Posted on 01/03/2016 8:38:35 PM PST by Jan_Sobieski
How did an armed takeover of a federal nature reserve in Oregon come about? It dates back to when Eastern Oregon father-son ranchers, Dwight Hammond and his son Steve, were convicted of lighting fires on federal land. The Hammond Ranch story began in 1991, when Steven Hammond started a fire on his own land for noxious weed control. The fire escaped and burned an acre of BLM land that was leased by the Hammond family for cattle grazing. Then in 2001, the Hammonds started another fire on their property that ran off the Hammond land and consumed 139 acres of BLM acreage, also leased by the Hammond Ranch.
In 2006, the Hammond family set a back fire to stop a lightning-caused wildfire. The back fire burned about an acre of public land. Dwight Hammond and his son, Steve, were taken to federal court for the 2001 fire. Steve was also charged for the 2006 back fire. The father and son were tried and convicted under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, created by Congress in response to the Oklahoma City bombing. Under the Act’s minimum sentencing requirements, both Hammonds faced a mandatory minimum sentence of five years in prison. U.S. Attorney Amanda Marshall stated: “The verdict sends an important message to those who think that they are above the law.â€
But in the October, 2012 sentencing, U.S. District Judge Michael R. Hogan reduced Dwight’s sentence to three months and Steve Hammonds sentence to one year, based on his belief that such a harsh sentence was not what Congress intended in creating the statute. “It just would not be – would not meet any idea I have of justice, proportionality,†Judge Hogan stated.
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
Well, they are going about the first part the right way, but there is a problem.
Sure, people know the government is corrupt and overbearing. Obamacare definitely brought that home to most Americans who aren't getting it free.
But do you really think a mass media incapable of understanding viscerally the wrong done to the Hammonds are going to in any way present the actions of this group in a favorable light?
Instead, the propaganda will go against gun owners, Christians, private property rights advocates, and rural folks in general.
The city folks who are the media can't present an issue they can't comprehend, even if they were not such socialists they don't believe in property rights anyway.
It isn't going to play out well.
It is going to feed the propaganda machine and that will be used not to gain support for the movement, but to quash it, and other unalienable rights besides.
You also underestimate the evil of your government, this is no longer America Smokin’ Joe...
No, I don't underestimate the evil in this government, and understanding it only puts one into 'tinfoil hat' territory.
Neither party is going to save it, they are both corrupted beyond repair.
Neither the Communists nor the corrupted, compromised, shade of the Republican Party will, I agree. But there is a deeper problem. Who elected those people?
Until that electorate is aware of the monster it has created, it won't embrace a return to the values which made this nation great.
For those of us in flyover country, in rural areas there is a completely different perception of what the urban dwellers see as the big, friendly lapdog who provides jobs, lucrative contracts, steady work, retirement benefits, or welfare, and cleans the streets and takes out the trash and protects them from criminals.
In the rural areas, we see instead of that loveable mutt, a ravening wolf, out to seize our land, stop our industry, let timber rot on the stump, come to eat our substance, unless you get farm subsidies or a monthly check.
We depend on ourselves to plow the road, take care of the trash, pump the well, grow food, and a host of other things urban dwellers either don't care to or know how to do--and they are afraid of that.
I read here how people subject themselves to the petty tyranny of a HOA, and they bray about freedom.
Yeah, I 'get it'.
But I still don't see how this standoff, armed, at this time, in this place will advance the cause of freedom one bit. Instead, I expect the Federal hammers will see a nail and hit it with overwhelming force, justified in the media by the fact these people are armed, and further used as a reason to push for the disarmament of the rest of us dangerous hicks.
YMMV.
What?
Are you afraid that this protest will lead to efforts to control guns?
harhar....
May that is the issue here....
Defiance is scary, no?
Put yourself in the shoes of those who have intentionally placed themselves in harms way. And yes, the BLM is a dangerous fed entity.
They like many other fed entities are out of control, and fearful of their constituency, and they do not like it that way.
But that is the way our republic was designed. It is the reason for the 2nd amendment. The people should never fear the government. The government should fear the people and respect them.
But that’s not the case anymore....is it?
So...accidentally burning a few acres of the kings land is worth 5 years in prison under a “terrorism” law?
Ok.
I do not think they will be martyrs...that is what the government does NOT want and especially if several hundred patriots go there will most likely not happen. It will defuse itself but the government knows there are folks out there ready to take them on. You seem to think that as long as we do nothing everything will be okay...it will not! Evil never stops, it keeps attacking until the good is defeated. Your assumptions just are out of place here.
You seem way overly concerned with how the left will perceive conservatives. You do not seem to understand they already hate us...have for decades. That is what has brought us to the place we are today. Doing nothing is not an option that will result in victory. Besides these patriots are making very clear that they are not there for violence, but as a peaceful protest. Maybe you should spend your time on the internet comparing this peaceful protest to St Louis and Baltimore...do something worthwhile for freedom.
