Three of Cliven Bundy's sons, militia seize federal building in Oregon

Washington Examiner ^ | 1/2/16 10:04 PM | DAN FRIEDMAN, KYLE FELDSCHER

[cuban leaf]

In the last Bundy story, the Feds were hopelessly outnumbered. Wonder what would have happened if a single person had opened fire? Martial law?

[DoodleDawg]

Wonder what would have happened if a single person had opened fire?

Law enforcement officers have shot civilians, armed and unarmed, for less. Had Bundy's people fired on the BLM agents then wouldn't the BLM agents been justified as firing back? Heck, these days if Bundy's people made any move that might conceivably be interpreted as threatening then the law enforcement agents would have been justified in shooting back.

[Mechanicos]

I agree, this tactic is stupid. Makes no sense as a strategic objective other then as a short duration information gathering operation where they can find evidence to support claims of criminal behavior by the government.

Besides, how is this diff from what liberals do all the time when they protest government and take over buildings? Don’t be a racist bigot because they are mostly white people here.

[MeneMeneTekelUpharsin]

Foolish action. There is an infiltrator among the group who is going to betray all of them. It would have been FAR more effective to have dispersed across the nation and sought out corrupt Federal officials to, say, cane. You don't get killed, you don't stay in jail long (it's just assault). It would have stretched Federal resources to the limit.

Confiscating weapons can not stop organized caning of Federal officials. But, no one asked me how to intelligently show displeasure with the Federal Government. That is just ONE idea of hundreds of which I can provide.

[itsahoot]

I’ve admitted my mistake, said I misunderstood, and apologized for my impetuousness. What more do you want from me?

Try reading this article and understand why you are intuitively mislead. America's Ruling Class

[cuban leaf]

Law enforcement officers have shot civilians, armed and unarmed, for less. Had Bundy’s people fired on the BLM agents then wouldn’t the BLM agents been justified as firing back? Heck, these days if Bundy’s people made any move that might conceivably be interpreted as threatening then the law enforcement agents would have been justified in shooting back.

---

Yes. I get that. My point is that it was akin to Little Big Horn.

If you get my drift...

[trebb]

If they have weapons in a federal building, they have screwed up.

And if enough of the People accept that w/o a second thought, all "Uncle Sugar" has to do is declare all public buildings/areas to be under federal aegis and poof! ... No more 2nd Amendment....

[trebb]

As I wrote in another thread, the federal government needs to use whatever force necessary to protect public property, arrest these militia, jail them, convict them, and send them to prison. As an American, a veteran, I say zero tolerance to inciting rebellion and taking up arms against the US. These thugs are no better than the people rioting in Baltimore, occupying Wall Street, etc. They are definitely not someone any red-blooded American conservative should be supporting.

Yay for you - the Founders were nothing but criminals and should have been taken down early in the game...

[sakic]

Intent is not a necessity for a charge of arson.

[Safetgiver]

Intent is not a necessity for a charge of arson....Umm..If I fell asleep with something on the stove and burnt down the block, I could be charged with arson? I was an arson investigator for a number of years. You had a fire you accidently started? End of investigation. Charge ‘em. Mens rae is in the criminal code for a reason.

[Democratic-Republican]

Intent is not a necessity for a charge of arson.

Are we splitting hairs? Arson is a deliberately malicious fire, even wikipedia knows that.

Arson is not a fire set on purpose. Well unless you want to consider everything from a barbecue, to a campfire, a fireplace, or a typical control burn ... to be arson.

Arson is a very serious thing because fire has been historically the longest and probably greatest destructive force to affect human beings and civilization since the dawn of time.

Let's not redefine down any more crimes, mmkay? Next thing you know your girlfriend might accuse of rape instead of plain old luvin.

[WildHighlander57]

IIRC in the Constitution there is a prohibition on double jeopardy and being charged twice for the same offense.

What the feds are doing is the same thing as what king George did back before the revolution.

[Nextrush]

The situation is disturbing....with comments like Pete Santilli’s online last night.... it really smells very dangerous.

Politics is not moving this country in the right direction, that is for sure. Hence Trump and Sanders.....

The alternatives to resisting wrong must be carefully considered and should be peaceful, non-violent, even non-confrontational if possible.

Those are tall orders considering how some situations have
ended like Waco or Ruby Ridge from the past.

[GailA]

If things go WACO, and nothing improves on the refugee, terrorist, black violence front, and 0 pushes through more gun control. American’s will start hiding their weapons and ammo, and a Revolutionary War 2 could be very feasible.

Feds may have a lot of arms training, but they don’t have the training a Farmer or Rancher does. My late husband was a Farm boy, when the Nam Draft hit, he could not find a job, threw hay for a $1 an hr. Until his notice came in. Then went and joined the USAF. Went on to Mace Missile School. He was the only Sharp Shooter from Boot Camp on. You didn’t hunt, you didn’t have meat. Their county was that poor and still is.

Pre-Revelations is happening before our eyes and people don’t see it. 1 world government, control of the people, and lack of morals are just precursors of the Book of Revelations. As are the man made droughts, plagues. These are not GOD made, yet.

[sakic]

The main elements necessary to prove arson are evidence of a burning and evidence that a criminal act caused the fire. The accused must intend to burn a building or other structure. Absent a statutory description of the conduct required for arson, the conduct must be malicious, and not accidental. Malice, however, does not mean ill will.

Intentional or outrageously reckless conduct is sufficient to constitute malice. Motive, on the other hand, is not an essential element of arson.

Then there is the matter of motive which according to some witnesses was a fire set to cover up a crime. Not sure if that is true. Its a point of dispute.

[Nextrush]

The law allowed for the sentence and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed so the Hammonds have to go back to serve it out in full according to the judiciary.

[kiryandil]

Hang in there. :)

[WildHighlander57]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/3379114/posts?page=32#32

Lots of info here!

[Girlene]

That could very well be....but until they are invited, the OathKeepers will not be providing their support.

[kiryandil]

Everything's "against the law", Dusty.

Well, unless you're Lois Lerner, Bill Clinton, John Koskinen, Jon Corzine, Charlie Rangel, or Hillary Clinton.

Then, we can "overlook" serious felonies, because some animals are more equal than others.

It appears to me that you're defending a banana republic's "laws", Dusty.

Correct me if I'm wrong.