the public's distrust of government. Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval suggested that the BLM reconsider its approach to constitutional rights -- and Sandoval's a former federal judge, whom you would expect to stand up for the federal court orders Bundy is flouting.
Sandoval issued a statement before the BLM backed down in which he argued, "No cow justifies the atmosphere of intimidation" that he was placing on BLM's doorstep.
That sentiment ought to apply to Bundy, as well. The rancher says he does not recognize the authority of federal courts. "I abide by all of Nevada state laws," Breitbart Texas reports that the scion told talk radio. "But I don't recognize the United States government as even existing."
He was willing to start a "range war" and risk the lives of his supporters in order to retrieve some cows. He doesn't feel he has to recognize a government elected by his fellow citizens.
The BLM clearly can be accused of overreach, but who elected Bundy to be judge, jury and sheriff?
Bundy could have fought the government at the ballot box by trying to elect members of Congress who want to defang the BLM. (It's strange when you realize that for all their anti-Washington sentiments, Nevada voters have sent Harry Reid to the Senate repeatedly since 1986.) That's the American way. Threatening to shoot law enforcement officers who simply are carrying out court orders is not
Taking all his cattle?
Noticing this sounds down right PROTESTant to me!
No we haven't!
We've lost the ABILITY or DESIRE to elect the right people!
... why can’t any individual citizen just move there, build a house ...
http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/content/wo/en/res/Education_in_BLM/homestead_act.html
Stunning isn’t it!!!!??????
Read this informative article - it’s long but educational.
http://www.constitution.org/juris/fedjur1.htm
excerpt:
And a further expression of similar import is found in Harcourt v. Gaillard, 25 U.S. (12 Wheat.) 523, 526, 527 (1827), where the Court stated:
“There was no territory within the United States that was claimed in any other right than that of some one of the confederated states; therefore, there could be no acquisition of territory made by the United States distinct from, or independent of some one of the states.
“Each declared itself sovereign and independent, according to the limits of its territory.
“[T]he soil and sovereignty within their acknowledged limits were as much theirs at the declaration of independence as at this hour.”
Thus, unequivocally, in July, 1776, the new States possessed all sovereignty, power, and jurisdiction over all the soil and persons in their respective territorial limits.
This condition of supreme sovereignty of each State over all property and persons within the borders thereof continued notwithstanding the adoption of the Articles of Confederation. In Article II of that document, it was expressly stated:
“Article II. Each state retains its sovereignty, freedom, and independence, and every Power, Jurisdiction and right, which is not by this confederation expressly delegated to the United States, in Congress assembled.”
“Threatening to shoot law enforcement officers who simply are carrying out court orders is not”
Well except for the problem that BLM forest rangers and hired mercs are not law enforcement officers. What they are is the civilian national defense force Obumble has been talking about.
Greetings.
From what I've read, Bundy had paid NEVADA for years what they determined was fair.
No, actually he has not paid anyone anything. He has been grazing his cattle for free for 20 years on the public land.
When the FEDs decided that THAT wanted the money; he stated he had NO contract with them, but with NEVADA.
The land is not Nevada's. It is the United States'.
He never had a contract.
He used to have a permit, a permit that was issued to him not by Nevada but by the US government.
NEVADA refused to take his money.
He offered to pay Nevada an amount of his own choosing.
The thing is, it isn't up to him to unilaterally decide on a price.
It also is not Nevada's place to take money in rent for property it does not own.
If I told your neighbor that I wanted to pay him $100 a month to live in your house, and then I moved in to your house, and you took exception to this, I highly doubt you would be convinced by this argument: "Look, I offered to pay your neighbor $100 a month. I don't know why you're complaining."
So here we are today.
Indeed. Really flawed reasoning creates all kinds of negative situations.
It's American citizens land, and American citizens have authority to elect representative's to determine its use.
“...whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends...
Pass it?
I can’t even INDENTIFY it!!
Just 'cause the skin color has changed, do NOT expect the Gummint tactics have!
Don't you have a link that's 140 characters or less?
I'm deep into Minesweeper and can't waste my time reading...
Do you have a link with the informative you’ve got in italics?
Alas, the nuts move first, and struggling against abusive bureaucracy will make one crazy. Poor guy is trying to make sense of nonsense, trying to play by the spirit of the rules while the umpires strain the letter thereof and change definitions to mean whatever they want.
The US Government obtained the lad at the end of the US Mexico war in the treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1846. That was before Nevada became a state 1864. At that time, Congress required certain inclusions in the State constitution before being accepted as a state. One of those inclusions is the state ceding forever any lands not already disbursed (to the state or public) as being US Governmnent lands. It is in the Nevada constitution under the section Ordinance.
http://www.leg.state.nv.us/Const/NvConst.html
We've lost the ABILITY or DESIRE to elect the right people!
psst.......When we've lost the ABILITY or DESIRE to elect the right people then we've lost our representative govt.
“Bundy’s situation is not dissimilar from those living in anti-gun states who all of a sudden find themselves owning “illegal assault rifles”. The people didn’t change, but our ruling elites managed to change the rules to make a few million instant felons.”
Bingo. CT did not, according to the gov’t, violate the rules - just changed them to require registration, and are baffled that people would rather be felons than comply. Likewise Bundy: BLM changed the rules according to the rules, and don’t take kindly to people refusing to follow the new rules even though they’re designed to be discouraging of previously liberties.
The Taylor Grazing Act was passed by Congress in 1934. A good dozen years BEFORE Bundy was born. It has been collecting grazing fees ever since.
Read this essay and then comment, please.
http://freedomoutpost.com/2014/04/bundy-ranch-crisis-causes-us-ask-actually-owns-americas-land/
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.