“Buy time for what? Cnn to report on the crazy well armed militia? There are better ways to bring attention to this. Seems to me it’s all about attention for the militia.”
You are part of the problem enduserindy...if that is all you can envision. You will just have to deal with your fear, this is nothing compared to what is coming. There is not going to be peace in the US. I think we are buying time putting it off with what the Patriots are doing in Oregon. Hopefully there will be several hundred there making it impossible for the Feds to kill them all.
"Hands up, don't shoot"
Really?
Every western ever, the unconscionable act is to shoot an unarmed man--even today, that persists in protests over police shootings of people who only had a cell phone.
Yeah, the concept of a 'bad shoot' of an unarmed person is as American as apple pie.
People understand the hell out of shooting someone who is pointing a gun at you, and generally consider it prudent.
I am a staunch supporter of the RKBA, and this crap will be used against it.
Any excessive force will be 'justified' by saying there were "armed" men inside. If you can't see that justifying the actions of those who use excessive force by virtue of packing heat will work against the idea of exposing that excessive force, you are missing the point.
Going in there unarmed, and letting it be known, paints one picture when the jackboots go in.
Having weapons justifies any excess of force they use and obscures the point that the government is being overbearing by justifying any action they take.
Did anyone think this through?
I am trying.
Sometimes the correct course of action is no action at all.
While you might feel better after this tantrum, the long term effects are going to not only be worse, they will impede any well thought out attempts to reverse this crap.
This will have justified the overbearing, militarized, park ranger assault teams, the gear, the training, and worse yet, the ongoing enmity between ranchers and farmers and the BLM.
It will have pushed the meme of White, Christian, Rural, Gun-toting, domestic terrorist to new levels.
Most of America will NOT see these people as "freedom fighters"; they will see "terrorists"--because that is how these people will be portrayed in the media.
I don't care how the Left perceives us, they are the enemy anyway. I DO care how stupidly this plays into the Left's control of perceptions, not just for their fellow travelers, but for the millions of people who depend on the Leftmedia for information. What do you think they are going to see? Sound bytes of crackpots with guns--that's how this will be portrayed, and, God help us, most of America will believe that. Right when Obama is going to make an 'announcement (illegally) of gun control measures by decree.
Bad timing, unless these people are working for the other side.
The issue of BLM abuses will take a back seat to the rest, and probably won't even appear in a sidebar.
If there is to be casus belli, it must be something understood viscerally by a majority of Americans, and this isn't the issue, nor the action, nor the time.
Take both the father & son off the ranch for a long period of time——and you effectively kill that ranch.
This is exactly what the Feds want——they want all farmers & ranchers to leave the land & move to the cities.
Where will our food come from if this is the result???
The various fire agencies start backfires against range & forest fires ALL the time..
Any person who lives rural knows that & it is very effective, depending on the wind.
The Hammonds are being unfairly targeted——AGAIN. How many times can you serve a sentence? Isn’t there some sort of double jeopardy involved here?
The Pacific Legal Foundation needs to get into this fight.
If the protesters were unarmed, they would have a disparity of force that would not invite armed confrontation and bloodshed.
First. You are assuming that being unarmed precludes Government agents from assaulting or killing you. False premise.
Second. It is my/our God given right to self defense.
Third. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT be infringed.” I’m sure a lot of people in the U.S. don’t really understand this. Or if they do don’t really care. The 2nd amendment is worth fighting for.
Fourth. In the same context what does it matter if the protesters are armed or not? You would prefer them to be unarmed?
Having said that I’m reminded of a scene from Animal House. And here ‘tis:
Otter:
Bluto’s right. Psychotic, but absolutely right. We gotta take these bastards. Now we could do it with conventional weapons that could take years and cost millions of lives. No, I think we have to go all out. I think that this situation absolutely requires a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody’s part.
Bluto: We’re just the guys to do it.
Your fear has overcome your senses evidently Smokin’ Joe...just sit back and relax. Rest assured there are American patriots putting it all on the line for you. That is really all you need to know and think about.
Your opinion is irrelevant as the situation is already there, you are just whining like a spoiled little girl. What possible good do you expect to do? Your words usurp the goodness these people are trying to do...that is treason at certain times.
Facts & Events in the Hammond Case
http://bundyranch.blogspot.com/2015/11/facts-events-in-hammond-case.html
They aren't going to come knocking with a candygram if you are armed, either. In fact, I can't think of a better way to guarantee or justify them coming in with force.
If the objective is to expose excessive government force, unarmed protest has generally been the most successful means. There is precedent.
It is my/our God given right to self defense.
It isn't self defense if you come into my living room uninvited and bearing a weapon. The invader, by an aggressive act voids that right, and it defers to the defender. Which is my point.
This action has placed the BLM in the role of the defender, not the aggressor. How does that show the government to be overbearing, invasive, or overly aggressive?
I am all for the RKBA, but would you extend that courtesy to someone who entered your garage without permission?
These people have entered a federally owned structure with weapons.
If the owners of record try to remove them, will they go in peacefully and unarmed? Against an armed invader?
What is the point, what is the objective of this exercise?
Frankly it has already failed.
Unless the idea is to get some people shot, and that will not play well for freedom loving nor RKBA loving people anywhere--and yes, I understand that right, I have exercised it for over 50 years.
If you are getting your strategy from Animal House, I think I see part of your problem.
And you are where? Behind your little keyboard calling me a coward for having the good sense to not jump with the lemmings?
Goodness?
This is an ill conceived operation carried out despite the wishes of the family and the community. When this is over, the BLM and every other militarized pissant with a wildlife management degree will have been justified by the actions of fools in acting like the Gestapo, and likely some people will be needlessly dead.
This crap might make all you gland driven pissants FEEL good, but in the end it will have done far more damage than anything else, not just for the people of the area, but for the entire country.
In your hubris, though, you can't think enough moves ahead to even play a decent game of checkers and the game, as I said, is chess.
Either that or you are a troll, an agent provocateur who is here to try to smoke out some people who haven't thought ahead to how this will inevitably play out.
I am not afraid of much besides stupid people in large groups. I am a cancer survivor, and I have worked at over half of the most dangerous jobs. I have been a firefighter as well (no longer on the top ten list).
Your whining, resorting to insult only displays that you have no justification for what is being done. You are out of rational arguments, so you resort to all you have left--name calling.
If you are so right, then I challenge you to show me how this is going to benefit anyone. Go for it.
Silly me. I thought being punished times for the same crime was the same thing.
Can you explain the difference?
Here’s an idea. A 4 or 5 officers drive a couple of vans to the office. Tell them “you are all under arrest for trespassing. Leave now and that’s the end of it. Otherwise you will be charged with much more serious offenses.” That’s a good place to start.
And before you say it the bunch occupying the office are not a bunch of murderers. And I don’t think they are stupid. They have to have thought out how this should end.
Maybe something like that will happen. But I doubt it. Because Government is the first one to start shooting. I’m with you. I think the Government is just itching for a fight. And they don’t care who they kill. And that’s a problem. What is the solution to that?
Objective attained.
The media focus was on this, but will soon be distracted by the standoff.
End it.
Unload the 'supplies' from the trucks and smuggle the people out or exfiltrate, no shots fired.
The Feds will wait around an empty building, for a little while at least.
Sounds about right to me.
My bet is that if they try that it won’t be allowed. I’ll bet that if they try to leave peacefully then one or more will be shot. Which is why I say the Government needs to give them a way out without being charged with felonies.
But that’s not gonna happen. Can’t have people occupying Government property. Unless it’s a University or something.....But I could be wrong.
Naw. I think the Government wants a few bodies. As an example.
Bookmarking
#1: You aren't "stalling" the Feds. You are encouraging the opposite: the acceleration of Federal force.
#2: Feds shooting "armed terrorists" who were illegally occupying a federal building in "support of convicted arsonists" isn't going to generate nationwide sympathy...except for the Feds.
Everything that you are saying and advocating benefits only Fascists and Fascism.
You are either a Fed or duped by the Feds. In the Alabama Militia, we call your types "Agent Provocateurs".
All such agents provocateurs can be recognized by their strict repetition of the same talking points handed out by their handlers such as:
"This government is no longer legitimate"
"Violence is the only thing that will get this illegal government to back down"
"Only cowards are against fighting the Feds right now, right here"
There is also another commonality shared by all undercover Fed agents: they have no direct solution for the Feds to agree to in order to stop a violent incident.
They can't say "If the federal government gives back 1,000 acres of land, then we'll go home."
They can't say, "If Congress agrees to hear us in DC, then we'll go home without violence."
pause
Which is to say that this entire Bundy incident has no solution. There is no one thing that the federal government can do that will send the Bundy's home peacefully...which is how you know that they are infiltrated by federal agents.
Undercover agents *want* only a violent ending. Arrests. Guns drawn. Shooting!
They can't offer a peaceful solution. They can't allow there to be a single way out of any contrived crisis.
So what's the end-game? What 1 specific, tangible, in 20 words or less change do the Bundy's want from this confrontation?
NOTE: "obeying the Constitution" isn't specific, it's generic...and that is the sort of non-answer that federal undercover agents will use against their dupes and chumps.
No, of course not. Liberal victim groups, especially blacks, can burn whole cities down and still be lauded as “victims.”
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.